Mysticism : A Truth , A Reality, a path

Complacency in the Pursuit of Truth 1/2
Complacency is the greatest obstacle in developing our thinking. To believe that your intellectual journey has concluded and you have attained perfection before reaching a decrepit old age is perhaps the greatest error, if not the biggest sin. Thought is a flowing river; by its nature bringing together the ‘wet’ and the ‘dry’ and it does not exclude anything, great or small. Rarely can anyone claim to have attained perfection in the path of learning. If this happens, all mental activity ceases and stagnation takes hold of the mind. When the pure and clear water of a fountain stops flowing, the result is only stench and decay.

Our thinking becomes restricted by goals which drive us. The capacity of the mind quickly reaches its limits because of the boundaries we set for ourselves. We find it very difficult to stretch or go beyond these intellectual confines. To dismiss God based on limited intelligence is unacceptable by any standard of research. Where the human mind reaches its own limits, it erects a temple, make an idol. The Self continues to worship at the altar of its own intelligence for the rest of its life. Rarely will it see beyond its walls or break out from its confines. Only by objectively pursuing an alternative course of action can the mind escape from its self-imposed boundaries. Curiosity driven by an insatiable appetite to understand reality is the secret for cultivating a healthy vibrant intellect, otherwise the mind becomes like an empty stomach that licks its lining to satiate itself. It does not obtain sustenance from anything else.

The remembrance of God gives life to dead hearts. The life of the mind is nourished by reflecting upon God. The mind of Man is programmed to imagine greatness and perfection. The only being who can satisfy the curiosity of Man is God, the Sublime and Perfect. Of course no human can claim to have acquired absolute wisdom: this is an impossible goal. But the dream of the intellectual is to come as close as possible to something which approximates this. Contemplation of the absolute continues succumbs to stagnation and develops a sense of complacency that is the product of self-centeredness. It is for this reason that the Quran specifies a limited scope for the human intellect and refers to it as ‘lam’ (The intellect of Man has been compared to a walking stick for the blind and revelation as the Sun. The mind of Man can lead him to reality but it is limited in truly fathoming it without become perplexed and bewildered). Prolonged inertia kills the mind’s capacity to develop further insight and wisdom. Ultimately, every branch of science, with the exception of Mysticism, centers on the physical and practical aspects of life. This is not knowledge, as it doesn’t address the deeper issues of human existence. The result is that the experts of worldly sciences are in the end gripped with a sense of dissatisfaction at the meaninglessness of life. The ultimate cause of this is the stagnation of the intellect which prevents the mind from attaining an insight into the reality of existence.
For centuries Man has lived under the binary tyranny of punishment and reward. Fear of being answerable to an authoritarian God haunts him. Yet the idea of reward from God imprisons him the realm of actions, stunting his intellectual development. This model of religion does not allow him to develop insight into reality, but encourages him to fulfill the rituals of religion in a robotic fashion. His mind remains disengaged and not satiated. Man’s response to this is simple: reject God. This is a knee-jerk reaction to rid himself of the God who threatens him and a religion which does not satisfy him intellectually. The option of denial is the easiest way out. The struggle involved in pursuing the path of thinking and understanding reality is too arduous. Modern Man chose not to verity the truths of religion and God, but threw the baby out with the bath water. The irony is that he finds it difficult to maintain a state of denial of metaphysical realities. The human mind, divorced from God, lacks the capacity to provide a compelling solution to the problems of life and the universe. All such attempts are doomed to failure if they do not understand the nature of human beings and their dependence on the ‘Universe’ (God). Self-denial can never be a substitute for self-awareness. Many people persist in this denial out of fear of intellectual isolation. If they were to challenge the consensus of denial they would find themselves abandoned and alone. The only way to save yourself from such ignominy is to seek out like-minded people who suffer from similar moral and intellectual crises, and find comfort in people like them.

Who you follow depends on providence. Your desires and attitude before you commit yourself to the ideas of another, have already determined, whether you want to be a friend of the Rahman (All-Merciful, God) or the ‘sidekick’ of the Shaytaan(Devil). The vital ingredient of humility is lacking in our leaders. When a scholar eventually realizes that he was in the wrong, we find that he lacks the moral courage to openly admit this and save many others from making the same mistakes in thinking. True following is characterized by the accurate assessment of your intellectual capacity, followed by a realization that you lack the qualities to attain such a level of understanding. This insight leads you to seek the guidance of those who are better qualified and more capable. On the other hand, the corrupt model of following others is when you possess the intellectual capacity but still insist on imprisoning yourself to a narrow school of thought. This form of ‘taqleed’ (Blind following) produces some of the worst types of bigotry and prejudice. It can result in the decline of thinking and understanding that impacts on future generations.

Complacency in the Pursuit of Truth 2/2

It is inconceivable that any ideology will permit the dictates of pure reasoning to penetrate the walls of its intellectual structure. It is common practice amongst many schools of thought that they attempt to conceal their intellectual shortcomings by resorting to false claims and attributing sacred and divine qualities to themselves. The entire focus shifts to the outward from and imitation of external practice: the conditions of color and dress become the means of your salvation. This false notion of ‘taqleed (blind following)’ does not only hinder understanding, but also does not tolerate even the hint of an alternative viewpoint. These religious and narrow-minded groups continue to instill ideas, which they believe are vitally important, in the minds of their followers. The result of this ‘brain washing’ is that many simple and respectable people are transformed into insane and fanatical bigots.

This indoctrination of the masses is motivated to some extent by the desire of shallow-minded scholars to safeguard their vested interests. Under no circumstances or at any cost will they allow the bartering of the privileged position they occupy. There is only one way to maintain their grip over the minds of ordinary followers and that is by inhibiting their capacity to think. With extreme skill and mastery, this clique creates feelings of fear in the minds of its devotees, and in this way maintains a strong influence over them, very similar to the way Hindu Brahmins maintain their power and authority over their followers. This tradition continues over generations. All schools of thought are limited in their thinking to the ideas of their founders. Everything else is heresy and disbelief (Kufr), and the fear of falling into this cursed category weighs heavy on the mind of the follower.

The testimony of faith (Shahada) is no longer for God but for the ‘bricks and beliefs’ of your school of thought. No religion in the world preaches fanaticism or keenness. How could the eternal message of moderation end up as a cult of extremism? From Adam to Muhammad not a single Prophet of God was intolerant or of shallow understanding. Each challenged exploitation and oppression, and liberated the minds of their people from the shackles of custom and tradition. Not one of them followed the path of extremism. These Messengers of the Absolute Intellect (God) came to give choice to people: the poverty of ignorant practices can never touch the station of Prophet-hood.

