Common Roots - Part Six
The fifth and last principle to be listed by Imam Rauf as basic to any 'globalized' religion through which human beings come to understand the nature of Divine relevancy to humankind concerns the idea that human beings are both responsible and to be held accountable for what is done or not done while journeying through the life of this world. Unfortunately, at least in my opinion, he speaks about accountability in terms of reward and punishment.
I have difficulty reconciling Imam Rauf's earlier emphasis on loving “God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength” (page 18) with the issue of reward and punishment. In fact, juxtaposing the two together seems something of an oxymoron.
Hazrat Abu Bakr Sadiq said: “The sign of attachment with the Beloved is detachment from all else.” This “all else” includes matters pertaining to reward and punishment.
A Sufi saying which is appropriate here states: “The Lover begs of the Beloved nothing but the Beloved. Accursed is the lover who begs of one's Beloved anything except the Beloved.” To speak of reward and punishment is really to introduce into any discussion of loving God with all one's being elements which pertain to other than a focus on the Beloved.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) alluded to something of a similar nature when he is reported to have said: “This world is prohibited to the people of the next world, and the next world is prohibited to the people of this world, and they are both forbidden to the people of Allah.” The people of Allah are those who, among other things, love Divinity independently of all considerations of reward and punishment.
'Ishq is an Arabic word which means ardent, intense love. The word is derived from the term 'ashiqa which refers to a plant that twines itself around another plant or small tree and deprives the latter of the sustenance necessary to develop leaves and fruit. Eventually, the deprived entity dries up, turns yellow, and dies.
Shaykh al-Shibli (may Allah be pleased with him) asks the question: “What is love?” and, then, answers the question. “Love is like a cup of fire which blazes terribly … when it takes root in the senses and settles in the heart, it annihilates.”
Love is the 'ashika plant that crawls its way into our hearts and being and cuts one off from that which connects us, and sustains that connection, with the world. Eventually, the one who is captivated by love dies to one self and to the world and passes away into the condition of fana when one's awareness is overwhelmed by the presence of the Beloved and is dead to everything else.
Love is the forging process which leads to spiritual transformation. The dross material of humanity is placed upon the anvil of life to be pounded by the hammer of experience.
The Divine Blacksmith tempers the dross material by alternately placing that material in spiritual conditions of fire (jalali) and water (jamali) before returning that material to the anvil for further pounding from life experience. And, in the end, if God wishes, the dross material is transformed into something of constructive use which has been purified and fortified to meet “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” with integrity and character.
None of the foregoing comments concerning love are meant to deny the realities of Heaven and Hell nor to deny those realities which revolve about the possibility of reward and punishment. However, this latter sort of vernacular really does not have much relevance to the topic of love.
In fact, we have arrived at something of a crossroads which underscores one of the fundamental differences between exoteric and esoteric approaches with respect to trying to understand the nature of Divine preferences for human beings. Exoteric approaches to spirituality (and included in this are most of the Muslim legal systems) tend to be rooted in a carrot and stick approach that emphasizes extrinsic techniques of motivation which work -- oftentimes in awkward, unnatural and oppressive ways -- on the human heart from the outside in, whereas esoteric approaches tend to be rooted in the most essential of intrinsic motivations – namely love -- in which spiritual desire and motivation flow from within in a way that is entirely consistent and synergistically resonant with, as well as nurturing to, our primordial spiritual capacity or fitra.
Paul said in 2 Corithinians 3: 6: 'Tnewcomershe letter of the law killeth but the spirit giveth life.' When I hear Muslims speak proudly about how they believe that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, I also think about how, in many ways, Islam is also the fastest dying religion in the world because soon after proclaiming the Shahadah that there is no god but God and Muhammad is the messenger of God, I see many of these newcomers initiated into a system of spiritual abuse in which idols are made of this or that theology or this and that Muslim legal system, as well as this or that traditional form of taqlid.
Taqlid is an Arabic word which is derived from a root that refers to a collar or restraint which is intended to control something – for example, an animal. All too many Muslims are rendered into beasts of burden whose imposed duty is to carry the theological and legal baggage of all too many imams, mullahs, jurists, legal scholars, Muslim leaders, and theologians … beasts of burden who are threatened with the whip of hell-fire if they do not do as their idol-masters demand while simultaneously being seduced with come hither whisperings and endearments of a Paradise which often has been sadly and pathetically reduced to sexual pleasures even as God is forgotten.
Rather than attempting to delineate the essence of what has been taught by all authentic prophets worldwide and across history in the manner in which Imam Rauf has done on pages 35 and 36 of What's Right With Islam, I would offer the following alternative way of saying things. This way is, I believe, a way which is fully consonant with the spiritual teachings brought by the authentic emissaries of Divinity.
