Posts Tagged ‘Islam’

Existential Amiss

September 30, 2018

Common sense, Reason, Logic, Causality, Imagination, Morality & Ethics!

 Image result for Pic of Existential amiss

I intended to write this piece in a secular fashion but the overwhelming relevance of the Divine wisdom kept piercing through my thought canvas, hence surrendered making it part of the discourse. Human discourse or argumentation, anyway, barely scratches the obvious externalities of the issues while the Divine wisdom put forth the internally woven realities in a succinct yet aptly simple manner. One may notice the examples of such Subtleties in the course of reading this treatise.

Had Common sense, reason and logic been potent enough to reach the absolute certainty of the conclusions drawn, there would have been no need for the Divine religions to barge in. All of these tools are perceptual or experiential outcomes of human endeavors which; given the deficient nature of human faculties; are incapable of coming even remotely close to the level of Divine Wisdom; Revelation, the only fait accompli. (A subtle hint/deduced from Q, 17; 37) Hence some of the precepts of the religion are above and beyond the realm of human commonsense, causality, reason and logic, exuding perfect certitude and submission. (A state of affairs enormously repugnant and conceptually unacceptable to the secularists, anti-religionists and non-believers)

Note:- similar debate has been going on for long. a brief excerpt is quoted here.

[The innovative Jahmiyyah and Their Relatives from Ahl al-Kalaam Asharis and Maturidis fought the greatest battle and contention between the followers of the revealed Books and the sent Messengers and between the followers of the Hellenized Jews, Christians and Sabeans. Those who contradict the revealed texts with their reason (aql), and think the reason is definitive over the revealed texts].

Common sense is really not as common as perceived. Variegated sense perceptions render it somewhat-common, partially-common, quasi-common or purely individualistic rather than really-common in the true sense of the word.

  Reason and Logic are even more disparate; propitious-reason and logic; sometimes referred to as rationality; are used to justify a conclusion, one is at home with. (Rational bias) A slightest dissension or differentiation would entail disapproval or divergence. Therefore, all these tools may create some sort of near or quasi-convergence but not an absolute or conclusive one. Logic is derived from the Greek word “logos”. In Muslim Philosophy another Grecian alternative “monads”*1 is used instead, to justify a position/stance by distinguishing a good reason from the bad one. It is only the Divine revelation (wisdom, word) which is flawless, absolute and ultimate-truth; authoritative in its perception, understanding and validity…worthy of even blind-Faith.

Kurt Gödel puts it succinctly as follow:- 

The logical axioms that underlie everyday things like arithmetic depend on us accepting as reasonable the notion that infinity comes in several different sizes.

In Islamic parlance, however “pristine-reason” (Haq al Yaqeen); in the absence of a human messenger; is considered to be potent enough for a rational being to come; at least, to the cognition of the existence and oneness of God, hence obviating disbelief. “Pristine-reason” here, is “elevated to the status of a “non-human-messenger” of God, for reason gains an edge when the logic fails rational being. (Deduced from Q, 17: 15)

Contemplative tools; human faculties, given the amiss, may help us reach the level of most probable/likely certainty (in the temporal, ancillary and ritualistic matters) but not that of an absolute certitude (in the core matters of belief/faith); which is only possible by Divine consent/intervention through the heart (Q, 10:100), as in the above case of cognition of God’s Oneness. Here the externality of this intervention cloaked in the garb of; “pristine-human-reason”, is upgraded to the status of “non-human-messenger”

Non-believer’s obstinate rejection of the Divine, religious injunctions and that of hereafter; though based on (tenuous and vitiated) reason, logic and common sense, amply explains their state of affairs.           (Q, 10:100)

*1 Universal Spirit, the first cause, singularity, Divine, Intermediary agent etc.

Imam Ghazali;- “With regard to sense-perception says; it made him very hesitant to accept the infallibility of reason. He believed in the testimony of sense till it was contradicted by the verdict of reason. Well, perhaps there is above reason another judge who; if appeared, would convict reason of falsity and if such a third arbiter is not yet apparent it does not follow that he does not exist.”