As religious strayed from the path of moderation, they were diverted by feeble-minded individuals from an all-embracing gospel and chained to the values of tribal prejudice and personal honor. Each nation believed that it owned religion and all outsiders were personal and religious rivals. The degree of self-interest, prejudice and bigotry which the Jews displayed in matters of religion later infiltrated into Christianity and went on to inflict immense damage to the universal outlook of Islam. The religion of Islam itself began to be associated with the bigotry of its small-minded ‘scholars’. The promoters of Islam turned out to its deadliest enemies. Instead of the Quran, the ideas of these ‘scholars of the externals’ began to be regarded as the teaching of Islam: the foundations of an intensely distorted approach to religion were laid. Regrettably, this tradition continues to spread its poison. Unlike science, where men of thinking mutually respected each other’s contributions and ideas for the sake of advancing knowledge and research, the proselytizers of religion created their own sects and viewed all other schools of thought as enemies. The most sublime message of the entire universe was manipulated by senseless and unprincipled individuals to wage war and incite hatred in order to pave the way for their grip on power and privilege.

While science continued to advance, religion split into cliques justifying their existence by rejecting others. The Jews refused to accept the ministry of both Jesus and Muhammad; Christianity denounced Islam; and the follower of Islam felt wrath of both. How could anyone find the way to God, or understand His message, without being sucked into this quagmire of bigotry? God was not about to dispatch another Messenger. Nothing was left apart from common sense and ‘reason’. This was the only tool. On an individual level, which enabled people to climb out of this crises of religion, comprehend reality, and accept the message of a Unified God.

However, some people attempted to solve these religious crises by ignoring the fundamental question. They flung the issue of the purpose of life behind their backs and restricted the meaning of life to the pursuit of limited worldly benefits. The religious fanatics had made a mistake by dividing religion, but modern intellectuals made an even bigger mistake. They confused religion with those who claimed to be its followers and rejected it, no on its own merits, but on the feeble-minded misconduct of religious bigots. Has the study of any other scientific phenomenon been subject to this baseless approach? Would the personal character or private beliefs of a scientist have any bearing on the validity of a scientific formula or change the equilibrium of Nature’s laws? Why then does the reality of religion change because of the erroneous views of some fanatics? Truth requires all phenomena to be researched with integrity and an open mind, including God and religion. Sadly, the true face of religion is unrecognizable and instead of believing and worshiping God, the masses prostrate their foreheads at the altar of idols, concealed in the bosoms of the narrow-minded ‘scholars’.

To be continued with the chapter " Blind Criticism of Religion"

Blind Criticism of Religion: 1/2
Critics of religion in the Muslim world have attempted to deconstruct Islam. The Quran, they claim, is replete with contradictions. To support this assertion they (mis) quote isolated verses of the Holy Book without taking into account contextual factors. The arguments they produce are highly entertaining and equally incoherent. For instance, they state that in some verses of the Quran God is mild and clement and in others He exhibits anger and wrath. Does this not show, they argue, that the Quran contradicts itself?
We should ask these ‘experts’ whether it is contradiction to claim that a person who is kind and compassionate can also display the emotion of anger? Does it make your personality inconsistent if afer a hard day’s work you prefer to do the opposite and have a rest! If, along with promises of reward and compassion, God mentions His punishments and Hell to aid human understandings, does this diminish the benevolence of God? is it possible to attain to the highest level of understanding without any effort and toil? Had these intellectuals assessed their level of understanding and insight they would have realized that they have not yet acquired the standard necessary to comprehend this ‘Perspicacious Book’.

This is like placing a doctoral thesis in the hands of a primary school child: the intellectual blunders that will result are self-evident. The Book of God has two distinct points of reference. The first is that of God, the Majestic and Exalted, according to whose wisdom and understanding this divine book is arranged and structured. The second is that of the human masters and experts who have been bestowed a deep understanding of this Book.
It is impossible for any mortal being to attain to the intellect and wisdom of God. it is possible, nevertheless, to utilize the intelligence and thinking capacity He has bestowed upon us so we can arrive at certain conclusions. This, however, requires a certain standard of reasoning and specialization. Even though the graduates of both the Arts and Sciences are of equal rank in their learning a post graduate student studying the Arts cannot access a Ph.D. in the field of Science because he is unfamiliar with the fundamental principles of this branch of learning. How is it possible then for a scientist or philosopher to pronounce judgment on the Book of God in any manner they like when they are not qualified to do so? Is it justifiable for someone who has not explored the science of religion to become an expert or a commentator on the Book of God? isn’t this approach to the critique of religion in the modern age utterly ludicrous?

Today, religion has become a ‘punching bag.’ It is blamed for almost every negative aspect of modern life. For instance, it is held responsible for all types of decline including the poverty of thought. Both the modernists and the traditionalists have chosen ‘religion’ and ‘progress’ as their battleground. The sum total of the intellectual output of the modern age can be distilled in a single statement: ‘religion is an obstacle in the path of progress and advancement’. If you want to succeed you must abandon religion or at least confine it to the personal and insignificant aspects of life.
This conclusion unleashed a powerful storm in the Western World which swept away the infrastructure of faith. Religion, and in particular Christianity, became a target on a social, intellectual and political level. It was attacked from all sides. By the twentieth century, religion had lost its power and was reduced to the level of myth and make believe. In Europe, the followers of religion were overpowered and left to the mercy of atheism, lingering on in the hope of a powerful counter action that would enable them to resume their struggle once again. But the counter-reformation did not restore the lost glory of Christianity.
In contrast, religion stubbornly refused to be dislodged from its central position in the East, and especially in the Muslim world. The explanation of this perhaps lies in the fact that in the East abandoning religion was not seen as a precondition of progress. It was associated with treachery and hypocrisy, deceit and deception, underhandedness, and the lust for autocratic power and domination. But this corruption was attributed to the gatekeepers of religion and not the religion itself. As a result, religion, even in its most hideous form, managed to keep the influence of atheism at bay.
Atheism was not alone in attacking religion. Capitalism too, intoxicated by the victory over communism and socialism, gathered all its might and force and launched an intense and unrelenting attack on religion. However, in the last decades of the 20th Century, capitalism also had to resort to bias, bigotry and prejudice in order to ‘deal’ with the religion of Islam. The ‘Cold War’ which was originally between different ideological systems, now transformed into a clash of religious and civilizations. The political leaders of Europe were shocked and shaken by the ferocity of suicide attacks, originating from the East, despite their immense technological advancement, and the range of means at their disposal, these robust social and economic infrastructure appeared to be crumbling. For instance, during the initial stages of this threat both Europe and America turned their backs on some of the most sacred traditions-legislation protecting freedom and liberty was disregarded. The boundaries of concepts such as personal liberty and freedom were confined and restricted with every explosion that ripped through both Europe and America: this was driven by their underlying fear of religion and recognition of the limitations of their defense and security mechanisms.

Blind Criticism of Religion: 2/2

Western civilization turned out to be timid and nervous beyond anybody’s expectation. Values of civility, toleration, open mindedness, and generosity seem no more than the elegant fairy tales spun by travelers of old. Their outlook and approach is no longer of those who are cultured, educated and informed. The intellectuals of the West have lost their artificial stature and standing, and now appear no taller than dwarves. Yet they continue to spread misinformation about Islam to serve their political ends. As God reminds us in the Quran, the plans and machinations of Satan are extremely feeble; a mere pebble of truth is sufficient to annihilate the spider’s web of falsehood.

