Hadiths are narrative accounts by Muhammad’s companions of situations involving God’s Messenger and rulings or statements that Muhammad made. Since Muhammad is considered by Muslims to be an excellent exemplar, hadiths have had a major impact on Islam’s worldview. There are six major collections of hadith. The most influential one is by al-Bukhari (who died about 240 years after Muhammad). Bukhari claims to have examined almost six hundred thousand hadith. He only accepted seventy-four hundred of them (1.2%) as being undeniably authentic. The other five collections also did not include the vast majority of hadiths they examined, but they do overlap considerably in the ones that they do consider authentic. I have selected five hadiths to gloss from my perspective as a Reform Rabbi. The first is from Sahih Muslim and the following four are from Bukhari.

Menstruation

Sahih Muslim: Thabit narrated it from Anas: Among the Jews, when a woman menstruated, they did not dine with her, nor did they live with them in their houses; so the Companions of the Apostle (may peace be upon him) asked the Apostle (may peace be upon him), and God, the Exalted revealed: “They also ask you about (the injunctions concerning) menstruation. Say: ‘It is a state of hurt (and ritual impurity), so keep away from them during menstruation’” to the end (Baqara 2:222). The Messenger of God (may peace be upon him) said: “Do everything except intercourse.” The Jews heard of that and said: “This man does not want to leave anything we do without opposing us in it.” (Book 003, Number 0592)

Gloss: Both Islam and Judaism have laws about ritual pollution deriving from a woman’s monthly period. Orthodox Judaism had greatly expanded the prohibitions against physical contact during a woman’s period. Muhammad opposes this expansion and limits the prohibition for Muslims. Reform Rabbis today are much closer to Islamic practice than they are to Orthodox Jewish practice.

Extremism

Bukhari; Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded.” (Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38)

Gloss: Unlike Christianity, both Islam and Judaism teach the importance of sacred slaughter of meat, and the avoidance of certain animals for food. In Islam, the rules are simpler and fewer than in Orthodox Judaism. Reform Rabbis would regard the increasingly restrictive developments in the laws of kosher diet, especially for Passover, as a counterproductive, overburdening of the people. The expansion of restrictions on Shabbat activities is also seen by Reform Rabbis as a counterproductive, overburdening of the joy of Shabbat. Muhammad wisely differentiates between extremism and striving to be near perfect (no one is perfect) which involves a rejection of extremism. Just trying to do well will be rewarded. Religion should not be hard. Making religion easier does not mean making religion soft or impious. This is a very important hadith because all religions have believers that think more is better, and harder is still better.

Worshiping none other than God

Narrated ‘Aisha and Ibn’ Abbas: On his deathbed God’s Apostle put a sheet over his face and when he felt hot, he would remove it from his face. When in that state (of putting and removing the sheet) he said, “May God’s Curse be on the Jews and the Christians for they build places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” He intended to warn (the Muslim) from what they (i.e. Jews and Christians) had done. (Volume 4, Book 56, Number 660)

Gloss: God’s apostle strongly opposed any diversion of reverence or worship to anyone other than God. Christians, and even Jews, had started worshiping at the graves of holy men, saints and prophets. Although they claimed to be only worshiping God, their feeling that prayer was better or more effective at such sites was cursed by Muhammad. In later centuries, some Muslims also began worshiping at the tombs of holy men and building places of worship near their graves. For Islam, none other than God can be attributed with divinity. Therefore, seeking divine assistance from the graves is shirk, associating partners with God, which is the gravest sin in Islam. However, some ignorant Muslims may unintentionally hypothesize divine qualities for certain deceased people. Although such Muslims are not too many, and they do not really intend to worship them, this is one of the developments that the Wahhabi movement strongly opposes.¹

Reform Rabbis would agree that such activity at grave sites should be condemned and could be seen as a curse. God’s apostle must also have realized that even the Muslim community would produce people whose piety would lead to such errors. No religious community is exempt from people who use piety and belief improperly. This hadith teaches us all to be humble when we view other religions and other sects within our own religion. The next hadith teaches this even more explicitly.

Learning from failings

Narrated Abu Said: The Prophet said: “You will follow the wrong ways of your predecessors so completely and literally that if they should go into the hole of an animal, you too will go there.” We said, “O God’s Apostle! Do you mean the Jews and the Christians?” He replied, “Whom else?” (Volume 4, Book 56, Number 662)

Gloss: Muhammad criticized the failings of many in the Jewish and Christian communities (as did the prophets of Israel), but he realized that people are human, and most do not seem to learn from the failings of others. He hoped that Muslims would retain their original purity, but he foresaw that decay and falsification were inevitable. God’s apostle would certainly attack female genital mutilation in Africa today as sharply as he attacked female infanticide in Arabia in his day.² It is a shame that many Muslim leaders in Africa today do not condemn it. Reform Rabbis, who have now been part of a modern democratic society for several generations are openly critical of those Orthodox practices and ideas that we think betray the spirit of Judaism in today’s world.

Superiority

Abu Huraira related: Two men, a Muslim and a Jew, abused each other. The Muslim said, “By Him Who gave superiority to Muhammad over all the people.” At that, the Jew said, “By Him Who gave superiority to Moses over all the people.” The Muslim became furious at that and slapped the Jew in the face. The Jew went to God’s Apostle and informed him of what had happened between him and the Muslim. God’s Apostle said, “Don’t give me superiority over Moses, for people will fall unconscious on the Day of Resurrection and I will be the first to gain consciousness, and behold! Moses will be there holding the side of God’s Throne. I will not know whether Moses has been among those people who have become unconscious and then has regained consciousness before me, or has been among those exempted by God from falling unconscious.” (Volume 8, Book 76, #524)

Gloss: God’s Messenger is so well known for his sense of justice that a Jew can appeal to him even in a conflict with a Muslim who has attacked a Jew. It is only natural for Jews to think that Moses is the best, and for Muslims to think that Muhammad is the best. Muhammad rebukes the Muslim, telling him not to claim that Muhammad is superior to Moses because even on the day of Resurrection, Muhammad himself will not know their relative merit, for although Muhammad will be the first to be revived, Moses will already be there holding the side of God’s throne. Muhammad teaches us that comparisons of religious superiority are wrong, for no human in this world, and perhaps even in the world to come, will know who the best is, and such comparisons do not help anything but polarize people by inciting partisan fervor. All Reform Rabbis would applaud this teaching although we know that during the Middle Ages all three religions claimed superiority.

