Practical Questions about Islam
Critic:-
You say that the Quran does not
recognise Atheism. Can we say than that the Islamic attitude and the Quran are
in opposition here? If yes, what is the stance of, for example, some fairly
educated average Muslim who knows well both his religion and society?
Comment:-
Why do you say that the Islamic
attitude and the Quran are in opposition? An Islamic attitude is based on the
Quran. Perhaps you mean that some Muslims recognise Atheism. But the Quran is
speaking about realities and not what people say or think. That is what I was
talking about. People are inherently aware that they are only a small part of a
much greater reality on which they are dependent and to which they must adjust.
But consciously, in thought they may interpret this greater reality
differently.
Critic:-
Of course, by your definition of
belief systems, I'm not an atheist. On the other hand, if your notion of
God/Allah or - more important - its concrete manifestation in the world's
social system, socially constructed reality and its ideologies, and NOT a banal
Hollywood-like picture of some powerful being in the human biological sense,
than I can call you an atheist by my definition.
Comment:-
It could be that you are not an
atheist even in thought but merely reject the popular or any particular idea of
God or have an idea of your own as to what is supreme e.g. the process of
Dialectical Materialism . And if by the word "God" you mean a person
with a white beard sitting somewhere in the sky on some planet or some object
or some other idea of your own, then yes, true, I am an atheist. That is why I
differentiate between Allah and God. The word "god" can refer to any
thing people worship or subordinate themselves to. Allah is that which is
described in the Quran. He is not like anything, but the fundamental self
existing Reality, the all pervasive origin of all other things.
Critic:-
Can you consider that your
definition of Real (as in reality) is not necessarily everyone's definition?
Comment:-
The Quran says: "Allah is the
real and that which they invoke besides Him is the False." That is what we
accept. We are not concerned with what other people accept.
Critic:-
Personally, I think that Reality
doest not 'really exist' - alongside and independent of subjects, but as every
lie and every system, it is necessary for the construction of society and the
conscious life of higher forms of life.
Comment:-
It is fact which everyone knows
that he is not his own creator and that he arises from something not himself,
something outside his experiences. He also knows that things come into and go
out of his consciousness, experiences and knowledge. There is a greater world
outside himself of he is only a small part and on which he depends for his existence
and welfare.
Apart from this fact of experience
he can also apply reason.
We distinguish between Reality
Absolute (RA) -Reality as made and seen by God, things as they are apart from
human perception, and human perception (RH). What human beings see is the
effect of things on their minds. It has objective and subjective factors.
The fact that RA exists is
demonstrated by the fact that it forces and constrains perception and provides
the common experiences of all perceivers. Though experiences vary there is
something about them that people have in common. People cannot alter them. We
can arrive at this by simple reasoning:-
A person P1 has an experience E1
about an object O1 and a second person P2, like himself and sees O1 as external
to P2. He communicates with the person P2 by means words W, who tells him that
he has experiences E2 in which he also sees O1 as external to P1. The verbal
communication is, of course also an experience. P1 must encode his E1 in W and
transmit it to P2 who must decipher it to extract an experience. The language W
must be common to both because it is associated with the same field of
experiences in the common environment and culture. It is not necessary that the
experiences of the words Ew1 and Ew2 by P1 and P2 should be the same. It is
sufficient that there should be a correspondence between them. So E1 contains
experiences of P1, P2 and O1 and E2 contains experiences of P1, P2 and O1. So,
even if they cannot experience the experiences of each other, each concludes
that the other person who is like himself outwardly is also like himself
inwardly and has experiences. And they also conclude that because the object O1
is experienced by both of them its cause is outside both of them.
Of course they do not consciously
reason that way. It is a built-in process, something implicit in the process of
life. But this reasoning has to be made explicit for those who through faulty
reasoning come to a false conclusion.
But note that if P1 and P2 do not
have a common environment where they have common experiences of objects and
words then the association between the experience of objects and experience of
words is not the same and communication is not possible. In fact, unless
deliberately created such as in the confines of scientific laboratories,
industrial factories, professional departments or religious group etc. the
environment of people and their interactions with it are different and there
are both common and uncommon elements in various combinations. This makes
communication inaccurate to various degrees leading to much misunderstanding.
However,
human beings are conscious of only a small part of all that exists and even of
all that which affects them, including the processes that are taking place
within them. This is well known. It is also well known that we can place or
withdraw our attention from things and that our motives affect what we see.
There is, therefore, a distinction here between four worlds:- The totality of
that which exists, WT, that which affects us WA, that which we can be conscious of, WC and that to which our
motives draw our attention WM. Human beings are motivated by the pleasure-pain
principle, by likes and dislikes, desires and fears. They tend to suppress from
consciousness what they find unpleasant or painful both within themselves and
in their surroundings, rationalise it away, substitute, and to project or
displace it elsewhere, and what they like and find pleasurable they exaggerate
or invent and introject or self-attribute, thereby creating a world of
illusions, WI. Apart from the needs
that are inherent in them they also have acquired desires that produce acquired
likes and dislikes which may even contradict the natural ones such as the taste
for bitter things, desire for self-harm, masochism or negate natural sympathy.