The occurrence of one or two more terrorist incidents may be decisive in propelling this terrified, frightened and panic stricken Western civilization towards its final outcome. In the current climate, the response of a frightened and ferocious West has been to seek revenge from the weak and impoverished nations of the East. The impact of bloodshed and destruction, injustice and oppression, chaos and disorder which America has sparked has been foretold to the Muslims by the trustworthy informer of truth, Muhammad, the messenger of Allah. However, with the passing of time both America and Europe are beginning to realize that they may end up witnessing ‘Hell’ here on earth.

This does not mean the Muslims should regard themselves as a victimized and persecuted people, for Islam, similar to Christianity, has never perceived itself to be an oppressed victim. This is in contrast to the Jewish nation whose history perpetuated the development of a siege mentality and a mindset of victimization. Furthermore, the Jews until the present day regard the teachings of many Prophet as false and are adamant the God carries out their wishes and guards their interests on a personal level. This attitude can lead them to regard other faiths with disdain and contempt. Christianity too, contains within it teachings, elements that can promote a negative attitude and disregard for others. For instance the concept of Jesus suffering has been used as pretext to escape from the guilt of committing sins. Thus the use of deceit and deception, coercion and intimidation, injustice and oppression, tyranny and destruction does not create any sense of guilt or remorse. Having been absolved from the guilt of sin by their savior Jesus, this ‘nation’ indulges in nothing other than ‘sin’. Thus on a collective level they have placed Jesus Christ in a unique and unusual predicament: they thrust the blame for their own sins onto him.

In contrast, one of the distinguishing features of Islam is that it does not promote a mentality of vicitimization. It contains, within itself, robust elements which enable it to experience defeat and disaster and still retain its integrity. The Muslim Ummah has not lost its intrinsic quality of resisting injustice, even in an age where the global situation is rapidly deteriorating. Nevertheless, there is a real danger that the wave of extremism and fanaticism which is currently confined to a few pockets within the Muslim community could escalate into collective struggle of the Muslim world. The shortsighted and senseless policies and practices of a few Western governments are providing a perfect climate for this to happen.

Finally, it is worth remembering that centuries are merely years in the lifecycle of nations. It appears, however, that not even a single full year is left in the history of the world. Events and incidents no longer fall as scattering raindrops, but instead are pouring like a torrent. Yet the present age is desperately seeking to purge itself from the greed and destruction of Man. It seems that the stars of destiny are casting their derisory smile on this under-developed aspect of human progress. Perhaps there is no need after all for prophecies and predictions: history is on the brink of repeating itself.

"is it justifiable for someone who has not explored the science of religion to become an expert or a commentator on the Book of God? isnt this approach to the critique of religion in the modern age utterly ludicrous?"

To be continued with the next chapter "The Mistake of Philosophy"

The Mistake of Philosophy 1/2

It is claimed that the fundamental difference between religion and philosophy is ‘blind faith’. This is not the case, as both schools of thought require their followers to accept certain ideas on trust. What philosophy condemns as dogmatic belief in religion is in fact based on the research of trustworthy experts, just as philosophical ideas are taken on trust from previous philosophers. Regardless of this, the phenomenon which is perceived by religion to be definitive, evident and certain is regarded by the philosopher as dubious, doubtful and open to question. Although the philosopher does not view himself as religious, he is engaged in an attempt to develop some form of ‘religion’ or personal belief system.
There is a crisis in the mind of the philosopher. He suffers from a ‘superiority complex’. He regards his intellectual capacity to be far above all others, so he finds it difficult to believe in things which ordinary people accept. One of these is religion. As we know, religion deals with basic cosmological questions, but at times we cannot make sense of religion based on popular and generally held religious beliefs. This is because religious knowledge is the product of the investigations and discoveries of those highly intelligent individuals who made the search for the purpose of life their foremost priority, devoting their entire lives in pursuing the pinnacle of human research. The findings of this intellectual search by a disparate group of individuals have remained consistent throughout time. We find that every single Prophet and Saint went through familiar stages in life, experienced similar events and independently arrived at the same conclusion: God exists.

On an intellectual level, the philosopher opposed every belief which is not supported by his own thinking. The measure of all things is his own mind. Whatever does not fit with his partial understanding is rejected. Many philosophers committed this error in thinking and it has continued to be repeated with such persistence that it becomes almost impossible to associate the words ‘wise’ and ‘intelligent’ with the term philosopher. It appears that the followers of philosophy, influenced by their intellectual egoism, brushed aside common beliefs as not worthy of any consideration. Not only did they completely upturn and destroy the order of priorities of intellectual thought, but they also attempted to cast doubt on an inevitable and universal reality, and portray it as a mere supposition.
Some people may quote in the defense of philosophy statements which indicates that these individuals of limited intelligence stumbled upon some aspects of absolute reality, but this does not in any way compensate for the fundamental flaw in their methodology towards religion. Scientist have a similar defect in their approach to reality in that what does not fit their framework is rejected. However, they may be excused for two reasons. Firstly, the focus of their research is not the Creator but the created phenomena. Secondly, the scientist creates a framework for his intellectual quest beyond the limits of which he or she cannot go. It is for this reason that science can never be regarded as a proof and evidence of religion. Furthermore, the religious opinions of scientists are nothing more than personal and subjective viewpoints or, at best, partial attempts to explain religious realities.

The philosopher’s mistake is simply not forgivable; their intellectual approach diverted humanity from identifying the purpose of existence, leading them away from their goal. This philosophical soothsayer, manipulating and enchanting through his words and ideas, gained such stature and strength that not even the finest torch bearer of pure reason could succeed in making the slightest dent in his power. It is breathtakingly astonishing that from Socrates until the present, both the intellectuals and critics of religion have paid scant attention to the most basic and fundamental question of the purpose of human existence.
The unpardonable error of the philosophers has two dimensions. First, is their assertion, that the Absolute Reality (or God) is a personal and subjective human concern which has no real or independent basis. Second, they regard God and religion merely as intellectual concepts created as a defense mechanism to cope with the vagaries and uncertainties of social existence. A cursory glance at the works of some of the major philosophers, both ancient and modern, reveals that not a single one entertained the slightest possibility of the presence of an Absolute Being as a hypothesis or an option, and followed this by years of arduous and dedicated research, which finally culminated in an objective and decisive conclusion either for or against the existence of God.

To be continued...