When Imam Ghazali could not reconcile the philosophical dispensations with the Divine wisdom, (Obviously there is no comparison between the two; one represents the mundaneness, while the other, word of the Divine) he turned to Sufism.

In quantum physics (Double-Slit) experiment, our act of observing something seems to change what’s observed – we are ourselves part of the experiment. Is this the ultimate problem of self-reference, one that suggests a limit to how much we can ever reason about—our surroundings—the universe?

 Role of the religion, therefore, becomes inevitable; for it presents us with flawless and absolute truth; which is perceptually-authoritative and practically valid, engendering “Taqwa”. [Innate reverential-fear (Awe) of Allah (SWT). Distinct from the usual fear of other (agencies)]

An incisive consideration and pondering, on just two of the aspects of the divine religion: 1) Belief in the hereafter. 2) The contentment would vouch for and warrant religion’s inevitability.

Belief in the hereafter is often considered a conceptual absurdity and theological fallacy hence rejected by the non-believers. Belief in the hereafter, however, is the source of immitigable hope and equity, which no atheistic belief/doctrine/philosophy may even, conceives to offer. Unbelief in the hereafter renders one scuttled of many realities. Such as; ultimate-reality; ultimate-hope; ultimate-triumph, and ultimate-Justice. One, without the belief in the hereafter, is like, latching onto the event-horizon of a black hole of hopelessness and despair. The statistics, available on depression/hopelessness resulting in suicide and homicide, is a vindication of this fact. Conversely, in the overwhelmingly religious affluent Middle East, there are hardly any such issues, hence NO mental hospitals needed.

https://shakir2.wordpress.com/2015/08/22/scuttling-the-mental-capacity/

Contentment is a huge blessing for a rational being. When someone (even a non-believer) is suffering; no relief in sight; distressed/desperate, resorts back to God, is blessed with His mercy. (Q, 27:62) Overwhelmed with gratitude, he takes a sigh of relief and the most joyous sense of contentment sets in. (One’s resorting back to God while distressed, means un-recalcitrant-submission; invigorating the innate impulses; meeting the pre-requisites; of belief in Him, His injunctions, including the belief in the hereafter).

Is He [not best] who responds to the distressed/desperate one when he calls upon Him and removes evil and makes you inheritors of the earth?” (Q, 27:62)

“Deprived is the one who has been deprived of the reward of enduring distress”  (Khidr–a.s)                                                                                                                                          Fasting in the month of Ramadan from dawn to dusk is a fine practical example of it; whereby one is patiently content (nafs-al-mutmai’nna) all day long, hoping the accrual of the temporal and divinely rewards at the end of the day.

Faculties of thinking and the exercise of Free-will (choice) are also signs of deficiency on the part of the creation. Allah does not think but intends; for He is omnipotent; causer of both, the cause and the effect. Nothing wrong/bad may emanate from His essence (Q, 48:23); but from His schematic creational activities, such as the creation of rational beings inseminated with good and bad. Indeed, Our word to a thing when We intend it is but that We say to it, “Be,” and it is” (Q, 16:40)   On the other hand; when rational beings would exercise the option of intention; in the similar fashion; (without thinking and deliberations) it is bound to be fraught with pitfalls, for rational beings are created with an existential amiss.

Imagination is of non-local (metaphysical/spiritual) origin; for it traverses both, the local and non-local domain. Therefore, those who accuse believers of worshipping an “imaginary God” are, unwittingly, admitting this reality. God inculcated, in the constitution of the rational beings, two-pronged sense of imagination (topical and non-topical); a schematic molding, hence the relevance and necessity of Divine and Divine religion becomes inevitable. God does not think but “Wills” whereas man’s will (choice) subsists in God’s will whereby He equilibrates it with the elements of hope and fear, (existential amiss) rendering it rationally operative. (Q, 17:57)

People need religion because it is the blueprint for the functioning of the “Soul” in the temporal realm. Voltaire, an archpriest of rationalism, alludes to this inevitability in a mundanely best possible way: “Man would have to invent God, even if He does not exist”

https://shakir2.wordpress.com/?s=inevitable+God

Religious Truth is multifaceted. It is comprised of science, logic, philosophy, history, ethics, and experience all mixed together. It is, in a sense, a different kind of knowing, not ignorant of the other kinds of truths (known and yet to be known), asserting the inevitability of the religion.