Most Americans would be amazed to hear such liberal and flexible statements coming from a religion that they think is rigid and fanatical. But the politicized Islam that has captured so much attention in the world today is the outgrowth of two recent factors. One is an anti-western reaction and scapegoating due to the great dislocations and upheavals occurring as a result of globalization in all modernizing societies in the twentieth century. The second factor is the result of several previous centuries of socio-economic decline that took place in the Middle East. Jews and Christians have already had reforming movements. Muslims have not. But the Prophet predicted that Muslims also would become more rigid and orthodox just as the Jews and Christians had. As we have seen Abu Sa’id al-Khudri reported God’s Messenger as saying: You will tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and step by step, so much so that if they had entered into the hole of a lizard, you would follow them in this also. We said: Do you mean Jews and Christians? He said: Who else?”

Unlike Orthodox Rabbis, Reform Rabbis accept the doctrine of nullification, which teaches that one verse in scripture can nullify another, and that rulings can be changed due to changed circumstances. Muhammad provides an excellent example of this principle in the following account. The Prophet originally told women not to visit graveyards, but toward the end of his life, he said to them: “I had told you not to visit graves; now I am telling you to visit them.” The reason was that Arabian women used to wail at graves. The Prophet wanted this practice to be stopped. Therefore, he banned women from visiting graves to start with. After some time, when Muslim women were better aware of how Islam wants them to behave in different situations, he allowed them such visits. In fact, the Prophet encourages visiting graveyards because such a visit reminds the visitor of his or her own death and the fact that they would have to stand in front of God when their actions are reckoned to determine their reward or punishment. Scholars like Ibn Qudamah, of the Hanbali school of law, make it clear that since this is the purpose of visiting graveyards, both men and women need such visits.

Another important teaching of the Qur’an for people all over the world today is that God chose not to create human beings as one nation and bestowed upon them free will to believe or not to believe. As it is written in the Qur’an (Maedah 5:48) “For every one of you did We appoint a law and a way. If God had pleased He would have made you one people, but (He didn’t) that He might test you in what He gave you. Therefore compete with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; for all return to God, so He will let you know (after Judgment Day) that in which you differed.” This is a wonderful further development of the teaching of the Biblical prophet Micah (4:5) that in the end of days-the Messianic Age-”All people will walk, each in the name of their own God, and we shall walk in the name of the Lord our God forever.”

A Muslim is one who submits to the will of God and believes that God has sent many different prophets to the many peoples of the world. As a Reform Rabbi I believe that Muhammad was the Prophet sent to the Arab people. I believe that the Qur’an is as true for Muslims as the Torah is true for Jews. Indeed, I love the hadith also narrated by Abu Huraira that says, “The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. God’s Apostle said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in God, and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever was revealed to you.’”³ Following Muhammad’s teaching I too neither believe nor disbelieve in the Qur’an. I do respect the Qur’an very much as a kindred revelation to a kindred people in a kindred language.⁴ “We have not sent you but as an unequalled mercy for all the worlds” (Anbiya 21:107). The Prophet Muhammad’s mission, peace be upon him, is not restricted to Arabs only. Arabs today comprise not more than twenty percent of the entire Muslim population around the world. Belief in the Prophets and previous revelations are two of the six pillars of faith in Islam. Likewise, the Qur’an is the final revelation that was sent after the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels. Its message is universal and does not cover one specific nation only. (Ed.)In fact, the people, the language and the theology are closer to my own people, language and theology than that of any other on earth. Of course, more than eighty percent of Muslims in the world today are not of Arab decent. But Arabic is their sacred language and the tradition that Arabs and Jews are cousins is widely accepted. This makes the present conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis especially tragic. It is very important to realize that the conflict is a political one and not a religious one. There can be no religious conflict between religions like Judaism and Islam because neither of them declares that their scriptures are the only ones from God. The strong support that the Qur’an gives to religious pluralism is a lesson that is sorely needed by the religious fundamentalists of all religions in the world today.

Notes

1. The tradition of building mosques next to graves, or the other way round is a common practice. However, Muslims do not have the intention of worshiping the deceased saints. Muslims worship and petition God, and God only. Besides, there are practical reasons, like performing funeral services more easily and praying for one’s deceased. (Ed.)
2. Female genital mutilation (or female circumcision) has nothing to do with any Islamic practice. It is a custom in some parts of Africa and the Middle East. In Islamic sources, there is no absolute prohibition, nor is there any kind of encouragement regarding this practice. This practice is also considered reprehensible since it carries a risk to the girl’s future ability to enjoy sexual relations with her husband. (Ed.)
3. This hadith refers to the fact that as a part of the Islamic creed, Muslims have to believe in all the Prophets and revelations sent to them. Muslims believe the previous scriptures have not remained in their original state. Since it is not certain how much these scriptures have been changed, the Prophet enjoins Muslims not to accept or deny completely the message of these scriptures. (Ed.)
4. “We have not sent you but as an unequalled mercy for all the worlds” (Anbiya 21:107). The Prophet Muhammad’s mission, peace be upon him, is not restricted to Arabs only. Arabs today comprise not more than twenty percent of the entire Muslim population around the world. Belief in the Prophets and previous revelations are two of the six pillars of faith in Islam. Likewise, the Qur’an is the final revelation that was sent after the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels. Its message is universal and does not cover one specific nation only. (Ed.)

Roaming in our shining civilization.

They breathed life into lost souls,

We called them heroes of compassion.

How we have missed you, waiting,

O heroes of compassion, alight.

Our darkened souls been longing.

In your return we will delight.

Heroes of compassion speak

Without words. They convey

An eternal message of love.

Their destiny became this way.

They did not come to hate,

Nor did they come to fight.

Their work was only for love

To erect the statue of the heart.

They absorb the fragrance of love

As the rain of grace descends.

Heroes of compassion radiate

Without a haze of pretence.

Deep in a fight of spiritual struggle

Until their mind and heart merge,

Their trademark is their anguish

Felt for those lost in cerebral surge.

A hero embellished our dreams

Since the days he roamed our shores.

On the coastline of our spirit

We still hear echoes of his chores.

Accentuate my heart O Lord!

Helping needy souls is my passion.

Elevate my soul up high

Like a hero of compassion.

Haven’t we waited long enough

In infinite yearned expression?