Philosophy was, however, instrumental in spreading uncertainty and doubt. It asked the questions without providing any answers. The consequence of this has been a decline of interest in philosophy at a popular level, to the extent, that today’s ‘philosopher’ has had no choice but to fall back on the ‘off-shoots’ of classical Philosophy, namely psychology and physics to ensure his survival and existence. The situation of the philosopher, a helpless victim to the questions he has himself generated, is beautifully encapsulated in one of the verses of Quran. This alludes to a seafarer, travelling in an old and ageing vessel whose helm has been smashed to pieces, in the midst of a raging sea, and a deadly darkness punctuated only by the roar of thunder and bolts of lightning: this traveler is unable to find the route to his destination, but under the brief flashes of lightning manages to gain a glimpse of the sea within a short distance; and as these brief moments of illumination pass, he is once again alone, surrounded by a fathomless and bewildering darkness.
Religion, in contrast to philosophy and science, has never taken its focus off the ultimate priority. Religion, in all its forms, has always established a ‘divine unity’ as a platform for the basis of life and the cosmos. It comes as no surprise then, that even polytheistic, pagan and idol worshipping cultures and societies, have continuously acknowledged the existence of an Absolute, Exalted and Creative Force. This is true whether the culture being referred to is that of Ancient Greece, centering on the gods of Mound Olympia, or that of contemporary India and the Trinitarian conception of the Godhood, expounded by Hinduism.
There are two aspects of the modern critique of religion which are baffling to an objective observer. The first relates to the absence of robust, or an intellectually plausible, basis for the assertion that religion is purely an intellectual concept constructed by society. There is no possibility that religion could be based on reason. The second relates to the absence of a secure basis for portraying religion as merely an escapist’s solution to the ills of social existence. In other words, religion provides a philosophy for the down trodden to remain firm, steadfast and patient. It is a means for the poor and oppressed to escape from the feelings of inferiority they experience. In fact, religion is the ‘opium’ of the people, exploited by the strong to dominate and control the weak masses. The root of the matter is that all these negative opinions of religion were a direct result either of unethical inclination or personal loss and deprivation. The life of Karl Marx exemplifies this.
Modern philosophy did not attempt to understand the message of the spiritual intellectuals who devoted their lives in researching God. they dismissed these paragons of knowledge and wisdom as ignorant individuals who did not possess mental faculties of reason. How can someone who rejects the evidence of another researcher without even verifying or looking at it, claim to have a superior intellect? Their rejection was based purely on their bigoted view of religion. Instead of rectifying the shortcomings inherent in the analysis, the shallow-minded critics of religion blindly lashed out their tongues of scorn, revilement and derision at religion. Having sealed their own fate they began in earnest to close the doorway of escape for the rest of humanity.
On what basis can philosophy and its followers categorically claim that God has never existed and that He does not exist? Is it possible for them to assert that they have pondered and reflected deeply on this issue in an objective and open-minded manner? Furthermore, how viable is their claim that they had succeeded in solving this vitally important issue, based on nothing more than their feeble and limited intellectual approach? The question arises: did the philosophers, deep down, really believe that they had done complete justice in their dealing and approach to this issue? The answer is, evidently, that of course they did not.
The fact of the matter is that God is not an abstract concept forged in the philosopher’s mind. Nor is He a mere assumption or theoretical possibility. The reality of God was, and remains; a truth upon whose investigation and determination rests the entire essence and outcome of life. On a personal level, the investigation into the reality of God opens up for the researcher the vastness of the cosmos and its horizons.
To be continued with the next chapter The Decline and Fall of Religion

The Mistake of Philosophy 2/2

Philosophy was, however, instrumental in spreading uncertainty and doubt. It asked the questions without providing any answers. The consequence of this has been a decline of interest in philosophy at a popular level, to the extent, that today’s ‘philosopher’ has had no choice but to fall back on the ‘off-shoots’ of classical Philosophy, namely psychology and physics to ensure his survival and existence. The situation of the philosopher, a helpless victim to the questions he has himself generated, is beautifully encapsulated in one of the verses of Quran. This alludes to a seafarer, travelling in an old and ageing vessel whose helm has been smashed to pieces, in the midst of a raging sea, and a deadly darkness punctuated only by the roar of thunder and bolts of lightning: this traveler is unable to find the route to his destination, but under the brief flashes of lightning manages to gain a glimpse of the sea within a short distance; and as these brief moments of illumination pass, he is once again alone, surrounded by a fathomless and bewildering darkness.

Religion, in contrast to philosophy and science, has never taken its focus off the ultimate priority. Religion, in all its forms, has always established a ‘divine unity’ as a platform for the basis of life and the cosmos. It comes as no surprise then, that even polytheistic, pagan and idol worshipping cultures and societies, have continuously acknowledged the existence of an Absolute, Exalted and Creative Force. This is true whether the culture being referred to is that of Ancient Greece, centering on the gods of Mound Olympia, or that of contemporary India and the Trinitarian conception of the Godhood, expounded by Hinduism.

There are two aspects of the modern critique of religion which are baffling to an objective observer. The first relates to the absence of robust, or an intellectually plausible, basis for the assertion that religion is purely an intellectual concept constructed by society. There is no possibility that religion could be based on reason. The second relates to the absence of a secure basis for portraying religion as merely an escapist’s solution to the ills of social existence. In other words, religion provides a philosophy for the down trodden to remain firm, steadfast and patient. It is a mean for the poor and oppressed to escape from the feelings of inferiority they experience. In fact, religion is the ‘opium’ of the people, exploited by the strong to dominate and control the weak masses. The root of the matter is that all these negative opinions of religion were a direct result either of unethical inclination or personal loss and deprivation. The life of Karl Marx exemplifies this.

Modern philosophy did not attempt to understand the message of the spiritual intellectuals who devoted their lives in researching God. they dismissed these paragons of knowledge and wisdom as ignorant individuals who did not possess mental faculties of reason. How can someone who rejects the evidence of another researcher without even verifying or looking at it, claim to have a superior intellect? Their rejection was based purely on their bigoted view of religion. Instead of rectifying the shortcomings inherent in the analysis, the shallow-minded critics of religion blindly lashed out their tongues of scorn, revilement and derision at religion. Having sealed their own fate they began in earnest to close the doorway of escape for the rest of humanity.

On what basis can philosophy and its followers categorically claim that God has never existed and that He does not exist? Is it possible for them to assert that they have pondered and reflected deeply on this issue in an objective and open-minded manner? Furthermore, how viable is their claim that they had succeeded in solving this vitally important issue, based on nothing more than their feeble and limited intellectual approach? The question arises: did the philosophers, deep down, really believe that they had done complete justice in their dealing and approach to this issue? The answer is, evidently, that of course they did not.

The fact of the matter is that God is not an abstract concept forged in the philosopher’s mind. Nor is He a mere assumption or theoretical possibility. The reality of God was, and remains; a truth upon whose investigation and determination rests the entire essence and outcome of life. On a personal level, the investigation into the reality of God opens up for the researcher the vastness of the cosmos and its horizons.

To be continued with the next chapter "The Decline and Fall of Religion"...