These come from addictions, habits, training and conditioning, accidental or
deliberate associations, and guilt feelings.
Critic:-
You speak of an objective source.
May be it is an objective source for you, not others. I believe your system
fits you very well, but my question was - how are Muslims prepared to meet with
other systems of thinking? What I will like to say is: I don't think that
difference between our worldviews is the /true/ social antagonism today.
Comment:-
I have explained what Islam teaches.
By objective source I mean it comes from Allah, the origin of all things. But
Muslims as people, like anyone else, have partial knowledge mixed with
conditioning, speculation, fantasies, desires etc. They are required to become
aware, seek knowledge. There is a difference between those who seek knowledge
and those who have fixations on some dogmas.
It is a question of recognising
the limitations and coming to an agreement to seek knowledge and awareness of
reality. This is not possible if what you say is true that there is no reality
apart from what people think.
Critic:-
As a practical example, the
hostile critic called 'Robert' on this web site is probably equally perceived
as a fairly complete manifestation of western unhealthy mental problems for you
as a Muslim, and by me as a Dialectical Materialist, atheist (by some
definitions). What I am trying to find out is: Is it possible to have partial
theoretical and practical alliance between two such different worldviews,
against today's "liberal", "multicultural" and
"post-imperial" mutation of capitalism in it's desperate pursuit for
survival
Comment:-
Human beings have partial
knowledge and different people have different parts. The cause of conflict is
the clinging to a fixation on the part. We must seek knowledge and agree on
that.
If you believe in the Dialectical
process then you cannot suppose that Dialectical Materialism is an Absolute. It
must have its antithesis in Dialectical Idealism. And there must be a synthesis
in Dialectical Vitalism (or some other such name.)
From an Islamic point of view,
this system of thinking produces a Trinity which refers to a Relativity. We are
required to transcend this to the Absolute, the Unity. Unity when manifested in
the created world where knowledge is always relative manifests as two relata
and a relating factor. e.g. observer-object-observation, knower-known-knowing.
This distinction is not to be found in the Absolute.
We, therefore, see all three as
belonging to the created world. There is constant interaction between them.
Though the pair of opposites comes out of an original unity, they combine to
produce the third relating or mediating factor which now interacts with the
other two. It is also a reflection of the factor that kept the two united in the
first place and tries to reunite them again.
Critic:-
I see Islam today as a one of the
few active and strong opponents of the worldwide hegemony of
"freedom" and "democracy". But on the other hand, are
Muslims prepared to tolerate (for them) the criminal way of life of someone who
occasionally gets drunk or high, singing on the beach with half-naked beasts of
the other gender, babbling many sorts of theories, sometimes talking even
blasphemous things?
Comment:-
Islam recognises human frailties
and forgiveness is taught. This does not apply to repeated and deliberate acts
of rebelliousness and flouting of moral rules which might affect others and
cause general erosion of morality and degradation. The Islamic community like
any other nation has laws by which its values are facilitated. The
recommendation in the Quran is not to associate with those who make a mockery
of religion and its values and leave the company of people when frivolous,
shameful and scandalous conversations and behaviour arises.
Critic:-
You say that man has fallen from a
perfect state. Contrary to that, many people think there is no original pure
state from which we are alienated later in life, corrupted, or otherwise by
what Christians call "original sin".
Comment:-
That depends on how things are
understood. I am speaking about human potentialities. The original pure state
refers to the Spirit, the seat of human capabilities such as consciousness,
conscience and will that contains the potentialities. It does not refer to
Time. But if someone does not believe that human beings have potentialities for
development and ought not to have an ideal to strive towards then clearly
Muslim part company with them.
Critic:-
My idea (ok, not originally mine
but ...) is that the moment of our birth, moment of entering the world of
socially constructed symbols, castration complex and simply said "human
affairs" is the Primordial Alienation. However, where I differ from both
sides is: I think alienation is not avoidable. The very moment when we realise
that mother's teat is not part of us in some autoerotic all-sensual sense that
by definition is alienation. However, this same alienation is offering life on
earth as we know it. This same alienation can and must be in some way taken as
an axiom, as product of 'will for power' in strict Nietzschean sense.
Comment:-
Alienation for us means alienation
from Allah and therefore, from the Spirit within. This is because of
attachments (fascination or hypnosis) with one's body and its senses and the
sense objects and events. It is this that creates the idea of self, the Ego
which is a mental construct, a false self, an illusion as opposed to the
Spirit, the real self. It suppresses the consciousness, conscience and will and
makes us automatons while constructing all kinds of fantasies and delusions
about ourselves. This condition is known as Spiritual Death or Sleep which we
must rectify.
From the Islamic point of view
"All men are born Muslim (i.e. in submission to their inherent nature),
but it the society that makes them into something else. Therefore, a
distinction is made between the Essence and the Personality. The one is natural
and the other is an artificial covering, the clothing (with which Adam covered
his shame). It is like a tough shell that protects the vulnerable interior
against the hostile environment but also conceals (from others and oneself) and
disables.
Critic:-
Islam itself is a construction,
rationalisation and fantasy in some sense, but I can acknowledge it as a system
that does a job that is good for many people.