When will you roam our shores?

We need you now, O heroes of compassion!

The 2006 World Development Report analyzes the relationship between equity and economic development in Developing countries. In this essay, I re-examine the relationship between equality, equity and development from a long-term economic development perspective. Equality refers to the condition where socioeconomic groups, i.e. upper, middle and lower classes, in a society have access to relatively similar levels of income. Equity, however, roughly corresponds to the broader term of human development,² and emphasizes equality of opportunity, and a broader set of human conditions. In the light of this report by the World Bank, I suggest that contrary to the long-held views, the development of contemporary Developing countries can only be achieved by “leveling the playing field” among citizens.

For long years, it was believed that economic development led to human development. it was assumed that as a country develops economically, it is able to provide more for the basic needs of its citizens such as education, healthcare, and a better quality of life. Even though it seems reasonable to expect improvement in individuals’ quality of life as a country develops, we have not observed many countries successfully achieving this better quality of life by following the advice of policymakers. However, a casual observation suggests that the relationship between economic development and human development may be endogenous; that is, just as it is natural to expect economic development to affect human development, we should be able to observe various aspects of human development shaping the course of development of many Developing countries. In fact, many Developing countries such as India and Turkey perform better in measures of economic development due to their higher levels of educated citizens.

Equality – development tradeoff

Following Simon Kuznets’ (1955) pioneering study on the relationship between economic development and equality, academicians and policymakers believed that there exists an inherent trade-off between economic development and socioeconomic equality. The dominant perspective places economic efficiency concerns at the center of this tradeoff .³Equality-enhancing redistribution programs lead to “diversion of resources away from their most efficient use.” According to this view, employing limited resources in welfare-improving areas results in a decrease in economic growth as well as underutilized resources. Instead of employing the relatively scarce factor of production, that is capital, in new investment opportunities which would economically be more efficient, spending the capital on less productive social redistribution would negatively affect the economic development hopes negatively.

The main alternative view highlights the welfare consequences of the presumed tradeoff between growth and equality. Proponents of this perspective claim that a focus on rapid growth is likely to entail “distorted patterns of development” and to reduce the welfare of the poor in the society. In particular, the state along with the actors in the private sector directs its focus on increasing productivity and efficiency in the manufacturing sector. Any financial commitment that potentially decreases efficiency in the economy is strictly avoided; redistribution to the poor in the society is considered among such expenditures. The socio-economic distress of the poor simply takes a backseat vis A vis economic efficiency. In order to minimize the short-term effects of the growth-oriented economy, equality should take precedence over economic growth. In the long-run, equality will positively impact economic development.

A recent report by the World Bank draws attention to this widely-accepted tradeoff between development and equality,⁴and proposes an alternative. The report claims that equality and development are complementary to each other rather than contradictory. Economic growth without equality can only provide distorted patterns of economic development leaving the majority of the population in need, just as we observe in many Developing countries today. On the other hand, an exclusive focus on equality is likely to hinder development as valuable resources at the disposal of capital-holders are diverted from their efficient use. As a result, a long-term solution to this impasse requires the introduction of a delicate trade-off between the two: Investment in human. Human development, hence, lies at the heart of this new conception of economic development.

Equity and equality

Equality, in the conventional sense of the term, refers to the elimination of extreme disparity with respect to wealth among individuals within a given community. For this end, different states have applied various forms of redistribution in order to eliminate inequality of income. Such use of the term mostly taps into the outcome aspect of equality. That is, the goal is to minimize the differences in incomes of the people by redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor. Equity, on the other hand, is the new term offered by the World Bank to development terminology. Equity is based on a larger conceptualization of the notion of equality. It suggests equal opportunities in respect to education, health and such; no explicit implication is being offered for the outcome-based notion of equality. Individual responsibility, in this regard, is critical in bridging equal opportunity at the outset with the final outcome.

John Rawls’ notion of the “veil of ignorance” summarizes the basic idea behind this contemporary understanding of equity.⁵ The veil of ignorance is expected to provide a fair allocation of resources that all members of a society would agree. In a hypothetical decision-making situation prior to their knowledge of which position they would occupy in the society, individuals are asked to allocate resources to members of the community; they may be the worse-off or best-off in the community, hence they will put an effort in fairly allocating the resources. In essence, Rawls concludes that “primary goods” should be provided for all, referring to the equality of opportunity for all. Amartya Sen dwells on a similar concept of primary goods, “functionings,” and defines it as “the set of actions a person performs and of states the person values and enjoys.”⁶ It is important to recognize the fact that no suggestions are being made here with respect to the conventional understanding of equality, that is income redistribution. The emphasis in this conceptualization of equity highlights the relative importance of equal opportunity provision over outcome-based redistribution, but not necessarily the exclusion of the latter for the sake of the former.

Inequality traps

Based on this relatively modern notion of equity, it is possible to identify three ways that equity and development are complementary in Developing countries. The first of these ways touches on the notion of “inequality traps.” Inequality traps can be defined as the reproduction of economic, political and social inequalities “over time and across generations.”⁷ Existing political and economic inequalities in Developing countries systematically favor the interests of a relatively small elite group over the rest of the society. By the use of overt or covert power, the elite in Developing countries are able to influence the policymaking process more effectively despite their disadvantage in number. As the poor are likely to be much less involved in the political decision-making process, the vicious circle of underperformance continues.

The second way that equity and development relate to each other comes in the form of inefficient redistribution mechanisms. The institutional structures are tailored to benefit not the neediest in the society, but rather middle-class and upper middle-class citizens.⁸Hence, the influence of the more advantaged in the society further determines the shape of the institutional structure.

Finally, leveling the playing field does potentially affect the investment and innovation environment. A modern economy is inconceivable without an active investment environment. Inequality of opportunity prevents individuals like Nthabiseng from taking part in the modern economy and realizing their potential. Barred from entry, either through institutional mechanisms or mere negligence, individuals facing inequality of opportunity will not be able to enrich the environment of competition necessary for economic development. The relatively few and well-endowed rich will be less likely to feel any pressure to pursue innovation and investment opportunities. Competition, which is regarded as the major source of development, will not come about. As a result, the resulting environment is inimical to sustainable development and poverty reduction.