The Decline and Fall of Religion 1/3

The history of the middle ages is a chronicle of Man’s lust for power and tyranny. It is a period characterized by the prominence of religious despotism. The central concept which fuelled the movements of intellectual regeneration and freedom of thought during the late mediaeval period was the desire to break free from this religious authoritarianism. However, the ‘advanced’ intellectual approach which the religious reform movements of Europe relied upon to escape from the shackles of religion was not without its own bias. The intense desire to fracture the stronghold of the Papacy and the Clergy led to adoption of an aggressive, intellectual style of debate, which on occasions resulted in the sacrifice of life and property. The positions adopted by both sides were so extreme and uncompromising that any attempt at mutual understanding was almost impossible.
In contrast, the Muslim world during the middle ages displayed a degree of openness and religious tolerance which far exceeded that of the West. Excepting a few isolated examples it is impossible to find historical incidents in the Islamic world of religious prejudice and hatred which have been worthy of going down in the annals of religious bigotry. In fact it was this tolerance which inspired Christianity to renew its religious thought, particularly after the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople. Thus the transmission of knowledge, originating from the centers of learning such as Cordoba and Baghdad, resulted in illuminating Europe during its ‘Dark Ages’.

However, both the movements for religious reform and the renaissance of science lost all sense of proportion, transgressing beyond the limits of sound reasoning. The dawn of the Sun of ‘freedom of thought’ not only exposed the bigotry and bias of religious thought and opinion, it also popularized the irrational ridiculing of the fundamental tenets of religious faith which went far beyond the legitimate critique of Papal exploitation and authority. In apportioning blame and responsibility against the religious tyranny, the intellectuals of the time did not distinguish between the beliefs of the individuals who were behind the oppression and the universal principles of religion. Instead the latter was subsumed under the former and was not subjected to an independent critique. Secular scholars of the time such as Bradlow identified numerous inconsistencies within the teaching of Christianity and gradually this influenced the undermining of faith in the truth of religion as a whole.

In the East, sects as the Mutazilites and the followers of pure reason, influenced by the opinions of the Greed philosophers, sought to find a rational basis for diverting people away from Islam. However, the religion of Islam never came under the complete sway and domination of one particular group or school of thought. With the minor exceptions of a few historical movements, Islam has succeeded in retaining its cosmological world view intact. The situation in Europe however, was such that religious learning slipped out of the hands of the great master and scholars and fell into the intellectual confines of the blind followers of these intellectual and spiritual pioneers. As a result of this we find that, by end of the fifteenth century, religion in the West became almost entirely defensive and reactionary in its outlook. In the context of the battle for intellectual and political domination and freedom of choice, Christianity had to admit defeat. The fundamental reason for this was the intellectual stagnation, blind adherence to the outward form of customs and traditions, unfamiliarity with the changes and advancements in learning, and the failure to acknowledge the results of intellectual thought and enquire of the time. The Church stubbornly refused at any cost to give up the influence it had for centuries exercised over the minds of the ordinary masses; nor was it willing to relinquish some share of this power. In the midst of climate of a renaissance of scientific learning and radical shifts in intellectual thought, the movements which promoted a secular approach found it relatively easy, with a few minor exceptions, to oblige religion into humbling itself and assuming a diminished role within society.

The situation in the East was entirely different. The main distinguishing feature was the failure of a narrow-minded clerical elite in establishing a complete stronghold on religion. As consequence, the secular backlash and resulting conflict had an almost negligible impact on religious thought in Islamic society and popular culture. The absence of popular uprising against religion in the Islamic world was a result of several factors intrinsic to the religion of Islam. Firstly, the simplicity and appeal of its religious philosophy coupled with a message which was unambiguous and free from internal contradictions. Secondly, the fundamental infrastructure of Islam with its unrelenting emphasis on the welfare, success and happiness of all people was an extremely attractive world view. Thirdly, the intellectual and religious tolerance, within the context of a thriving culture and civilization which was constantly expanding its borders, had a convincing appeal in comparison to the harsh, ruthless and bigoted alternatives of the time. The centers of the Islamic world were characterized by sophisticated social and economic infrastructures, underpinned by justice and fairness: it was a society where even the rights of non-Muslims were safeguarded and protected under Islamic Law. Even in the darkest days of Islamic history, the rights guaranteed by Islam continued to be respected.

The Decline and Fall of Religion 2/3

In addition to the philosophy and outlook of Islam there was, however, another extremely vital and fundamental factor which diminished the necessity for mass protest and revolution. In fact, it ensured that Islamic society and culture would never be permeated by an extreme version of the basic instinct for ‘survival’, similar to that which occurred in Europe. This underlying element was the presence of the Quran. It was a text which was beyond the slightest taint of uncertainty, whose every word and letter was above any tempering, and whose intrinsic value as a source of absolute knowledge was never in doubt. Indeed, not even a single dot or letter had been subject to any alteration since the time of the original revelation up till the present day, a period spanning over fifteen centuries.

This characteristic of the Quran was of such an amazing, astonishing and miraculous nature that it set it apart from all other scriptures: it was a fact which the doyens and standard bearers of modern thought could not comprehend or explain away. In comparison to other inspired scriptures, the divine status and reputation of the Quran was evidently clear, and its standard of wisdom and insight was able to withstand any type of critique and scrutiny. When considered alongside the Quran, the scriptures of other faiths appear as though they are the products of individual effort, even though it is possible to glimpse a ray of the ‘mind’ of God the Almighty and Exalted in these writings. Despite this, the influence of human agency coupled with the distortions of key passages is discernible.

However, it must be acknowledged that although it is possible do discern the awareness of God’s injunctions within the corpus of the other inspired scriptures, it is difficult to perceive within their choice of language and style of exposition anything approximating to the level of the Divine. Furthermore, none of the prophets and sages, who may be regarded as the main mediating instruments of their scriptures the contents of their message. For instance, even though the Torah and the New Testament acquired the rank of being the ‘Message of God,’ they could not attain the level of being the exact ‘letter of God’. Because of this, scholars, disciples and religious authorities of later generations, motivated by selfish egotistic concerns and the desire to attain worldly honor and status, were afforded an opportunity to distort the meaning of scripture through verbal and semantic manipulations. Perhaps, this is why God refers to these scriptures as His ‘message’ and not His ‘word’, and states in the Quran with absolute clarity that He no longer regards these distorted scriptures as worthy of being relied upon, and that if you desire an authoritative and verified account regarding His laws and universal principles, then turn to the Quran.