https://shakir2.wordpress.com/2018/02/03/scientific-elaboration-of-surah-at-tin-fig-95-verse-4/

 (Hadith) Every child is born on Nature— (his natural disposition/course. Resorting back to/linking with the Creator)

“It is asserted here that fitrah is the essential condition and state of existence in which God fashioned mankind; with innate impulses/urges including the sense of good and bad; fear and safety; pain and relief; cognition of God; submission, transgression and arrogance etc. (existential amiss–Imperfection, tendency/choice to swerve). It is present in the very essence of the creation and is inextricably kneaded into the very substance of the “rational beings” (Q) which is acutely elicited in the following verse.

 

إِنَّا عَرَضْنَا الاٌّمَانَةَ عَلَى السَّمَـوَتِ وَالاٌّرْضِ وَالْجِبَالِ فَأبَيْنَ أَن يَحْمِلْنَهَا وَأَشْفَقْنَ مِنْهَا وَحَمَلَهَا الإِنْسَـنُ إِنَّهُ كَانَ
نَظَلُوماً جَهُولاً –

 “We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof: but man undertook it;- He was indeed ignorant  and foolish” (Q, 33:72)

 

Ordinary beings, given their basic knowledge of the religious fundamentals, are tested for their weaknesses (existential amiss). The window of forgiveness is wide open for them; even if they have a mountain of mistakes/sins on their back; as long as they keep seeking forgiveness with utmost sincerity and a commitment not to repeat the same. (There is no numerical or time limitation)  This is an esoteric expression of the unbounded mercy of the Creator; for the people of knowledge and intellect who understand.

Men of knowledge (Aalim/Scholar), given the higher degree of knowledge, are tested for the equitable dissemination of the knowledge while acting upon it themselves as is due. Their test becomes harder and their failure attracts equally harsher punishment, for they are given the knowledge as the inheritors of the Prophet (PBUH).

Prophets; given the highest degree of knowledge and the duty of disseminating the message entrusted to them, often face the hardest of the tests for their perseverance, firmness, devotion and endurance instead. They are immunized of the mundanity (existential amiss) to a large extent due to their highest station/status. (Protected from major sins—Asmah/Masoom); which keeps them even from minor sins but some rare slips. (Q, 4:31)

“If you avoid the major sins which you are forbidden, We will remove from you your lesser sins and admit you to a noble entrance [into Paradise]” [Q, 4:31]

Hadith: when a companion asked the Prophet, despite being a Prophet of Allah why do you always keep asking for His forgiveness? He replied; “for any moment passed without His remembrance” This emphasizes the point that one, regardless of his station, should never be oblivious of the innate existential amiss and always keep asking for His forgiveness.

“Cause and effect” is a phenomenon of the sequential morphing of things/ideas in the space-time spectrum. It, however, can’t continue ad-infinitum. It also cannot fully transcend back into the metaphysical/spiritual realm. Therefore, becomes unhitched, regressive, and even ineffective. ‘Ex Nahilo’ is an outright negation of temporal phenomenon of “causality”. God (SWT); the very first (primal) cause, therefore, is the sole cause/causer of the Universe. (Creational activity in the space-time realm is known as “Khulq/Takhleeq” )

“When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, “Be,” and it is” (Q, 2:117)

In the absence of space-time spectrum, there is but an intention/will (ordinance {Amar}), of the primal cause, for the matter/idea to come into being. In the metaphysical/spiritual realm, contrary to the physical realm, no material/tangible cause has to exist to produce a material/tangible effect. Divine causality, therefore, is inimitable by the rational beings in the space-time spectrum. (Creational activity in the absence of space-time spectrum is known as “Takween”)

Takween is derived from the word “KUN” fayakun. It is beyond and above the physical laws of the universe and does not need the matter, time or space for a thing to come into existence. (Ex Nihilo=Out of Nothing). Bypassing the temporal physical laws or the temporal causality is also called Takween. {creation of Adam and Jesus Christ—PBUT}

 Temporal causality vs. Divine causality

Here are vivid differences.