Implications

Several world religions endorse social justice, helping the poor, and equality as central principles in their teachings. Even though these principles may manifest themselves in fundamentally different ways, the basic idea remains the same. Christians are urged to love their neighbors as themselves; Buddhists are responsible for caring for the poor; one of the five pillars of Islam is zakat (almsgiving); and, the word for “charity” is the same as for “justice” in Hebrew.⁹ As a demonstration of this shared concern among world religions, the World Faiths Development Dialogue has issued a statement the essence of which asserts as follows: “All religions would see the extreme material poverty in the world today as a moral indictment to contemporary humanity and a breach of trust within the human family.”¹⁰ In addition to this poverty-reducing aspect of religions, it is easy to see how this recent understanding of equity can also be inferred from one of the fundamental tenets of all religions. Human dignity constitutes a shared and fundamental theological principle for world religions.¹¹ In order for human beings to reflect this dignity, the latent potential for perfection has to be provided with the right set of opportunities, and basic necessities such as health care, education, and nutrition. Otherwise, undeveloped individual potentials do run the risk of being wasted leading to both dishonoring human dignity and economic underdevelopment, as a social phenomenon.

In what preceded, I introduced a new perspective on economic development, a chronic problem among Developing countries. By making a distinction between equality of income and equality of opportunities, the presumed trade-off between equality and economic growth might be overcome. It is my hope that this new emphasis on equality and human development will allow billions of people living in dire conditions to reclaim their dignity as humans. Eventually, this emphasis on human development will result in economic development, long-anticipated in Developing countries.

A. Kadir Yildirim is a PhD candidate in political science at the Ohio State University. He can be reached at yildirim.10@osu.edu.

Notes

1. The story of Nthabiseng and Pieter is taken from World Development Report 2006 by World Bank.
2. Human Development is defined by the United Nations Development Programme as “the priority of human well-being, and aimed at ensuring and enlarging human choices which lead to equality of opportunities for all people in society and empowerment of people so that they participate in – and benefit from – the development process.” Education, health care, and quality of life are different aspects of human development. For reference, see: http://www.undp.org/rbec/nhdr/1996/georgia/glossary.htm
3. Bruce Moon and William Dixon. 1992. “Basic Needs and Growth-Welfare Trade-offs.” International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 36 (2).
4. World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development. Oxford University Press: New York.
5. John Rawls. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Amartya Sen. 1985. Commodities and Capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
7. World Development Report, p. 2.
8. Rudra, Nita. Who Really Gets Hurt? Globalization and the Race to the Bottom in Developing Countries Manuscript. Also, see World Development Report, p. 179, for a similar discussion.
9. World Development Report, p. 76.
10. http://www.wfdd.org.uk/, September 1999.
11. In a recent article in The Fountain, Halim Calis presents a compelling argument on human dignity in Islam and Christianity as a common ground for interfaith dialogue. See “Holy Sources of Human Dignity.” The Fountain, Issue 58, 2007.

Cherries are grown as one of three types: sweet, sour, or wild cherries. Alongside fresh cherry consumption, cherries are also used in juices, jams, jellies, cherry pies, cakes, ice cream, and so on. Cherries are healthful and rich in minerals. A hundred grams of cherry juice contains 246 kilocalories, 58.3 grams of carbohydrate, 3.12 grams of protein, 1 gram fat, 115 milligrams of sodium, 745 milligrams of potassium, 0.5 milligrams of vitamin C, 64 milligrams of calcium, and 81 milligrams of phosphorus. They are rich not only in folic acids, which play a significant role in producing nucleic acids and in the conversion reactions of certain amino acids, but also in potassium, which is needed for osmosis of bodily fluids and acid-base balance. Ripe cherry fruits have been widely used as a traditional medicine to relieve pain, especially in Western Europe and North America.

Cherries as a rich source of antioxidants

Antioxidants are vitamins, minerals and other compounds found in foods that can slow down the oxidation process. During the oxidation process that our body goes through in order to metabolize fats and glucose so they can turn into heat and energy, the body constantly produces free radicals as a byproduct of normal metabolism. Antioxidants help prevent the damage done to the body’s cells by such naturally occurring free radicals as super oxides. The super oxide exposure of a person weighing 70 kilograms amounts to about 1.72 kilograms on an annual basis.

Free radicals are unstable substances with missing electrons. They seek to balance themselves by stealing electrons. In constant need of electrons, free radicals take electrons from our healthy cells. Damage to healthy cells caused by free radicals plays a major role in the aging process as well as in the onset of many ailments. Antioxidants provide the electrons that these free radicals need so they can leave the electrons from your healthy cells alone. Protecting the body against free radicals’ mass conversion of cells, antioxidants help reduce the risk of various degenerative diseases caused by free radicals, boost the immune system and improve our health.

God Almighty has created all the cells of the body containing complex systems of antioxidants to prevent chemical damage to the cells’ components by oxidation. Our body is created with an ability to produce metabolic enzymes which are extremely effective antioxidant scavengers. However, the body produces more free radicals and fewer antioxidant enzymes after the late twenties. The All-Providing God has granted us many antioxidant-rich food products that may help us maintain a high quality of life, especially as this ability of the body to generate these enzymes fades dramatically with age.

Ranking above most fruits, cherries are an excellent antioxidant food. There are fourteen compounds in cherries with antioxidant properties. These compounds can protect the body against degenerative diseases, including cancers and cardiovascular disease. One of the more powerful antioxidant compounds in cherries is anthocyanin. In just one liter of cherry juice, there are 267–688 milligrams of anthocyanins that also give the fruit its bright red, red, purple, or violet color.

Recently, as awareness has been raised of most fruit and vegetables having natural antioxidants, and that cherries especially are a rich source of naturally occurring antioxidants, the use of such food products has become more common than synthetic antioxidant supplements.

More health benefits

Cherries offer other major health benefits. They contain the powerful antioxidant compound melatonin, which has anti-inflammatory properties and which controls daily circadian rhythms, helping to improve sleep patterns. Alongside their anti-inflammatory health benefits and improving sleep, they also provide pain relief. Research shows that the consumption of an average of twenty fresh cherries or some cherry juice is much more effective than aspirin in reducing pain caused by inflammation, arthritis or gout.

Cultivation, consumption, and storage

Cherry trees grow in a wide range of climatic conditions and are indeed easy to grow from seed. Once the cherry plant has established, it reaches the fruiting stage in several years.