It may be argued that the difference between the Quran and other divinely inspired books is of such a magnitude that any attempt to equate it with them is unjustifiable. The broad-brush approach adopted by some contemporary critics of regarding all revealed scripture as one and the same, without any rational basis or authentic analysis, is utterly absurd and intellectually flawed. According to the accepted methodology of the intellectual and scientific community, there is no rational justification for the assumption that the taxi of the Quran is identical and comparable to the contents of other divine scriptures. On further reflection it is evident that not only is the Quran incomparable to other religious revelations, it is also impossible to find, within the entire literary effort past and present of humanity, a written text which equals the Quran both in significance and authenticity, and its insights on reality.
Despite their reliance on the latest paradigms, theories and techniques of textual criticism, it is these features of the Quran which compelled the pseudo-rationalist faction within the Muslim community to acknowledge that the text of the Quran was free from distortion. Instead, they began to assert that its true meanings had been misinterpreted. Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that the Quran has remained unchanged as regards its accuracy and authenticity, and has been totally free from any kind of distortion or misrepresentation. However, this has meant that in all times and ages it has had to encounter challenges of one kind or another.
Amidst the change and upheaval of history and in periods of progress and decline, Quran has posed an open challenge to popular and common beliefs, to the conclusions of intellectual struggle and strife, to human curiosity, and to the boundaries of confusion, certainty and doubt. In particular, during times of intellectual advancement and the expansion of human understanding the Quran took a position contrary to that of the ‘latest’ intellectual revolution, without experiencing intellectual defeat or embarrassment. In fact, no period in human history has been able to declare or demonstrate any shortcomings in the facts of the Quran: even though at times the limitation of human knowledge and understanding have meant that humankind could not access the depth of meaning contained within the Quranic data.

Both the intellectual investigations and ‘scientific’ discoveries of the middle ages were inherently unreliable and far removed from certainty. For instance, we find that the learning and knowledge promoted and popularized during this era appear nowadays as nothing more than antiquated and obsolete myths. In fact the opinions and views that were presented regarding certain phenomena, in hindsight seem crude and uniformed. Although we must pay tribute to the intellectual curiosity reflected in the mediaeval scholars ‘research’, it is not even remotely possible for us to accept and agree with their conclusions.
The fact that it was, and still is, impossible for anyone to change the words of the Quran, meant that many religious scholars resorted to personal interpretations when undertaking Quranic exegesis. Due to the intellectual shortcoming of some of these commentators, it appeared that certain definitive and conclusive verses of the Quran were open to criticism based on modern scientific research and discoveries. This view was also the result of the absence of true knowledge and insight into reality, and an age which did not accept anything beyond empirical science and physical matter: in the context of a popular Zeitgeist which did not recognize the limitations of both scientific instruments and the human intellect. It is worth bearing in mind that, despite these historically and culturally bound criticisms, the conclusive and definitive findings of science and intellectual enquiry as opposed to scientific opinions and theories, in fact confirmed and supported the claims of the Quran and acknowledged the presence of the Almighty. In contrast, the uncovering and deeper understanding of physical phenomena through scientific research and discovery began to reveal glaring inconsistencies between science and the sacred texts of other religious traditions. Faced with this, the followers of these faiths had no choice other than to declare total and blind adherence to their religions and thus expanded the rift between reason and revelation or science and religion.

The Decline and Fall of Religion 3/3

The hasty and knee-jerk response of the intellectuals and ‘sages’ of the new scientific and secular thinking did not distinguish between various religions, lumping them all together under one critique. Thus European thinkers and certain ‘sages’ of the East who blindly followed them, declared religion to be a ‘backward’ and regressive notion and tried their utmost to diminish its importance in human affairs For instance, they proclaimed that all religion was incompatible with scientific reasoning and thought. This claim was and still is entirely baseless and without a shred of truth: it reflected the limited knowledge and ignorance of these ‘scholars’.

The view that all religious teachings were irreconcilable with science had some unfortunate consequences. For instance, a cursory reading of the Quranic text, followed by a superficial analysis, followed by a superficial analysis, led to a novel, imitative and short-sighted attitude towards the Quran. As a result of this, religion was declared as outmoded, and its practices deemed to be incapable of practical implementation. Instead, the lifestyles of the modern age predicated on the pursuit of physical pleasures, and animalistic instinct were upheld and promoted. The tragedy was that these scholars and intellectuals regarded the reading and understanding of the Quran as a waste of time. Even those who did read the Quran did not ponder deeply on its wisdom and remained within the confines of its recitation and the appreciation of its rhythmic beauty, whilst some religious fold used the Quran primarily as a means to attain a livelihood (like Mullahs of Islam). Moreover, there were those, who on the basis of their narrow-minded and sectarian interpretations reduced this great source of inspired wisdom and knowledge to fit within the dogmatic parameters of their particular school of thought.

Despite their limited capacity for balanced and rigorous intellectual thought, the teachers and dons of these religious schools attempted to raise the profile of their intellectual status and credentials be resorting to the use of inflated and hyperbolic titles and appellations. Furthermore, they proclaimed that their unenlightened and superficial interpretations were above any shortcomings or criticism. Not only did they drag the Quran down to the level and standard of their self-centered writings, they also succeeded in erecting such robust barriers and walls of intellectual prejudice and bigotry which diverted the Muslim Ummah from understanding the reality of the cosmos, miring them instead, in the rut of mundane and humdrum issues.

The adversaries and critics of religion, who were without doubt immensely more educated and intelligent than the teacher of the religious schools, fell into the trap of regarding the limited and unenlightened interpretations of these narrow-minded teachers as the ultimate benchmark and standard of the Quran. Based upon this they proclaimed that Islam as a religion was characterized by bigotry and extremism. It seemed that it was now the turn of Islam to bear the brunt of the secular critique, since Christianity and other major religions had already been reduced to the level of mere custom and tradition, with no significant role to play in civilized society. Communism and socialism had forced themselves into the minds of people in a similar fashion to the intellectual tyranny of the middle Ages, and this approach to life was purely restricted to the materialistic aspects of human existence, declaring that all the metaphysical and cosmic realities of the religion of Islam were no more than ancient fairy tales. Instead, they firmly believed that their philosophy of materialism was the ultimate truth, and pointed to the object condition of the Muslims coupled with their limited contributions as evidence of their success and the truth of their arguments. However, since communism was at the same time undertaking an ideological battle with countries following the European model which promoted opposing values such as social independence, freedom of thought and free trade, it was inevitable that it would lose this battle because of its short-sightedness and limited materialistic approach to human life.
After the fall of communism, it was only a matter of time before the secular culture of the West came face to face with Islam. The fact was that the military resources of Islam were few and its intellectual resources were even fewer. On the other hand, widespread opportunities for ease comfort and luxury available in a secular culture had quickly tempted people towards it. The values of religion were declared as enemies of freedom of thought and personal liberty. Faced with this relentless secular onslaught, Christianity had no choice but to compromise; in order to survive it had to learn to live at the mercy of a free and secular culture. In a very short time it accepted defeat, with the result that we find that religion in free secular societies merely exists as a personal and private inclination. What is more, it morally degraded itself to such a level that it felt obliged to give its approval and blessing to extremely reprehensible acts such as homosexuality.