In temporal causality, a causer may activate the cause but may not have the capability to determine the effect. He would also not have the capability to alter the effect (outcome) of a cause. A rational being may be dealing with a clear cause or INUS (insufficient but non-redundant parts of conditions; which in itself unnecessary, but sufficient for the occurrence of the effects). This distinction would not exist in the Divine causality.

In Divine causality, The Causer of the cause and effect is the same. The Causer is omnipotent to alter/determine the effect(s) as He wills. The Causer is also competent to produce an effect without cause (Ex-Nahilo). The Causer may pre-determine effects or causes in multiple, and then afford the medium (sentient beings) the application of Free-will (Choice) to commensurate effect(s).

“And when We would intend to destroy a township We had sent a commandment (warning) to its people of authority leading easy lives; who yet disobeyed and transgressed; so as a result of our Judgment passed, We annihilated it with complete annihilation” (Q, 17:16)

Note:- (Ghazali’s views on causality, read: http://www.ghazali.org/articles/gz-aylon2.pdf)

Morality, mortified by the psychology of innate fear, sprouts from the Divine religious injunctions. Although it lays the ground-rules for this word, the effects also transcend to the next.

Morality, based on reward and punishment, (retribution) works wonderfully due to the psychology of “innate-fear” of being monitored unimpeded and continuously by the “Invisible”. Religion (Islam) “submission” was enacted simultaneous to the Creation (forbidding Adam and Eve from eating the fruit) and the punishment for its violation was established by the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Heavens. Satan (Lucifer) was also expelled for his disobedience due to his avarice and pride. They were not simply expelled but with specifically (and schematically) mandated rights, roles, and responsibilities; which, in specifically Islamic parlance could be called “Sharia’a” and in everyday parlance “Morality”.

Ethicality is developed by the rational beings, in the light of their past collective experiences. It regulates the immediate, contemporary cultural, societal or communal behavior. It is limited to temporality in scope, optional in its practicality; often floutingly by-passed without compunction. Needless to say that, the resourcefulness of Morality is unsurpassable by the man-made ethicality.

Ethics (Laws) are devised by the people for a community, society or culture; monitoring whereof is also done by people (an agency) employed for the purpose. The compliance would simply depend on either one’s call of the conscience or the fear of being caught by the monitoring agent. The physical absence of the monitoring agency would offer all kind of inducements to flout, as it cannot be established and no penalty would ensue.  This is the weakest aspect of the man-made ethicality.

A distinct difference between Divine law and the man-made law is that Divine Law compassionately seeks avenues to forgive while the man-made law is hell-bent on seeking evidence to punish.

Those who envisage morality, without religion, in fact, misconstrue ethics as morality.

After all, man is created with an existential amiss.

 Innate Fear, Psychology of fear is employed by the Divine to elicit the compliance of the religious injunctions without the presence of a physical watchdog.

  • An infant, when made to hold a bar, would continue clinging to it due to the innate fear of fall and hurt until made to feel safe to let it go.
  • In a situation of distress, “heightened state of fear/anxiety” (even in the case of a non-believer) all boundaries and impediments are dismantled; a connection between the Lord and the distressed-servant is immediately activated, and the call of the distressed is heard by the Almighty. (Q, 27:62)

Innate-fear, therefore, is not just a predicate of punishment, as often complained, but also that of an “SOS” signal, in the situation of distress.   

shakir2.wordpress.com

Topics covered:- Logic, reason, pristine reason, common sense, causality, Temporal/Divine causality, revelation, Divine wisdom, Inevitability of religion, Non Human Messenger, Gazali’s falsity of reason, imagination, Imaginary God, belief in the hereafter, Contentment, Voltaire’s rationalism, Fitrah, khulq/takween, Ordinary,/ scholar/ prophet, Psychology of Innate fear, Morality, Ethics and  The-Distressed.

Advertisements

Praying Silently?

March 31, 2018

 

 It is very important for Muslims to know the difference between praying-silently and praying-in-the-head.

