( Recently we were part of a program called "Unity in Pandemic". In particular, I really enjoyed the panel discussion, in which Ner Temid congregation Rabbi Saford Askerlod and Rev Catherine Greg shared wonderful insights. The entire program (which included presentations by all panelists and musical performances) can be viewed here . )
The panel discussion itself can be viewed at the link below.
Unity in pandemic panel discussion part 4
4 comments:
Hello Waheed. During your time speaking at this presentation, you have enunciated several ideas which I have been trying to explain to you. It gives me hope that, perhaps, you do actually listen to what I say. You also side with me on views that I hold that other Muslims have utterly rejected.
You say that "God does not always teach from a book. God teaches through the universe itself." Basically, this is my fundamental principle and also the fundamental principle of many, many religious and non-religious people. Some of us would say "God never teaches from a book", however, the important part is that we can observe the universe for ourselves and learn from it and be guided by what we observe. Most Muslims have told me that guidance comes only from the Qur'an.
I totally agree with you when you go on to say: "The existence of everything is itself a scripture in the sense that it gives us guidance as to what to do and what not to do. It gives us clues as to what to do and what not to do."
You also say: "God created the universe and God allows everything that happens therein through events that are beyond human control. The moments of crisis that we face have been given to us by God." I agree with that much, however, you add the words "for a reason or for reasons". This reflects both a theological and philosophical difference. The theological difference is that you presume that God acts according to HUMAN-LIKE motivations. My God is not at all human-like. The philosophical difference is that given that we could never understand God's motivations, there is no wisdom to be gained by speculating that God either has motivations or by speculating what those motivations might be.
I also agree with you when you say: "Each individual or each community will receive lessons that are unique to themselves." I would go further and say that EVERY individual is capable of bringing lessons to their community. However, Muslims have wilfully blinded themselves to such messengers since the time of Muhammad. You explicitly state this when you say that Muhammad is "the seal of the prophets". Yet, both you and I are trying to bring such lessons to our communities.
You say that "There is not actually one scripture but two scriptures." What happens when the two scriptures do not agree? Isn't it obvious that there can be only one true scripture and that any other is merely an imperfect human commentary on it?
Your speech at this presentation is the closest you've come to coming from the same perspective that I do, and I'm happy to see it!
Hello N.B.
Thanks for your comments. I'm glad you got something from the presentation. Take a look at the Panel discussion as well, the q and a session was very nice.
There are a couple of points you made that I would like to share a thought on.
" Most Muslims have told me that guidance comes only from the Qur'an." (N-B quote)
Religiously, the Qur'an is the most important source, but that is not the only source. Indeed, the Qur'an itself repeatedly points to the universe, to history, biology, etc as sources of information and guidance.
" This reflects both a theological and philosophical difference. The theological difference is that you presume that God acts according to HUMAN-LIKE motivations. My God is not at all human-like." (N-B quote)
We cannot understand fully the wisdom or reasoning of God, however, upon reflection, a person can figure out in broad ways how God has directed their lives. This is a perception of faith, I will admit, but I have seen it in my own existence. That does not mean that we are seeing God in human terms, rather it only means that we have some limited abilities to see God's pattern or work in our lives.
" What happens when the two scriptures do not agree? Isn't it obvious that there can be only one true scripture and that any other is merely an imperfect human commentary on it? "
Good question. WE strive to understand the "scripture of the universe" through the physical world (sciences) and through revelation. Even when WE misunderstand or cannot grasp the realities of both, the blessing of the effort is still there, and worthy of getting some level of guidance, information that is sufficient for our needs at that time.
There is a Quranic verse which is very beautiful, relevant to this discussion.
"And if the oceans were ink, and the trees pens, the oceans and trees would be exhausted, but the WORDS OF ALLAH would not be exhausted".
Thanks for your comments again.
Hi Waheed (or do people call you as "Shams"?)
I think that you are missing my main point. What concerns me most is how Muslims and non-Muslims view each other. The stability of societies and the communities within those societies depends on the cooperative interactions of the individuals. Divisiveness is perhaps the most destructive force that a society has to deal with. A group of individuals who separate themselves from the rest of society by declaring that they are "guided" and the others are "unguided" are practising one of the worst forms of divisiveness.
By agreeing with us that "the scripture of the universe" is the fundamental source of all guidance, you are contradicting your religious position that "the Qur'an is the most important source". It simply is not true that those of us who reject the Qur'an as a source of guidance are "unguided", contradicting what the Qur'an says and what Muslims say about non-Muslims.
Even the young girl in your Sunday school recognized that what you were telling her was in direct contradiction to what she had herself learned from "the scripture of the universe". Please go back and watch that moment again and watch it carefully and meditate on it!
I hope for the day that you open your eyes to the truth that there are non-Muslims who are very solidly grounded in the realities of life and who can offer Muslims much guidance. At that point, you will realize that you don't need the Qur'an at all and you will recognize the harm of factions which divide the way Islam divides.
Hi N.B.
I go by both names, so whichever one chooses, I have no problem with it.
I don't see any difference in speaking about "The scripture of the universe" and that the Qur'an being the most important source for Muslims. Indeed, the latter repeatedly tells us to observe and study the universe, and even tells us of certain fields to study.
Observe the word "ayah" or "ayaat" [the latter being plural). It means "sign". Do a search of the Quranic usage of that term, and you will see what I mean.
I don't have much time today, but I have never assumed that Muslims cannot learn from Non Muslims, and recognize the value of diversity as part of God's plan. In fact, take a look at the video "Imaan and Tawakkul", here on the blog, in another posting. That should help you to see that your assumption is incorrect in this case.
Will pick this up another time, God willing.
Regards
S Waheed
Post a Comment