The religion of God, known as Islam, holds no complaint or bitterness against others. Its lament is that it has been held hostage by the arrogance, ostentation and posturing of its adherents. Having abandoned and cast aside the higher aims and goals of life, the Muslim Ummah has been consumed by the scourge of sectarianism. The tyranny and dictatorship of partisan religious scholars (Mullahism) strived to extinguish the qualities of sincerity and thinking within the Muslim Ummah. The Muslims have been diverted from the fundamental goals of religion, and with the passing of each day, erect new schools and seminaries devoted to a particular interpretation of the faith. People of mediocre thinking exploit religion for personal power and glory, and even the most highly respected religious institutions of learning are fanning the flames of bigotry and sectarianism. The act of separating God from religion has encouraged within all the religious movements of modern times a cult of secrecy on the style of freemasonry, exclusivity centered around on a figure around, and a personal perspective promoted as a universal truth.

The Muslim world has not transformed into a society without religion, but it has been infected with religious paralysis. It has become an arena in which ideologies from every corner of the globe are reflected and contested. This has resulted in the trivialization and belittling of religion. For instance, Muslim society displays a greater willingness to accept and adopt the beliefs of scientific and political theories in comparison to those of religion. In fact, it clearly communicates its desire to follow common and conventional styles of thinking instead of religion. Suffering from the twin curses of an illiterate population and extreme underdevelopment, the governments of Islamic countries show more interest in holding on to political power and promoting nationalism, instead of bettering their people through a deep understanding of religion.

A handful of individuals and ‘thinkers’ are driving the intellectual thought process of the Muslim Ummah: the majority of whom are beguiled identity and lack the capacity to conceive of an effective and alternative vision. Standing shoulder to shoulder, both the narrow-minded rulers and these ‘intellectuals’, having been educated in the lecture halls of Europe and having ‘tasted the freedom of western culture,’ are working relentlessly to create a secular society. What is happening in reality is that they are creating new ‘church’ in opposition to the model of religion espoused by the shortsighted and poorly educated ‘scholars’ of Islam. This battle for the hearts and minds of Muslim society is conducted at all levels. In the name of personal freedom and liberty, mass media and modern communications technology is actively engaged in a struggle to popularize, at a grass root level, the notion of a ‘free’ society. The biggest thorn in the side of this campaign is religion.
This clash of values is not merely in the East or the West, but is visible at all levels and within every Islamic country. Nevertheless, Islam stands tall, as though it awaits the coming of those who possess, like the first generation of Muslims, minds suffused with sincerity, purity and clarity, and who will raise high the banner of God’s love and create an Islamic society in harmony with human nature: an exemplary society the like of which has never been witnessed before either on terrestrial land or the starry firmament, in which the live and recognition of God would form the backbone of religion. It would be a society in which power would lie not with force and oppression, but with knowledge and understanding; wherein, as well as bettering the conditions of this physical, temporary and short spanned life on earth, preparations would also be made for the never-ending, everlasting life beyond the grave; where there would be no cause for stress, anxiety and emotional upheaval, other than the normal concerns of life and death; wherein in words ‘compassion’ and ‘blessing’ would attain their full meaning. The creation of such a society is not merely the dreams of a utopian paradise, without historical precedence. The culture and society of the Prophetic era and that of the rightly guided Kahlifahs (1st four Caliph) is a historical fact. However, it is a sad observation that this is the only historical realization of the vision of Islam, and one which has never been repeated in succeeding generations.

To be continued with mind blowing chapter: The Origin of Intelligence

The Origin of Intelligence 1/3

There are many motives which drive people to seek education. For some it is a means of acquiring a livelihood, gaining status and respect. Others want more than this. They want education to lead to enlightenment and salvation. There are two approaches which can be taken. Firstly, the path of initiation into a religious order or group. People of this temperament place their trust in others and are content to be shown the way along the ‘straight path’ to reach their final goal. The alternative method is to acquire the skills and qualities which will enable you to discover the path of guidance for yourself. This approach allows you to evaluate beliefs and ideas, arrive at your own conclusions and avoid the pitfalls of blind faith.

Human beings posses all the tools they need to discover the truth for themselves. Their survival depends on the use of the faculties that God, the Prime Teacher, has bestowed on them. Out of His grace, God entrusted destitute and vulnerable humanity with the faculty of intellect. He placed in them the awareness of how to utilize it (for example, through the use of observation and experimentation). The capacity to learn from the experiences of the past, present and future is a powerful instrument in the intellectual tool kit of Man. In this way the survival of Man guaranteed. How else could a weak and dependent creature maintain its dominance when surrounded by dangers?
It was the intellect which urged early Man to seek knowledge and understanding. It encouraged him to reflect on his experience and develop better ways of doing things. Above all it pushed him to go beyond the concerns of daily survival and discover his higher self: to pursue the path of self-realization. In the animal kingdom we find that some species of animals are also able to learn from their experiences. This allows them to adjust their behavior. What they cannot do is use this experience in a context not dedicated by their animal instincts, that is, go beyond issues of eating, drinking and mating. For instance, after centuries of being dominated by Man has any species of animal been able to utilize their experience to free themselves from being exploited? Has it been possible for any animal to shake the burden of its human masters and create a world in which it is completely safe and secure? In contrast, human beings have attained supremacy over the Earth. This is due to the extraordinary and superior faculty of the intellect. It has enabled Man to be the unchallenged master of the Earth. No other creature has dared to question his authority.

If the intellect is the secret behind mankind’s power on Earth, then we must ask where did it come from? Was it an innate ability with Man? Was it bestowed on Man? The Quran informs us in the following verse that the faculty of the intellect and consciousness is a trust which was offered to the whole of creation, who shuddered at the responsibility it entails and therefore refused to accept it. Man on the other hand was foolish and accepted the burden:
“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 unjust and foolish (33:72)”

This verse also shows that the intellect is not an inherent quality of Man and that it is false to assume that mankind has always had personal ownership rights over it. There is an allusion that Man has been given possession of this faculty in this world and in the next world he will not have free use of it. The key point is that the intellect is given as a trust to Man and this entails certain responsibilities. For instance, to utilize it only to satisfy your ego and animal self is an abuse of this trust. There is an expectation that Man will deploy his mind to understand his purpose in life and to discover his creator. If not, he must remember that what is given can also be taken away. There is a force from which the intellect originates. Who is the real owner? The answer is : God.
Modern discoveries in the field of physical anthropology support the view that the intellect has not always been an inherent quality of mankind. Research shows that there is little difference between the characteristics of early human beings, including earlier species of primates, and other species of animal. Human Beings trace their biological ancestry to the species known as ‘Homo”. This species existed for millennia without showing any evidence of intellectual activity that set it apart from others. It was only about seven thousand years ago when farming was discovered, that mankind became distinguishable from animals. The intellect of Man from then on begins to emerge as a dominant factor in the world. As God reminds us in the Quran, mankind existed on the Earth for a very long time when they were not even worthy of being mentioned.
“Has there not been over man a long period of time, when He was (Not even worth) mentioning? (76:1)”