Reciting silently; means one’s lips must move, the tongue must move and the breath must be exhaled with subdued voice (like whispering). What is being recited silently must be audible to the reciter.

Zuhar and Asar Prayers *1 are a good example when both, the Imam and those praying behind him, are reciting silently for it is the peak-time of the day when minds are usually pre-occupied with a host of things/thoughts and a loud recitation even by Imam may not suit the bustling mood of the day and may distract those reciting silently behind him.

In other three prayers, the serene ambiance under the cloak of darkness seems suitable for louder recitation.

*1–Zuhar and Asar Prayers are called “sirri” (silent/subdued) while other 3 prayers are called “Jahri” (loud or audible).

Reciting in the head (without the movement of the above-mentioned facial-parts is not a “recitation” but “imagination”.

It does not constitute a valid recitation in the prayer.

In Islamic Fiqh, the terms “jahr” and “khaft” are used when describing the way one should recite. Linguistically “jahr” means “to be loud, clearly audible” and “khaft” means “to become inaudible, low, and soft”.

Muslim Scholars, however, have resorted to the technical meanings of these terms; based on the linguistic definition, by adding limits to them.

Technically, as explained by the scholars, “jahr” means to recite out loud; the minimal whereof being the recitation in a way that the next person in line can hear. “Khaft” means to recite quietly, the minimal whereof being that the person reciting hears himself. What constitutes “Recitation” is the movement of the tongue, breathing in and out to produce sound. Just “thinking” it in one’s mind does not constitute recitation.

There is a strong position taken in all the schools-of-thoughts (Madahabs) that in a minimal “khaft” (silent) recitation correct pronunciations of the Arabic words of the verse being recited, must be murmured, without exuding sound.

 

shakir2.wordpress.com

Why Muslim should not eat the meat prepared* by the People of Book (POB)? *

March 5, 2018

 

Image result for still pic of beautiful bull from Pakistan

*(Word “prepared” has been used instead of “slaughtered” to avoid any misunderstanding which might be created)

Sounds Strange? Yes, it does, until one reads it all before making up his mind.

First of all, let us understand what is“Halal” and what is “Dabiha”?

Halal:- is a generic term for permissible animals/things, which may be slaughtered/consumed by Muslims.

Dabiha:- on the other hand, is the meat of a permissible (halal) animal slaughtered by meeting 4 conditions, namely:- Severance (by a sharp object) of Jugular veins, Cutting of Esophagus, while invoking the name (chanting-takbeer) of Allah (SWT) and then letting the blood be drained.

Now, according to the (Q, 5:5) “Today, all the good things of life have been made lawful to you. And the food of those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime is lawful to you, 14  and your food is lawful to them. And [lawful to you are], in wedlock, women from among those who believe [in this divine writ], and, in wedlock, women from among those who have been vouchsafed revelation before your time – provided that you give them their dowers, taking them in honest wedlock, not in fornication, nor as secret love-companions. 15  But as for him who rejects belief [in God] – in vain will be all his works: for in the life to come he shall be among the lost. 16 

Here I would like to draw attention to a very subtle hint. Muslims, in this verse, have been allowed to marry the chaste women* of the People of Book (POB) by paying them dower.(ensuring the legitimate relationship) On the other hand, POB has not been allowed to marry Muslim women, regardless. Food of each other, on the contrary, however, has been allowed to be consumed (Unconditionally). It is an excellent display of Divine wisdom; by granting a concession at this juncture; because the women who have been made lawful for Muslims (despite being Chaste) grew up on the food; which might not have been prepared as per Islamic rules; and the same would most likely be offered to Muslim-Husbands, refusing to eat whereof would sound offensive and insulting. (Muslim may take their women but refuse to eat their food!). {Explanations # 14 & 15 by Asad, in his translation of 5:5, alluding to this subtlety}

*(Can one, in the given circumstances, find a chaste woman easily amongst the POB? Hence, one ought to see the overall-condition of POB also in the same-vein; necessitating the application of conditional clauses 1 &2, mentioned below)

Here is, however, what has been categorically ordained before/after the concession allowed by Allah (SWT) in (Q, 5:3 & 6:118)

The conditional clause # 1 of “إِلَّا مَا ذَكَّيْتُمْ (unless you have properly slaughtered)” should be closely observed as it is used in the Qura’an as a distinguishing factor for the permissibility of meat. Linguistically Dhakah means to complete or perfect something.