Comment:-
You misunderstand. I have
distinguished between RA (Absolute Reality) and RH (Human Reality). The same
distinction must be made in the Quran and Islam. There is the real Quran and
Islam and there is what people think they are. There are many varieties and
degrees of it. We are required to strive to move towards RA.
Critic:-
However, my position is that
society where people are educated and develop shame of their sexuality, to
cover themselves and repress various healthy impulses with arrogant forms of
self respect is not really for everyone.
Comment:-
You misunderstand. Christians in
the past who thought sex was a sin, regarded Islam perverse as being sexually indulgent.
It is release from this repression that has caused the pendulum to swing to the
other extreme in the West where it is the cause of many psychological, social
and physical malfunctions and much suffering.
There is no repression of
sexuality in Islam, but its proper use is required for real self-fulfilment and
for the social and psychological development. We do not think it consists of
mere sexual intercourse but that its purpose is reproduction, to bind the
parents to facilitate the proper bringing up of children, and to create a
society as a network of interconnected families. The characteristics of
sexually are to unite, intensity of motivation, and creativity that can be
channelled to love and self-development. Its perversion or repression creates a
great number of psychological, social and physical maladies. Look around you
and observe the widespread results of sexual immorality in Western Societies.
Critic:-
However, as rarely done by other
Marxist, I reject the false notion that people are equal. What is good for me
is not necessarily good for you and vice versa. People should have *real*
chance to really choose; for example to redefine the values of their culture if
they have the will and drive in them for such a discourse.
Comment:-
We believe in Objective Truth and
the striving to acquire it and live by it.
You are speaking about
differences. There is a difference between equality and similarity and the
context in which things are judged. People are certainly not equal or similar
in height, weight, strength, vigour, health, virtue, intelligence, talents,
circumstances, social position. But it is the conditions of life which
determine which characteristics are useful and which are not and give
advantages or disadvantages. This creates a third category, social differences
and inequalities.
Apart from this, judgement
requires a standard or scale. This must be equally applied to all. There is
equality before the Law, Equality in Justice. If you use centimetres to measure
one thing and inches to measure another you cannot compare them. If you use
arbitrary standards based on whim then again there is to real comparison or
judgement and everyone can apply their own conflicting ones.
Critic:-
Myself, I rather find that life
doesn't have meaning, that all is meaningless, empty, false, and that nihilism
is only what we can approximately call "True" - until I myself create
reason and meaning for things - to give significance to them in a light
different from the rest of my social environment which gets its meaning on the
basis of inertia from religion or capitalism. Basically, my answer to nihilism
is not a Platonic one, nor a Christian one, and even not an Islamic/Judaic one.
My answer is not "God".
Comment:-
You have not thought things out
adequately. Where did you get your intelligence or reason from and the data on
which you base your opinion and wish to construct your system? And if your
opinion is based on whim or on certain inherent mechanisms of your mind, which
are also not under your control, then is it not true that any one else's
opinions based on the same are equally valid even if they contradict yours.
There is then nothing real or objective about it, including your Dialectical
Materialism. There is then no way of running a society but by means of coercion
by those who hold the power.
There is a Universe, and there are
materials, forces, laws and order in it. You are part of it and made of it and
your welfare and development, motives that are also inherent in you, depend on
your adjustment to it. If your perception, opinions and behaviour do not
conform to it but conflict with it then you will suffer and be destroyed.
Critic:-
Do you believe now that there are
really some atheists in the world?
Comment:-
No I do not. I think they are deluded.
Their ideas are not in conformity with the reality of their experiences and
behaviour. Everyone "knows" consciously or unconsciously that they
are only a very small part of a much greater Reality than themselves and that
they interact with it and are dependent on it.
Critic:-
Even if
this is so, this does not explain the characteristics that the Quran attributes
to God.
Comment:-
That
Reality exists is a fundamental assumption, integral to human existence. It
does not take much thought to realise that it must be an Absolute,
self-existing and all pervasive and a Unity in the sense of being unique,
indivisible and a whole. We must also account for the existence of the
fundamental concepts by which we understand existence such as Truth, Virtue,
Power (Ableness), Creativity, Compassion, Benevolence, Justice, Beauty, Harmony
and so on. These categories of thought are inherent features of the mind and
therefore, of the world that we see and understand. They do not arise from
experience and thought, but exist prior to them and determine how we
experience, think, understand and judge. They are not created by us but by the
forces that create the Universe and all things in it, including man, and by the
process of gradual adjustment to Reality that has brought us into existence,
the process called Evolution.
Though Allah is Absolute, these Attributes exist only relative to the
created world and can be regarded as that which defines its nature and gives it
form, purpose and meaning.
Two
other types of categories have been postulated, those described by the
Philosopher Kant for instance, e.g. Quantity, Quality, Relation and Modality
and those used in Science, e.g. space, time, matter, energy, order etc. But
these are not fundamental as they derive from experience and thought and they
are not comprehensive. We do not only recognise facts, but also meaning and
values. We are not passive with respect to existence but also mediating and
active. We have purposes and judge things.
----------<O>----------
Contents