Cherries can be consumed or stored in a great many ways. Alongside cherries eaten fresh or dried or the juice from the fruits, they can also be used in many dishes, especially desserts, jams, and marmalades. While buying cherries, select fresh, unblemished fruit. Besides consuming cherries as a fresh fruit item, they can also be kept in frozen fruit packs or in cans. Cherries that are to be saved can be stored in the freezer in airtight bags. Canned cherries are also available preserved in sugar syrup. Sweet cherries are particularly used in cakes and puddings. Sour cherries are generally candied or preserved.

“China Air Flight 0815, now boarding.” I sat in an unfamiliar airport in Beijing, China, waiting to board my plane. I had been in Beijing for three days and was headed to Urumqi in northwest China. Until now, I hadn’t been afraid. In fact, I had been strangely fearless. At the age of 15, I was ready to take on the world on my first overseas adventure. Well, at least I had been fearless until the night before the flight. The leader of our group had gathered us all in the hotel for a debriefing of our day. Before we left, he told us that the flight we were going to take the next day was one that many Muslim people would be taking as well. We needed to be aware of whom we would be flying with and be prepared to be respectful of our Muslim neighbors.

In utter honesty, this scared me. I thought back to all the pictures I had seen on the television during the months since September 11, 2001. I had sat on my couch looking at pictures of men in turbans, and I had been frightened. I remember thinking I was glad I was nowhere near them. September 11 had been a blur for me: church prayer services, classroom discussions and continuous news reports on the television. For a fifteen-year-old in comfortable America, I did not feel the full impact of the events that Tuesday morning. For some reason I was detached and distant from the whole ordeal and busied myself instead with the handsome football player in my theater class. To top it all off, the next month I lost a good friend to suicide. The last thing I was thinking about was people halfway around the world. And now, all of a sudden, here I was, with history staring me in the face. It was then and only then that the words of Mr. Henderson’s quotation from Shaw hit me. I had been ignorant. I had been “incapable of learning from experience.” As I sat in the busy airport that sunny day, the images from the news programs were suddenly alive. I found myself in the midst of the very world that I had thought was so far away.

Granted, nothing happened on the plane that day. I boarded the plane, sat down in my assigned seat, plugged in my earphones and, before I knew it, I was in Urumqi. Nothing eventful had happened. Yes, there were Muslim men with turbans and long black beards. But they were friendly; one had even smiled at us. This was my first of many encounters with Muslim people.

Once in the Xinjiang province, I was immediately intrigued with the culture I came into contact with. Though Urumqi does have Han Chinese, the majority of the city’s population is Muslim Uyghur. The Uyghur people of northwest China welcomed us into their city, and I soon felt at home there. During my first evening there as I was surrounded by dancing, music, delicious fruits and sweet, sweet smiles; I knew that I had embarked on what was to be a personal pilgrimage through the Muslim culture.

Returning home from China, I took a special topics course at Houston Baptist University, called Introduction to Islam. It was then that I encountered the key beliefs of Islam. Through my studies, I was able to better understand those I had grown to love.

By far, the most memorable experience in my class was an interview that I conducted with a Muslim student. I had told Elif that she could recognize me by the pink tennis shoes I would be wearing, and she told me I could look for a woman wearing a head covering. As I approached her at our meeting place at the University of Houston, I can admit I was a bit apprehensive. Little did I know that the assignment I was about to complete was really giving me deep insight into the heart and life of a passionate Muslim woman.

A literature and sociology student, Elif is very independent and holds deep convictions. When asked her views on the roles of husbands and wives in marriage, she admits that she is a bit of a feminist. There were times when she saw women in her native Turkey who were not being treated the way that they deserved, or according to what they were worth. “I am lucky, I am,” she says as she thinks about her husband and their balanced relationship. When she saw women being mistreated in Turkey, she wondered what made men act like that. “Men are proud of being men,” she says, but she wonders why. Was it culture that made them that way, or religion?

To help her better understand this, she read about the Prophet and his wives. According to Muslim teachings, Muhammad was deeply committed to and loved his first wife Khadija. And though he had more wives later, he was not hurtful to any of them. Instead, he was helpful, even doing things like washing the dishes. Some of his later wives were women that he took into his home to protect because they had children but no husband. Muhammad was supportive of women, not oppressive.

From reading this, Elif decided that men were not justified by religion in their actions. With her strong convictions about the roles of men and women, she herself had some reservations about being married. She clearly laid out her ideas to her husband before they were married. She did not want to marry a man who simply wanted to marry a veiling, practicing Muslim. She wanted to marry a man who wanted to marry her for who she was, as an individual. Her husband is very respectful and a very good listener.

He supported Elif and encouraged her to continue in those strong convictions. He was even the one who influenced her to go back to school to get her masters degree. She warned him that if she did this, she would not be able to be at home all the time, helping out with food and meals. And he said to her, “You don’t have to be like everyone else.” This impressed Elif, and she is grateful for her respectful husband. She says they enjoy cooking together; he often prepares the salad, while she prepares the main course (because she is the better cook!).

“The idea of prayer is gorgeous- I need prayer,” she told me. When asked about prayer and her relationship with God, she was passionate and excited about her beliefs. Elif says that prayer is a way that she can feel close to God. He is always close to her, but when she prays, she can feel his closeness more. Time in prayer with God is the “ultimate closeness.” Prayers serve as a reminder to think about God. She says that as humans we are prone to forget God, and so the Muslim tradition of praying five times a day is helpful, in that it constantly brings you back to focusing on God. She said prayers usually begin: “In the name of God, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate…” And she reminded me that He is not just merciful to Muslims, but to everyone. “He loves everyone equally.”

I feel my words do not do justice to Elif. I was inspired by her passion, strong beliefs, firm convictions, and honesty. She was passionate about everything she talked to me about. From Russian literature, to passing on the love of books, to the role of women in marriages, to prayer and fasting, she was utterly honest and approachable. Though she introduced herself to me as someone who was unsure of what she thought about some things, I found her solid, grounded and strongly convicted about the things she believes. I found it a joy to get to talk with her and hear about her life and personal journey.