Life is rooted in self-awareness and the awareness of experience. Out of these several forms of awareness arise curiosity and questions concerning the significance of the contents of awareness. These questions revolve around issues of: identity, purpose, meaning, values, suffering, well-being, methods, and truth. In conjunction with these questions various kinds of intentions and choices emerge which begin to engage such themes according to personal predilections. All choices, no matter what they may be, entail struggle and striving. Out of these efforts various kinds of insight, interpretation, reflection, understanding, and judgment emanate in relation to the questions of life and the contents of consciousness. We act on or apply these understandings in emotional, psychological, worldly, or spiritual ways, and what we do will be evaluated … by ourselves, by others, and by the nature of what is.
All of the foregoing is measured against the degree to which the process of life gives expression to or conforms to the truth, as well as the extent to which justice is done to that truth in relation to each and every facet of our awareness, experience, choice, struggling, understanding, doing, and evaluating. Truth and justice are set by that which is independent of human construction, and it is the task of human existence to merge horizons with such truth and justice according to our capacity to do so. To the extent that one is successful in fully realizing one's capacity for truth and justice, then, to this extent does one come to know, love, and worship the nature of Divine relevancy to humankind … to this extent does one develop character … to this extent does one come to know, if God wishes, the Hidden Treasure which Divinity loved to be known … to this extent does one fulfill one's spiritual destiny.
Toward the latter part of Chapter One in What's Right With Islam, Imam Rauf titles the final section of that chapter in the following way: 'Jews and Christians: Siblings On The Block'. Imam Rauf cites a Quranic verse which informs Muslims that they should “not argue with the People of the Book except in the best way” (2: 62) When reading this verse, I am struck by the thought – as I am sure many Jews and Christians are struck by the thought – that suicide bombings probably don't capture the essence of what Divine guidance is getting at here.
A little further down the page Imam Rauf states with respect to the relationship among, on the one hand, Jews and Christians, and, on the other hand, Muslims the following: “Disagreement between them certainly exists, but all disagreements are no more than family disputes”. While reading this I was struck by the idea – as I am sure many other Muslims are struck – that reducing Lebanon, Palestine, and Iraq to rubble while killing, maiming, and torturing tens of thousands of the inhabitants of these countries appears to be something more than a “family feud”, “disagreement” or some other well-chosen euphemism. Imam Rauf must have attended the same school as did those who came up with the terms of “collateral damage” and “extreme rendition” as civilized ways of talking about murder, kidnapping, and torture.
Toward the bottom of page 37 of What's Right With Islam Imam Rauf says: “the Quran did criticize the Jews for failure to uphold the Torah (5: 68-70) for excessive legalism and exaggerated authoritarianism by some of the rabbis (3: 50, 5: 66-68) and for nationalizing monothesism (2: 111).” However, what Imam Rauf does not state is how Muslims should be criticized for failing to uphold the revealed scriptures which were given to them, or for the excessive legalism and exaggerated authoritarianism of various imams, mullahs, theologians, leaders, and jurists, or for the way in which Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kuwait, Iran, and other Muslim localities have sought to nationalize Islamic monotheism … and similar things could be said in criticism of Christians for committing precisely the same kinds of error.
On page 39 of What's Right With Islam, Imam Rauf indicates that the Qur'an praises Christians in various ways and declares Christians closest to Muslims because of “their warm practice of neighborly love.” I'm sure that all the peoples in Central America, South America, the Middle East, Africa, Vietnam and the rest of Asia who have been oppressed and exploited by imperialistic, colonialistic, and capitalistic strains of Christianity across history – including today -- would fully concur with the foregoing.
Every spiritual, economic, political, and philosophical tradition is populated by both Cains and Ables. The Ables of the world – whether they be Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, Taoist, Aborigine, Maori, some form of indigenous spirituality from the Western Hemisphere, or humanists – they try to observe a “warm practice of neighborly love” to one another – even to the Cains … whereas the Cains of the world – whether they be so-called Muslim, Jewish, Christian, humanist, and so on – tend not to observe a “warm practice of neighborly love” to anyone, including themselves.
According to Imam Rauf, we – Jews, Muslims, and Christians – are basically “all right as long as we believe in the one God, try to love God as best we can, and make our best effort in treating humanity humanely.” And, this is so he believes in spite of whatever mistakes we may have made in our understanding of Divinity and in our practical observances of such understanding.
The problem with the foregoing is that we continue to make mistakes with respect to the nature of Divinity, what it means to love God, or how to treat humanity humanely. Consequently, things are not all right, and events around the world are screaming this at the top of their lungs … events for which Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, the practitioners of many other spiritual traditions, and humanists bear the fullest of responsibility.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have asked the people with him: “What actions are most excellent?” And, then, he is reported to have provided the following answer: “To gladden the heart of a human being; to feed the hungry; to help the afflicted; to lighten the sorrow of the sorrowful, and to remove the wrongs of the injured.”
There is nothing in the foregoing saying which is restricted in its scope with respect to humankind. These actions are most excellent no matter who performs them and no matter in relation to whom they are performed.
| Part One | Part Two | Part Three |
| Part Four | Part Five | Return to Menu|
|