Legality operates until proved Otherwise.

A ruling deduced from (Q,10:30) has been specified by Al Jassas in his “Ahkam Al Qura’an” that all edibles are permissible and Halal(lawful) unless the unlawfulness or prohibition of something particular stands proved through an evidence of shria’a. (Consider the current religious practices of the people of the book in the light of clause #1 &2).  A pertinent Hadith reported by Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Abu Hurairah, where Prophet (PBUH) said “By the one in whose hands rests my life, any Jew or Christian (POB) who hears my call and still does not believe in the teachings I have brought, then he/she will be of the people of Hell (Jahannam)” (the language employed in this Hadith expresses the continuity of its application until the end of the time).

Accentuation of the point of eating properly slaughtered meat.

Eat of that (meat) over which the name of Allah (SWT) has been pronounced—The conditional clause #2 (while slaughtering that animal/bird) if you are believers in His revelations (6:118)

And why should you not eat of that (meat) on which Allah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of slaughter), while He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you, except under extreme necessity? And, surely many do lead (mankind) astray by their own desires through lack of knowledge. Certainly, your Lord knows best the Transgressor (6:119)

Eat not (O believers) of that meat on which Allah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of slaughtering) for sure it is disobedience of Allah (a sinful conduct). And certainly, the Shayaatin (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [making al-Maytatah legal to eat (Maytatah – a dead animal or animal/bird slaughtered without taking the name of Allah during slaughter)], then you would indeed be a polytheists (i.e. doing shirk, ascribing partners to Allah) (6:121)

And such animals (cattle) upon which they mention not the Name of Allah (during slaughter) only to fabricate a lie against Him (6:138)

So eat of the lawful (Dabiha) and good food (Pure wholesome, Halal cattle slaughtered according to Islamic method) which Allah has provided for you. And be grateful for the Graces of Allah, if it is He Whom you worship (16:114)

And say not concerning that which your tongue says falsely: “This is Halal and this is Haram,” so as to invent lies against Allah. Verily, those who invent lies against Allah will never prosper…A passing brief enjoyment (will be theirs), but they will have a painful torment (16:116-117)

For every nation, We have appointed religious ceremonies so that they may mention the Name of Allah (SWT) upon the animals that He has given them for food (22:34)

So mention the Name of Allah (SWT) upon them (sheep, goat, cows, oxen, camels etc) as they line up (for sacrifice) (22:36)

Relevant Ahadith

Sayyiduna Abu Hurayrah (R.A) reports that the Prophet (PBUH) said, “A time will come upon the people wherein a man will not bother what he intakes; whether from a Halal source or Haram.”  (Bukhari 2059)

The Prophet (PBUH) said, “Avoid whatever you have doubts about in favor of what is not (doubtful).” (Tirmidhi)

 

Hanbalite, Shafai’ite, Malikite and Hanafite school, all adhere to the above position.

 

IMPORTANT NOTE

One should not pick and choose a verse to present his/her own (favorite) point of view. Instead, a collective outcome, of all the verses on the topic, should be the one guiding and binding. (Q, 2: 85 & 4: 150)

 

Opposite Points of views

Despite all the above quotes and the position emphasized upon in this treatise several Imams, such as Imam Ibn Katheer (RA) writes in famous commentary, “Ibn Abbas and Abu Umaamah and Mujaahid and Sa‘eed ibn Jubair and ‘Ikrimah and ‘Ataa’ and al-Hasan and Makhool and al-Suddi and Muqaatil ibn Hayyaan said that it (the food of the people of the book) means “what they slaughter”; in fact this is a matter on which there is agreement among the scholars that is what they [the People of the Book] slaughter is lawful for the Muslims because they believe that it is unlawful to slaughter to other than Allah and they mention nothing other than the name of Allah over what they slaughter even though they believe things about Him, exalted is He, that he transcends.”