The physical makeup of mankind is subject to the general laws of biology through which God has created animal life. These are the laws (Sunnahs) of God in creation. Like everything else, human being start from a single cell which then splits and becomes an organism consisting of two cells. The Quran informs us that God has created everything in pairs: male and female, positive and negative, electrons and protons, inner and outer. This duality is visible everywhere and is not specific to humans or animals. For instance plants have a male and female part that facilitates pollination.
Not only does Man share his physical constitution with animals he also has an affinity with minerals. The Quran tells us that Man was made from clay. This means that he consists of certain minerals. The evolution of life from simple to complex forms can be seen as a movement along the spectrum of minerals, plants and animals. Each one possesses a feature not possessed by the previous one. For instance, rocks are solid and do not have the quality of growth, while plants have the ability to grow but not the capacity to move like animals. There is always a duality between things which have one cell or two, then between those that are motionless and those that can move, then those who have the ability to speak and those that do not, then between those who have sight and audition and those who do not. So far, Man has no distinguishing feature. Most animals can move, produce sounds, and have hearing and sight. For thousands of years Man was identical to animals. There was nothing which made him different.
The story of life continued to unfold…

To be continued....

What in me is dark

Illumine, what is low raise and support;

That to the height of this great argument

I may assert eternal providence,

And justify the ways of God to men.

The Origin of Intelligence 2/3

The story of life continued to unfold, millennia after millennia. Then, all of a sudden, something amazing occurs which will affect the course of life on Earth forever. A unique and extraordinary change is making itself felt. Out of the blue, Man gains intelligence. He begins to think. The suddenness of this event is beyond human explanation. Scientists are unable to provide an answer to the questions of when, why and how this unbelievable event occurred. Despite the advances in scientific knowledge, we are still unable to pinpoint the moment when the members of the genus Homo began to use the intellect. It is in religion alone that we find an answer to this question.

No one but God can give a satisfying answer relating to the origins of natural phenomena. For instance, why is a walnut a walnut and why is the almond the way it is? Evolutionary processes may partially explain the minor changes between generations of specific species. However, what they cannot account for is the sheer size and extent of the variety and diversity in the forms of life scattered across every corner of the world. There are around a billion species of creatures, and each one of them points towards some meaning and purpose in life. Granted that our knowledge of the diversity of life on Earth is limited, our understanding of the human being is even more rudimentary. Every so often, sciences such as biology, psychology, sociology and neurology shed a glimmer of light and take us one step closer to understanding ourselves. But this only increases our awareness of how little we know. Despite our discoveries, we are plunged into the realm of speculation, as out limited intellects are unable to comprehend the workings of the Absolute Intellect, God.

The acquisition of the intellect by the human species was a remarkable turning point in the history of the world. This ape-like creature, who until very recently was indistinguishable from other species of animals, now displayed self-consciousness, went on to lay the foundations of towns, cities and mighty civilizations, to erect grand monuments and ‘wonders’ of the world, and to develop laws and systems for social existence. Having been the ultimate manifestation of brutality and barbarism, this bipedal creature began to display signs of humanity. There was no doubt that this special quality of ‘Homo Sapiens’ set them apart from every other species and creature on the planed, ensuring their status as rulers and vicegerents of the Earth. As well as this, the members of this species became susceptible to the clash of good and evil, right and wrong.

However, little did Man comprehend the price to be paid for this special quality, and the accountability that it entailed. To what end should this faculty which had not belonged to our species for half of out history and which had given us the privilege of leadership and authority on earth, be utilized? Was it to be used to further the ambitions of human greed and arrogance? Was it the case that this attribute of the intellect was our personal birth right, and the purpose behind its cultivation and refinement was to subjugate the physical world, its rocks and minerals, vegetation and forests, birds and fowl, and animals and livestock. After having satisfied our physical needs, was the higher purpose of the intellect to aid us in seizing power and authority, wealth and resources, even at the expense of death, destruction and disaster? Was this the ultimate function of the intellect, or was there some other purpose to it?

The real purpose of the intellect has been conveyed repeatedly throughout history, and with equal regularity it has been ignored and forgotten. The knowledge of this purpose was not the result of our rational investigations; rather its source was an external, supra-human intuition and inspiration. Throughout history we witness the long line of prophets, reformers, and saints who dedicated their lives to the teaching and instruction of humankind. They frequently reminded people of the message which had been forgotten. The crux of the message was that the intellect you have been given is not your personal possession, but you hold it in trust. Although the utilization of this trust is lawful and permissible for you, its wrongful use will result in a prolonged period of suffering for you. On the other hand correct use of it will entitle you to a life of eternal happiness.

What did God want in return for bestowing the intellect on Man? One this is certain:

To be continued…

The scandal of the pious Christian, and the fallacious triumph of the Infidel should cease as soon as they recollect not only by whom, but likewise to whom, the Divine Revelation was given.

Our curiosity is naturally prompted to inquire by what means the Christian faith obtained so remarkable a victory over the established religions of the earth. To this inquiry an obvious but satisfactory answer may be returned; that it was owing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the ruling providence of it's great Author.

But as truth and reason seldom find so favourable a reception in the world, and as the wisdom of Providence frequently condescends to use the passions of the human heart, and the general circumstances of mankind, as instruments to execute it's purpose, we may still be permitted, though with becoming submission, to ask, not indeed what were the first, but what were the secondary causes of the rapid growth of the Christian church?

It will, perhaps, appear that it was most effectively favoured and assisted by the five following causes:

1. The inflexible, and, if we may use the expression, the intolerant zeal of the Christians, derived, it is true from the Jewish religion, but purified from the narrow and unsocial spirit which, instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles from embracing the law of Moses.

2. The doctrine of a future life, improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth.

3. The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church.

4. The pure and austere morals of the Christians.

5. The union and discipline of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart of the Roman empire.

We are far ahead from this discussion my dear. i dont think that your post is neccessary here in this discussion at this stage about churches which we have discussed long ago:)..

Butin point 3. 'miraculous powers' seems great :)
and what do u think all christians have pure and austere morals as u said in point 4?
i respect ur points or reasons but i simply couldnt understand what u wanted to say.. like intolerant zeal of christians at one point which u said derived form jewish.on the other hand u r saying pure moral.. does prejudice/bigotry/intolerant exist in moral? m really couldnt understand a bit of ur point of view.. intolerant zeal purified from narrow and unsocial spirit? r u blaming to jews for this narrow minded ness for this and also blamig jewish law which doesnt allow outsiders to enter in their religion?

what i understand and i like most is ur point no 2 its absolutly based on reality.very true fact. does christianity believe in accountablity? well we have discussed this as well in previous chapters

well i suggest to hold on ur points and we will discuss these after what i have started for u guys... anyhow, i dont think at this stage i should write anything else for the sake of continuity. no offense as i couldnt understand about ur point of view may be u r looking from anyother angle which i couldnt grasp..

.

But Thanks for sharing ur views dear..