Another stop along my exploration of Islam was reading the philosophy of the writer, preacher and educationist M. Fethullah Gulen. My first impressions of this man are very positive. I feel his ideas aim to bridge gaps between cultures and religions, destroying hostility and bringing peace in their midst. While I do not uphold everything he believes I do sincerely believe that anyone can learn from Gulen. When I met with Elif, she talked to me of the influence Gulen had had on her. She talked of how he highlighted the importance of contemplation and gratitude. My generation seems to be filled with mindless video gamers, not deep and passionate thinkers. We need to be cognizant of what is going on around us, exercising our minds to analyze and seek understanding. Also, I completely agree that we need to be more thankful. Especially in the American culture, we are so coddled by all our belongings; we think we are self-sufficient, forgetting that our very existence is something for which we should be thankful for to God. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in his book Life Together, says that perhaps it is because we are not grateful for the little things in life that God does not entrust us with the big things. Being intentionally thankful is a lesson I learned from Gulen. May we all live lives of gratitude.

Also of utmost importance are Gulen’s thoughts on education. Fundamental in his discussion on education is the home. He declares that “the home is vital to the raising of a healthy generation…for souls without truth and knowledge are fields in which evil thoughts are cultivated and grown.” So often today the home is viewed as a place of conflict; why is this? I’m grateful that I have grown up in a home where love was lavished on and instilled in me. But unfortunately, I don’t think this is the norm. Instead of the home being a place where peace is destroyed, peace should start in the home.

Gulen also makes a distinction between educators and teachers: “Education is different from teaching. Most people can teach, but only a very few can educate.” He also states: “Teachers should know how to find a way into the student’s heart and leave indelible imprints upon his or her mind.” I have been lucky enough to have a few educational experiences like this. On occasion I have had teachers, or should I say educators, who cared so much about me that they were able not only to help me gain factual knowledge, but to grow as a person as well. One of these educators told my class a story of one of his former professors. This old professor pondered the difference between teaching the grammar of a language to people and teaching people the language.

The difference is subtle, but the implications are profound! One system of education stresses the information that needs to be processed, while the other highlights the individuals whose lives will be changed and edified as they grow in not only knowledge, but also character! This is the ideal for which every education system should strive. And in a culture that is usually stereotyped as being oppressive to women, Gulen writes, “Although it is fundamental that girls be brought up to be delicate like flowers and mild and affectionate educators of children, due attention must be given to making them inflexible defenders of truth. Otherwise, we shall have transformed them into poor, impotent beings for the sake of delicacy and mildness. We must not forget that female lions are still lions.” His recognition of the place and position of women is of utmost importance in this day and age, and serves to empower Islamic women.

Being immersed in the Muslim culture in Urumqi, China was a blessing. I’ve never felt more welcomed in my life. My new friend Elif was a doorway into the world and culture of Islam. I so appreciated her walking me through the world of Islam. Gulen’s writings, as a peace movement within the Islamic context, can make a huge impact on the world as a whole. This young American Christian woman is grateful for a pilgrimage through the Islamic culture.

Many of you are frightened of us. You have even invented a disease called “Arachnophobia” (fear of spider). On the contrary, I do not inflict any harm on you, but rather help tidy up nature by catching harmful insects in my web. Particularly, when I remember the honorable task one of my ancestors took part in, my eyes get misty with emotion: In order to save the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, the Pride of the Universe and Humanity, from his enemies, our Lord commanded one of our ancestors to quickly make a web over the entrance of the cave they were hiding in, and this made the infidels stop searching for him there. This honor is enough for us until the Day of Judgment. And please, at least, remember this historical event and stop killing us wherever you see us.

Many of you mistake us for insects. We, the spiders, are different from the insects. The easiest way to differentiate us is to count the number of legs and the parts of our bodies. Insects have six legs, whereas we have eight; their bodies are made of three main parts, while our bodies consist of two parts, one being the head. Moreover, we are different with respect to the sizes and numbers of our eyes. The insects usually have two large compound eyes, whereas we have eight small simple eyes (the simplicity here does not mean ordinary, or lacking in art, it means uncomplicated, plain!).

Those who-in order to reject our Lord-seek a way out through the dead ends of the theory of evolution are stunned when they see the delicate embroidery art in my body and the trap strategy in my magnificent webs. Since they know that we do not have intelligence or conscience, they, helplessly, take refuge in a term called instinct. You can resemble these thinkers to the flies that fall into my trap; the more they struggle through reasoning, basing their theories on nature, or causality, or coincidence, the more entangled they become. In order to deny God, they give credit to some imaginative alternatives for the artwork that has been bestowed upon spiders and thus deceive themselves.

We can live in all continents, except Antarctica, and can survive in many climatic conditions, from deserts to rainforests. The reason that we are more common on oceanic islands than on continents is the special threads we use in our nets. We can use this thread like a parachute and can travel on the wind to far away lands.

One of our most important attributes, the merit of which is so valuable that it is mentioned in the Qur’an, is our silk thread gland that produces thread in various qualities. We use this silk-like substance, which is discharged from conical nipples on our abdomen, for numerous purposes. Most of us are granted with at least two kinds of silk glands, with different structures and secretions. And we are given the knowledge to use these threads for different tasks appropriate to their chemical composition. Since the flexibility, durability, thickness and adhesiveness of each type of thread is different, we use the right type for each task. We use some types of thread to build a web to trap prey, others for furnishing inside our homes, and still others to protect our egg or sperm sacks.

Although everyone knows about our thread, the bio-chemical process that takes place during its production is yet to be completely understood. Our thread, despite being thinner than one thousandth of a millimeter, is five times stronger than a steel string of the same thickness. And it can be stretched up to four times its length. Moreover, it is so light that, despite the great length required to go around the world, such a thread would only weigh 320 grams. My web occupies a large space in comparison to my size; but this appearance is deceptive. My real home is a small spot in the middle; the rest is a trap set up for flies. Now, despite being such a wonderful material, the Holy Qur’an, in the chapter named after me, states that “ The parable of those who take to them other than God for guardians is like a spider: it has made for itself a house, and surely the frailest of houses is the spider’s house. If they only knew this!” (Ankabut 29:41). Have you ever wonder about the inner meaning of this verse? If you have, you can see that it describes my house as being feeble and flimsy, but not the thread that made the house. That means, no matter how excellent is the material you have, if you do not use it in the right place, it is useless. My thread and my house that I build are adequate for me, working as traps for my prey. You might waste the highest quality materials if you use them to construct a building with poor foundations. That is to say, if a human being, equipped with the most wonderful qualities, chooses an invalid fallacious god for themselves, they waste the equipment bestowed upon them, such as intelligence, comprehension and conscience. What is worse, when they adopt a deity other than God, whatever they accomplish in terms of excellent scientific studies, discoveries, or inventions will all be wasted. The arguments of those who deny God might seem sound, but in reality they are fallacies, causing those who are not using their innate capabilities to fall into their traps. Of course, a miraculous book like the Qur’an can be read and understood from the perspectives of other sciences and thus can be understood in a variety of ways. Mine is just one. …

The production of my silk, which is stronger than either synthetic or natural fiber, is similar in part to the production process carried out in factories that manufacture thread. The protein called keratin that I use in silk production is a very common substance, found in human fingernails and hair, as well as in bird feathers, in horn, and in the scales of snakes. Even though the same amino acid is used by these creatures, our Lord, the Creator of all, has the knowledge and the omnipotence to turn the same protein found in your fingernail into silk in my glands.

