Common Roots - Part Three
On page 16 of What's Right With Islam, Imam Rauf cites the following Quranic verse – namely, “Be religious in accordance with your truest inclinations, the immutable nature (fitrah) of God upon which He created people – there is no altering God's creation – that is right religiousness, but most people do not know. (30:30)” Imam Rauf claims “that any person who listens to his or her heart or conscience would recognize that God is One, that humanity is one family, that humans should be free and should treat each other fairly and with justice.”
Given, as I am quite sure that Imam Rauf would agree, that human beings are inclined to error without the support of Divine guidance and assistance, one may not be able to accept what he says in the foregoing without a certain amount of qualification. One of the lessons of history is that, for the most part, human beings all too frequently are not spiritually in accord with their truest inclinations or fitrah since they do not recognize that God is One or that humanity constitutes one family or that human beings ought to be free and ought to treat one another with equitability.
Because the foregoing is very often the nature of human affairs, this is precisely why guidance is necessary and why Divine books and messengers are sent to humankind. If human beings could act in accordance with our truest inclinations or fitrah on our own, then, Divine guidance would not be necessary, but such is not the case.
Many people listen to what they believe is their heart or their conscience only – if they are fortunate – to later discover that the real teachings of the heart, conscience, and fitrah are something other than what they previously believed or thought. Not only is the art of listening to one's heart or being in accordance with one's fitrah difficult to accomplish, but learning how to differentiate among the different forces – both destructive and constructive – which seek to undermine the proper functioning of the heart, conscience, or fitrah entails an extremely difficult set of tasks.
In general terms we may all agree that qualities such as freedom, equality, social justice and fraternity are very important. However, both Divinity and the Devil are in the details of working out what any of these qualities actually mean amidst the many particularized problems and complexities of everyday existence.
Like the Peanuts character, Linus once said – “I love humanity! It's people I can't stand.” Consequently, when one looks into one's heart and conscience, we may all see a tain constructed from general ideas (like Linus's humanity) concerning freedom, equality, social justice, and fraternity, but the particular images of freedom, equality, and so on that are reflected from the glass covering the tain (like Linus's actual people) may be very different from one individual to the next.
For example, I agree with Imam Rauf about the importance of each of the qualities which he mentions. Yet, nonetheless -- as I am pointing out in the present discussion, as well as other essays appearing elsewhere in this collection which critically engage What's Right With Islam -- my understanding of these qualities (along with a number of additional themes) seems to be quite different than his conception of what freedom, equality, social justice and fraternity may involve. Some of these differences are minor, but others appear to be much more substantial.
What does it mean to say: that God is One (e.g., there was a controversy between those who maintained that there is a 'oneness of witnessing' but rejected the position of those who advocated a 'oneness of being'), or that humanity is one family (is it a dysfunctional family, or a family beset by internecine struggles like Cain and Abel, or a family locked in unending machinations and manipulations like the brothers of Joseph – peace be upon him)? What degrees of freedom should be extended to any given individual and what degrees of constraint? What do we mean when we say that one should treat others fairly and with justice?
Imam Rauf seeks to draw a parallel between the “self-evident Truths” of the Declaration of Independence and the natural inclination of our minds and heart to acknowledge the truth of the Abrahamic ethic. Yet, initially, these truths of the framers of the Declaration of Independence that were allegedly so self-evident excluded women (unless they were property owners), blacks, slaves, and Native peoples from having a rightful place among the men who were “created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.”
Apparently, like the central characters of Orwell's Animal Farm: 'All of us are equal, but some of us are more equal than others'. In any event, once again, the idea that all we have to do is look within our conscience and hearts to see the truth of things raises a lot of unanswered questions for a perspective like that which Iman Rauf is putting forth concerning the alleged self-evident nature of the truths about freedom, liberty, social justice, and fraternity.
Is Imam Rauf correct about things, or am I correct about things, or are both of us wrong, or are we partially right and partially wrong? Allah knows best, but what I do know is that the problem is not as simple as Imam Rauf seems to indicate – that is, we do not just look into our hearts or conscience and realize the nature of fitrah. This requires considerable: spiritual guidance, Divine assistance, as well as struggle from ourselves. Indeed, if things were as Imam Rauf appears to suppose them to be, there would be no need for revelation, Prophets, or other forms of Divine assistance.
According to Imam Rauf “those that practice what their hearts tell them are practicing the right religion”. The Qur'an refers to this as “deen Allah” (Qur'an, 3: 83), and Imam Rauf says that this 'deen' has been bequeathed to human faculties of reason and understanding. Moreover, Imam Rauf claims, on the one hand, that the primary component of this understanding is the recognition that God is One and, on the other hand, that both jinn and human beings have been created for no other purpose than to worship God – who “desires no aid from” humans nor jinn (Qur'an 51: 57) – and that the nature of worship “involves the observance of His patterns which are knowable by reason (page 16)”.
In the Qur'an one finds the following: “The seven heavens and the earth and all that is therein praise God and there is nothing that does not glorify God in praise, but you understand not their manner of praise.” (17: 44) Apparently, reason is not enough since we all have it and, yet, there are patterns of praise and worship inherent in the nature of things – including humankind -- which we do not understand.
Abraham's father, who constructed and fashioned idols which gave expression to polytheism rather than monotheism, had reason, but he did not observe or understand or grasp the Divine patterns … or, perhaps, he did observe such patterns but just interpreted them incorrectly. Might one suppose that Abraham's father looked into his heart or conscience and that reason told him that polytheism was the right way to go? Do we have any evidence to indicate that this was not the case?
Presumably, just looking into one's heart or conscience and working toward a reasoned understanding is not enough. Not all reasoning is necessarily correct. Not everything which we believe our hearts and conscience are telling us is necessarily an accurate reflection of what God is trying to disclose to us through the signs and patterns of nature, revelation, or prophetic missions. Something is missing from the equation.