 

The Validity of opposing views

 

These Imams; based on their ijtihad (juridical-contemplative-deduction); uphold the injunctions given in (Q, 5:5) as self-contained/ freestanding. In Islamic parlance; where a difference of opinion like this ensues; neither of the points of views is considered invalid or wrong.

 

(H) “Difference of opinion of Muhammad (PBUH)’s companions is a mercy for Allah’s slaves” Every difference of opinion, in juridical (Fiqhi) issues, is based on a sincerely deduced unique perspective hence become a basis/source of mercy.

 

 The Basis of a difference of opinion

 

A difference of opinion among the Imams normally stems from the state/understanding of the Evidence such as-(text or hadith);

Un-availability, abrogation, considered weak, forgetfulness of it, the unreliability of its narrator, misconstruing its meaning or thinking that the one in hand is stronger than the new one.

 

Here is how one may decide which “way” to follow:-

 

Those who know of the evidence should follow it (Qura’anic text or hadith Sahih) even if it goes against some of the Imams (but not against the consensus–Ijma’a–of the ummah). Shaykh Uthaymeen (R.A)

 

Those who are not well versed in such a knowledge should resort to a reputed scholar, for Allah (SWT) says:- “So ask those who know the scripture, if you know not”(Q,16:43)

 (I seek refuge in Allah (SWT) for my shortcomings. May Allah (SWT) guide us all on the right path).

 shakir2.wordpress.com

 

Scientific rationalism, reason vs. Religious Faith

January 6, 2018

Related image

These are two different fields of knowledge and inquiry. It would be naïve to compare them on any logical basis, for they are not compatible and human logic and reasons, including scientific knowledge; restricted to tangibility, empiricism, and repeatability, cannot transcend into the realm of spirituality.

Such questions are generally raised by those who are staunch believers in material/tangible world only. They fail to even imagine or entertain the idea that; there could exist another realm beyond their area of comprehension; despite the fact that they invariably acknowledge the limitation and fallibility of human knowledge, reason, and logic, including taken for guaranteed scientific knowledge. They also talk about many dimensions of the Universe but exclude the spiritual one due to ingrained anti-faith arrogance and rigidity.

Most often a misunderstanding of the earlier religious figures or even nonreligious figures; who laid some kind of claims in the name of religion; which turned out to be false are being exploited to justify the incorrigibility of reason, logic and scientific knowledge, which in itself is deceit and treachery. There are, on the other hand, numerous claims made by scientist community; being transient and tentative — as per the Pierce Doctrine of “Fallibilism”–turned out to be false, should they not then be used similarly to validate the religion/faith?

The good news, however, is that there is a growing breed of people; who have the capacity and will to traverse both the realms with equal ease and certainty. This approach is the only approach which will augment and extend, the understanding and the ensuing benefits of both the realms, to the human race.

Needless to stress the reality, that the Creator of the science is also the Creator of all the universe (s) dimensions including spiritual one. We cannot go too far by just acknowledging and depending only on one of the dimensions of—materiality, tangibility, empiricism and repeatability. We ought to learn to transcend and traverse both (and all) the realms to better understand and benefit fully.

https://shakir2.wordpress.com/2017/12/17/epistemological-theology/

For further reading:- May GOD be dispensed with?

shakir2.wordpress.com

Reality

January 6, 2018

 

Image result for pictures of nebula

Reality is subjective and perceptive in a spatial-temporal world. It has as many shades as seekers. it entails priori (analytical) and posteriori (synthetic) justification resting on innate ideas. It transforms into a new dimension when experienced through spiritual wisdom–beyond the realm of space-time. It remains available to the one witnessing it from priori and posteriori justification standpoint and also to believer, follower, adherent out of sheer devotion and reverence through posteriori knowledge only. The first one could be Gnostic, saint, Sufi, Mystic and the later one, a follower, devotee, faithful. believer, or a seeker of reality and truth. It is not however yet a destination but a state/stage/rank in the Quest for Ultimate reality!

shakir2.wordpress.com

Do animals also feel pain?

December 24, 2017

Most animals, as well as plants, do.