The liquid silk material, discharged like a protein soup, passes through the ducts of a gland where the liquid is absorbed very rapidly and is then turned into acid by other cells via hydrogen atoms before being spurted out as silk. Once the densified proteins enter the acid pool they form links with one another and turn into thread. The bio-chemical reactions that take place in this process, which I have only explained very basically, vary, depending on the types of thread produced in the different glands; by using different processes different types of thread are produced.

My Lord, Whose mercy is endless, Who gave me all the things that I need to survive down to the smallest detail, has granted me six different manufacturing chambers. In each chamber the chemical substances, prepared as different formulas, are mixed in different proportions to suit my needs; in addition, the caliber of the orifices from which they are spurted and the pressure of the pumps are adjusted to the most appropriate levels to produce thread with different characteristics. Neither my knowledge, nor my ability is enough to comprehend the settings in the silk producing nipples located in my stomach. Nevertheless, the threads that I use for hunting are sticky, while others, by which I return to my home with my prey, are stronger and more flexible. Moreover, the other kinds of thread which I use to wrap my prey are straight and have the quality of becoming harder when movement occurs, while the other threads that I use for my egg sacks have an antibiotic to protect against germs, the ones that I use to go up and down are slippery, and finally the ones I use to lay the foundation of my house are thicker while the ones that I place within the nest are thinner. With graceful leg motions I bring all these threads to the right place and secure them there. I straighten some thread with a comb in my foot. The threads are coated with a liquid substance that protects against fractions in case of exposure to pressure.

A creature that is as small and helpless as I am would need to understand the order of the protein atom used, as well as the properties of pressure in order to protect against fractions, and comprehend the structure of the coating material and many other physio-chemical principles in order to produce these threads that have such excellent qualities. Since that is not the case (I do not have any such knowledge) and as the creation cannot be explained via some unconscious terms such as evolution, mutation, or natural selection, my Creator, the creator of all that I do, is Allah. Plastic surgeons have just started to use some types of spider threads in delicate operations on tendons and joints.

Although I do not have any architectural or engineering training that would help me to calculate where I have to secure my threads or to understand the angles between them, with Divine Guidance I am able to perform these tasks properly. Since I live mostly on insects, I am a very useful animal for you; by catching and destroying many insects I play an important role in the ecological balance. Otherwise, these insects would be overwhelming, not to mention the harm they cause to crops. In addition to this there are some interesting species of ours, which live on fish or even bird.

There are approximately thirty-five thousand species of spiders; of this only five hundred can be considered to be dangerous to humans. Even though all of us have poison glands, if we bite a human in general this only causes an itch. We do not deliberately come and bite humans. Even the most poisonous of us all, the black widow (Latrodectus mactans) is rarely fatal for human beings. This species, which builds a large web with a conical center, can hide around 250-750 eggs, wrapping them up with a silk cover. The females are three centimeters in size, while the males are only about one-fourth the size of the females. Once the females receive the sperm, they eat their males instantly before they can escape. Unlike many of us, the Tarantula (Lycosa tarentula), a spider that measures 2.5 centimeters and which belongs to the wolf spider family that is found in Europe, does not make webs; rather they catch their prey by chasing. They have strong venom as well, but contrary to the common exaggeration, this venom is not fatal. There is another species of tarantula in South America, but this spider belongs to a totally different family, the Theraphosa. The size of the main body of this spider is about 9-10 centimeters, and the distance between the legs is 25-30 centimeters. This large and hairy kind of spider is active at night. Some of them live in holes they have dug in the ground, while others build nests on trees. Even though they can be classified as harmless, their bites hurt. They kill small frogs, lizards, and even birds.

Most spiders live alone. A few of us make houses next to each other, and hunt together. Our hunting techniques are various. The Bolas spider (Cladomelea longipes) has incredible techniques for preparing and throwing bolas. Even though their sense of sight is poor, this species can feel the vibration of flying pigeons and they diffuse a special odor to attract their prey; once the prey has come close, the spider catches it with a sudden attack, paralyzing it with its poisonous bite and then wrapping it in special silk. This special silk has a quality that allows it to keep the wrapped prey fresh; thus, the food, which cannot be consumed in one meal, can be safely stored.

Species that live in the desert dig tunnels in the sand to protect themselves from the dreadful heat, and discharge a special excretion to stick the sand together. They also insulate the interior of the tunnel with silk threads to protect themselves from the heat outside. They make a special silk lid to the entrance of the tunnel and camouflage it with some sand. Then, by stretching their thin thread between some rocks and sticks nearby, they wait for their food. Since the daytime is so hot, they prey at night, waiting for insects to vibrate the threads they have placed.

There are other species, for example, the water spiders (Argyroneta aquatica). This species lives in the water and makes their nests in an air bubble on the water, from time to time traveling up to the surface and restocking the air under their stomach to pump it into their home underwater. Another species, called Dolomedes fimbriatus has legs that enables them to walk on the water and to live on fish. As it is the case with all kinds of Arthropoda (exoskeletal animals), we need to change our skins when we grow. Once the outer skeleton, made of ketone becomes hard, it impedes our growth. Because of that, from time to time, we shed this skin, and grow rapidly while our new skin is soft. Moreover, the legs, which are cut off due to various reasons, are renewed with the grace of God.

I could tell a lot more about my friends, but I think this is enough. I hope that from now on no one will attribute our artful of creation and behavior to evolution or coincidence. In fact, I do not expect such a thing from human beings, who have intelligence, conscience, and comprehension.