In the Qur'an are the following two verses: “And whoever is blind in this world will be blind in the Hereafter, and even further from the path.” (17: 72), and, “It is not their eyes which are blind, but the hearts in their breast.” (22: 46)
Obviously, according to the Qur'an there are forces which can obscure the vision of the heart. If the vision of the heart is not clear, then, various kinds of blindness plague human understanding and reason.
Spiritually speaking, the heart is a capacity with different dimensions, potentials and characteristics. One facet of the heart is known as the 'qalb' – an Arabic term meaning that which turns or fluctuates.
The qalb can be oriented toward the carnal soul, Iblis, and/or the multiplicity of emotional and rationalistic entanglements knows as 'dunya' or the 'world'. The qalb also can be oriented toward the ruh or spirit.
In fact, the qalb is a battleground of forces for both good and evil which determines one's degree of receptivity to spiritually destructive and constructive currents running through the heart. If one is attuned to spiritually destructive currents, then, one will be beset with one kind or another of blindness with respect to correct understanding or reasoning. If, on the other hand, one is, by the Grace of God, receptive to spiritually constructive influences running through the heart, then, one's understanding and reasoning are modulated in a way which assists one to 'see' and understand some element of truth and to be able to use this understanding to direct reasoning in an efficacious manner.
All of the foregoing can be summed up in a saying which has been attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). “There is an organ within the human being which, if it is problematic, then, the whole of one's being becomes problematic, but, if that organ is sound, then, the whole of being is sound, and that organ is the heart.”
A little later on in Chapter 1 of What's Right With Islam Imam Rauf does indicate that there is a strong tendency within human nature to resist the primordial, spiritual capacity of fitrah which God has bestowed upon humankind. He describes this inclination toward resistance as a form of 'forgetfulness' and indicates that this is not primarily a matter of forgetting what we know – that is, a lapse in memory – but, rather, constitutes a failure to apply what we know. In effect, we know better than we often do.
I tend to disagree somewhat with Imam Rauf in relation to the forgoing position. While I do accept the idea that human beings may not act in a way which is consistent with what we know to be right or moral, one has to address the issue of why such inconsistency between knowledge and action arises in the first place. I believe this inconsistency points toward a deeper problem.
Essentially, the problem of forgetting revolves around the issue of identity. We have forgotten who we are. We have forgotten our spiritual potential. We have forgotten our origins. We have forgotten why we have been brought into this world. We have forgotten our relationship with Allah. We have forgotten how to reconnect with that which we have forgotten.
Even when, by the Grace of God, we recognize something to be true and correct, we often do not act in consort with that understanding because we have forgotten that nothing is possible without Divine support and assistance. We have forgotten that – in the reported words of the Prophet – “This life is but a tillage for the next life, therefore, do good deeds here that you may reap benefits there … for striving is an ordinance of God, and whatever God has ordained can be attained only by striving.” In short, we have forgotten that effort and struggle is necessary to, among other things, acquire understanding and, then, in addition, convert such understanding into appropriate action.
In pre-eternity the Qur'an indicates that Allah addressed the spirits with: “Am I not your Lord? (Alastu bi rabbikum) And the spirits answered: “'Yes, we testify (Qarbala)'. “ (7: 172). When we were brought into this world, most of us forgot this conversation and the myriad ramifications of the central question and answer of that dialogue.
Furthermore, this inclination toward forgetfulness is not merely a passive phenomenon but can become a very rigorous tendency toward rebelling against anything which might lead to remembering our essential identity and its concomitant responsibilities. More specifically, not only do we have a carnal soul which incites us to forgetfulness, but, as the Qur'an indicates: “If anyone forsakes the remembrance of the Most Gracious, We appoint a devil to be an intimate companion for that person and who will hinder that individual from the path. Yet, they think they are being guided in the right direction.” (43: 36-37)
Therefore, the problem of forgetfulness goes beyond not acting in accordance with what we may know to be right, just, or moral. In fact, this latter kind of forgetfulness can be subsumed under the more essential form of forgetting outlined above – a more essential form of forgetfulness that explains why, among other things, a disparity between knowledge and action arises in the first place.
Imam Rauf goes on to state that: “If there is anything in the Islamic view that approximates the Christian idea of original sin, in the sense of something that can be described as the universal human flaw, it is that humans forget.” (page 23). I believe this statement to be problematic in several ways.
First of all, the theological concept of original sin usually does not refer to some universal flaw in human beings but rather refers to what is inherited by every human being due to the mistakes of Adam (peace be upon him) and Eve (may Allah be pleased with her) when they disobeyed God in the Garden of Eden. This is the sin for which people are said – at least by many Christians – to be in need of baptism … for which even Jesus (peace be upon him) was supposedly required to be baptized by John the Baptist (peace be upon him) … although there are aspects of baptism, depending on which brand of Christian theology one is considering, that extend beyond just the need to be cleansed of original sin and enter into a condition of spiritual renewal.
To speak in terms of a potential for rebellion against the truth (i.e., the nafs or carnal soul) is a very different idea than is the notion of original sin. Although, spiritually speaking, all human beings do inherit the capacity to rebel against truth, this capacity has to be acted upon through choice – that is, one has to choose to rebel in order for this aspect of human potential to be given expression. However, in the matter of original sin, one gets no choice in the matter – one inherits the stain of sin without ever exercising choice. This is diametrically opposed to the Islamic perspective in which all human beings are born innocent and sin-free and, then, the intentions and choices of life determine whether, or not, we commit spiritual errors for which we are to be held accountable.
| Part One | Part Two | Next |
| Part Five | Part Six | Return to Menu|
|