In my opinion, anything which can be perceived to have been endowed with any level of consciousness (Humanly cognizable or not) does have the sense of joy and gloom, which would be a consequence of obedience or disobedience to its Creator.

shakir2.wordpress.com

Is Allah’s wrath; like Anger, a human weakness?

December 24, 2017

“Anger” is not a proper translation of the word “Ghazab” however, the closest proper English equivalent would be “wrath”. Allah’s wrath is one of His characteristics. It, however, is not a characteristic passed onto human beings as such—but a much milder version of it “anger”. Logically and rationally human beings are incapable of handling the intensity and wholesomeness of any of His Characteristics. Justice is also one of His characteristics and passed onto human beings in the similar fashion. “Unjustness” or “In-justice” however, is not one of His characteristics but human beings practice it due to their innate unsavory impulses. When human beings; despite His countless blessings; transgress; doing an injustice to His right(s); it results in His “wrath”, which is quite logical and rational consequence.

Unlike Human being, Allah (SWT) is all knowing and is beyond “injustice”, therefore, His wrath would be perfectly justifiable. It is only the human being who could be wrong in his expression of anger. Whereas, getting angry impulsively would be a weakness associable with him But not with Allah (SWT).

shakir2.wordpress.com

Tazkiyyah-a-Nafs, (Self-Control).

December 24, 2017

“And keep yourself patient [by being] with those who call upon their Lord in the morning and the evening, seeking His countenance. And let not your eyes pass beyond them, desiring adornments of the worldly life, and do not obey one whose heart We have made heedless of Our remembrance and who follows his desire and whose affair is ever [in] neglect” (Q,18:28)

Improvisation

Keep your-self (Nafs) restrained/subdued by being in the company of those, who keep busy remembering their Lord, day and night (morn, eve) seeking His pleasure/approval/mercy. Do not let your-self (Nafs) evade their company by being attracted to the adornments of fleeting life (temporary worldly life). Do not be in the company of someone whose heart, We have rendered, barren of Our remembrance. The one who is the slave of his desires and, his disposition is utter neglect. 

 

(This may have also provided a justification (deduced) for   “Majalis” & “Halaqa”— group chanting, Mahafil—e–Sama’a etc—for ordinary people and the people of Sufi orders)

Needless (Poor) king of the Kings!

December 24, 2017

The one who is, selfless and sincere to the purpose of life; goodness towards others and, obedience to the Creator. He would never have to question anyone’s intention or motive for he is free of the expectations and needs. Sin (covetousness) is the destruction of the station of the needless. Needless (Poor) is the king of the Kings; for the covetousness and expectations are his slaves, and the Kings are slaves of their covetousness and expectations.

He (PBUH) said, “Have no desire for this world, Allah will love you; have no desire for what people possess, people will love you.” [Ibn Majah]

In the world of selfishness and materialism virtue becomes too feeble to even register.

shakir2.wordpress.com

Demonizing, Repressing a Religious Minority!

December 19, 2017

 

 

 

DEMONIZING AND REPRESSING A RELIGIOUS MINORITY BECAUSE IT HAS DIFFERENT MORAL VALUES THAN THE MAJORITY CAN HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
A classically American approach that protects the many religious streams running together to form the American cultural heritage rather than damming one in favor of another. As historian Denise Spellberg observes of Thomas Jefferson’s view of Islam, “In the formation of the American ideal and principles of what we consider to be exceptional American values, Muslims were, at the beginning, the litmus test for whether the reach of American constitutional principles would include every believer, every kind, or not.” Jefferson didn’t care for Islam (or any organized religion, for that matter). But he understood that America would be stronger if citizens favoring one stream of its heritage vigorously argued its merits without seeking to place legal limits on those arguing for the merits of a different stream.
Shakir2.wordpress.com

Denise A. Spellberg (born c. 1958) is an American scholar of Islamic history. She is an associate professor of history and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. Spellberg holds a BA from Smith College (1980) and a Ph.D. (1989) from Columbia University.

Books

Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of ‘A’isha Bint Abi Bakr. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an: Islam and the Founders, New York: Knopf, October 1, 2013; ISBN 978-0307268228


%d bloggers like this: