Page 24 - Chapter
Two: "From the beginnings, Kalam experts attempted to understand Koranic
teachings in rational terms with the help of the Greek philosophical heritage. In keeping
with the inherent penchant of reason to discern and differentiate, Kalam fastened on all
those Koranic verses that assert the transcendence and otherness of God. When faced with
verses that assert God’s immanence and presence, Kalam explained them away through
forced interpretations (ta’wil).
Commentary: One
has difficulty understanding precisely what the author means when he maintains that
"Kalam experts attempted to understand Koranic teachings in rational terms with the
help of the Greek philosophical heritage." This difficulty is a function of several
factors.
To begin with, the
adjective "rational" is ambiguous, and people tend to apply it - along with
words such as "democratic" and "ethical" - as being synonymous with
whatever they may be doing or advocating - irrespective of whether, or not, there is a
legitimate equivalency between, for instance, what is truly ‘rational’ and what
they are saying. Just as what is referred to as "common sense" is not as common
as some people might suppose, so too, that which is referred to as "rational" is
sometimes difficult to find.
Another source of
ambiguity within the author’s foregoing quote revolves around the fact that
"Greek philosophical heritage" covers a lot of ground and is not unidimensional.
Democritus, Zeno of Elea and the Eleatic school, Zeno, founder of the Stoic school,
Heraclitus, the Sophists, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle - to name but a few, all had very
different approaches to the use of reason as a means of probing and attempting to
understand the nature of experience.
Consequently, in view of
such diversity, one does not know what kind of "help" the Kalam experts derived
from the "Greek philosophical heritage". In addition, one has no idea of how, or
to what extent, these experts may have modified this ‘help’ to serve their own
purposes.
Furthermore, reason
consists of something more than an "inherent penchant" to "discern and
differentiate". In fact, one might say that it was the capacity of reason to travel
in so many different directions which led to a variety of philosophical schools arising in
different parts of Greece over the 500 year period that constituted its golden period of
thought.
Hypothesizing,
questioning, logical analysis, modeling, ethical judgement, dialogue, the development of
rational systems, reflection, and so on, were all used by the early Greek philosophers.
Yet, various philosophers employed these tools of rationality in different ways depending
on their circumstances, interests, ideas, purposes, inclinations, and abilities.
All philosophy - which
originally meant the love of, and search for, wisdom - begins with a presupposition. More
specifically, philosophy is predicated on the assumption that wisdom can be ascertained
and realized through the use of rational faculties.
The Qur’an and
Hadith are replete with teachings that call into question the fundamental starting point
of philosophy - namely, that everything can be understood through the use of reason.
Consequently, to the extent that the "Kalam experts" relied on reason - with or
without the "help of the Greek philosophical heritage", their project was bound
to be seriously flawed.
For example, one finds in
the Qur’an many verses such as the following: "No soul can believe except by the
Will of Allah, and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not
understand." (10:100) "And they ask you about the spirit. Say: The spirit is one
of the commands of my Lord, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a
little."(17:85) "It is not their sight that is blinded, rather the hearts within
their breasts." (22:46) "Or, (the unbeliever’s state) is like utter
darkness in the deep sea: there covers it a wave above which is another wave, above which
is a cloud, (layers of) utter darkness one above another; when he holds out his hand, he
is almost unable to see it; and to whomsoever Allah does not give light, he has no
light." (24:40)
Unless belief and
understanding come "by the will of Allah", then, one will be left in a state of
doubt and obscurity. No amount of reasoning will be able to generate belief or
understanding.
If reasoning alone were
sufficient, there would have been no need for 124,000 Prophets to be sent to humankind,
nor would there have been any need for various Books of Revelation to have been disclosed.
If reasoning alone were sufficient, all one would have to do - and, this is what the
philosophers and proponents of Kalam believed, is to focus reason on issues such as:
identity, purpose, God, existence, or truth, and wisdom would bubble to the surface.
Yet, again and again, in
the Qur’an, Divinity is stating that: belief, understanding, knowledge, sight, and
light come from God and no one else. Reason which is not supported by Divinity or
illuminated by the light of God is utter darkness.
Reason, unaided by
Divinity, supposes that it can storm the gates of wisdom and, through the sheer brilliance
of its capacity, force its way into the inner sanctum of truth. Reason assumes that it can
work its way to the heart of Reality merely by engaging the surface of experience.
However, Divinity clearly
indicates - through both the Qur’an and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him),
that such a project is doomed to failure. Unfortunately, it is not the capacity for
discernment and differentiation, among other things, that is blind in rationalists -
whether these be philosophers or Kalam experts. It is, rather, "the hearts within
their breasts" which are blind because it is unlit by the Divine light of faith.
Spiritual truth must be
understood through its inner, essential nature. It cannot be penetrated from without.
God must permit
realization of the truth. Reason, by itself, is useless.
Reason must be informed
by spiritual insight, understanding and wisdom. Reason can neither generate spiritual
insight, understanding, or wisdom, nor can the former inform the latter - it is always the
other way around.
Many academics are a lot
like the Greek philosophers and Kalam experts. When evidence, experience, facts, and the
truth do not comply with their rational frameworks, then, more often than not, they try to
force fit things to fit the framework rather than adapt their frameworks to reflect the
nature of reality.
Contrary to the
impression created by the author of Sufism - A Short Introduction, Kalam
experts did not flounder just with respect to the issues of transcendence and immanence.
They ran aground and became derelict at each and every juncture where they gave
pre-eminence to reason, in and of itself, over the fundamental importance and centrality
of the need for the light of Divinity to illuminate the nature of truth, purpose,
identity, and reality.
In effect, those Kalam
experts who relied on reason committed shirk or associating partners with God. In other
words, for them, there was God and there was reason, and despite what God said in the
Qur’an, or despite what the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, that was at
odds with the basic presupposition of the rationalist’s enterprise, the latter went
ahead and established ‘reason’ as the ultimate arbiter of truth.
The Kalam experts forgot
that the Qur’an encouraged people to "Put all your trust in God" (5:23)
rather than reason. This does not mean that reason should be discarded, but, instead, reminds
us that "To God belongs the conclusive argument," (6:149) and, therefore, reason
is answerable to Divinity, not vice versa.
|