It would not be wrong to describe each state as a Divine gift and the breeze of nearness to God one feels in the heart, and each station as one’s continuous and stable experience of this breeze and the acquisition of a second nature. Like life, light, and mercy, each state is a direct gift of the Almighty and leads to the conviction of Divine Unity. By contrast, since each station depends on a purposeful effort, it cannot reflect the truth so manifestly. Therefore, without viewing stations as being obtained by a personal effort, a believer’s feeling of the spiritual occurrences in his or her heart, and a believer’s opening a new way in his or her heart to the One known by the heart at every moment, results in a deeper appreciation of the Source of those occurrences than would be possible by shaping them according to one’s own capacity and character, which may lead to ostentation and conceit.

The most truthful and confirmed one, the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings, once declared: “God considers not your bodily statures, but your hearts.”¹ These words direct our attention to what is important for the Truth, and show people how to reach the main target. The Tradition narrated through a less reliable channel is: “God considers your hearts and actions.”² This is a reference to a station reached after cycles of state.

A state consists of Divine manifestations occurring at times determined by the absolute Will. These manifestations are reflected in the heart and in the believer’s perception and consciousness, which pursue and cast them into a mold. For this reason, while a station signifies stability and subsidence after waves of state, a state can be likened to groups of waves of different lengths and colors coming from the Sun, appearing and then disappearing, being dependent on the absolutely dominant Will.

Sensitive souls and those whose consciousness is alert or awakened to the knowledge of God discern the waves of state upon their hearts, just as they see the Sun’s reflections on water, and respond to these waves according to their level and manner of perception. Those who have not corrected the imbalance of their hearts, and thus live disconnected from the Almighty, may regard these waves of state as illusions and fancies, while those who see existence with the light of the Truth view them as manifest, experienced realities.

The greatest hero of state, upon him be peace and blessings, who regarded each spiritual gift received as less when compared to the one that followed-may God illuminate our hearts with the light of his gifts he regarded as less-declared: “I ask God’s forgiveness seventy times a day.”³ It was impossible for a perfectly pure soul who felt the need for an everlasting mount and an eternal light in a never-ending journey toward the Infinite Being to have done otherwise.

Notes

1. Muslim, Birr, 33, 34.
2. Ibid.; Ibn Maja, Zuhd, 9.
3. Bukhari, Dawa‘at, 3; Tirmidhi, Tafsir al-Qur’an, 47.

Despite the plethora of predictions for centuries by prominent scientists and intellectuals regarding the disappearance of belief in God, today it is evident that the secularization thesis has failed. In addition to supporting the claim that religion is as vital today as it was centuries ago, this article will try to provide a spectrum of the ideas and predictions great thinkers have conveyed about the prognosis of religious belief in human history and try to indicate some essential questions they have neglected, as well as some fallacies involved in these ideas.

In the nineteenth century, trapped in his nihilism, Nietzsche sends his God into the graveyard and declares “God is dead!” Then, he makes his madman cry out, “We have killed him-you and I. We are his murderers.” Despite his boldness and frenzy, Nietzsche is not celebrating, he is mourning. He feels abandoned in his dark cave of nihilism and loses hope. God is not there anymore watching over him above the clouds, and his despair makes him weep on behalf of humankind. Nietzsche suffers intensely because even if we are mistaken and God is actually not dead, we have killed Him and now we are doomed to live our lives without Him; Nietzsche realized that God is dead in the hearts of modern men-killed by rationalism and science.

Everyone was astonished at Nietzsche’s audacity; however, he was certainly not the first one to pronounce or predict God’s death. Voltaire, as early as the eighteenth century, had predicted that the end of religion would arrive within the next fifty years. Less than a century later, the French thinker Auguste Comte announced that, as a result of modernization and the emergence of the science of sociology, human society would soon outgrow the theological stage of social evolution and moral judgments would be based on social science rather than religion. Similar to the claim of Enlightenment thinkers, great names such as Karl Marx, Charles Darwin, and Sigmund Freud, as well as the pessimistic intellectuals of the post-World War II era, predicted the decline of religion and proposed that the secularization of the world was imminent.

Moreover, attempts to send God to the graveyard have continued in recent history, perhaps becoming even more impudent. The debate on the issue has gone so far as to feature on the cover of Time Magazine in 1966; the question “Is God dead?” was written in bold red on a black cover, leaving a lasting impact on peoples’ minds. During the psychedelic 1960s, a student magazine in Atlanta even ran a satirical obituary of God in newspaper style: “ATLANTA, Ga. , Nov. 9-God, creator of the universe, principal deity of the world’s Jews, ultimate reality of Christians, and most prominent of all divinities, died late yesterday during major surgery undertaken to correct a massive diminishing influence. Reaction from the world’s great and from the man in the street was uniformly incredulous.” During such a time of non-theology, the students were apparently not mourning the loss of God anymore; on the contrary, they were elated to send a disturbingly mighty authority to the grave. The striving, self-centered generation of the new era was denying its need for belief in God. Feeling a newfound power through scientific advancement and an unprecedented knowledge about everything imaginable, it was a fierce rebellion, a cry of freedom that would eventually end in despair.

Today, one cannot help but wonder if humankind is still rebelling against the existence of its creator or have we gone through a catharsis and found the God we had once lost? Have the rumors of God’s death reached the rest of the world? Could gigantic machines and tons of pages of knowledge stuffed into encyclopedias have made belief in God unnecessary? When meteorologists gained a more profound knowledge of the causes of thunderstorms and achieved the ability to predict them a week before they happened, did that disprove the existence of God? Could people live their lives overlooking the questions about existence that have always intrigued their minds?

It appears not.

Today, it looks as if everything has not turned out, in any way, to be as predicted. A contemporary sociologist of religion, Rodney Stark, points out that the number of people who believe in God is very high today; this number is considerable, even in Europe where secularization originated.² To support his claim, he gives the example of Iceland, which was claimed to be the first fully secularized nation. Based on the 1990 World Values Survey report, 81 percent of Icelanders expressed confidence that there is life after death, 88 percent said that they believe humans have souls, and 82 percent reported that they pray to God. The survey also reveals that in Iceland only 2.4 percent of the population describe themselves as “convinced atheists.” Moreover, recent studies report empirical data which show that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe in God and that proportion has never dipped below 94 percent³ (Hadden 1987). In Religious Change in America, Andrew M. Greeley⁴ reports that in every Gallup Poll that has asked whether the respondent believes in God, more than ninety percent say they do. In addition, ninety percent of Americans pray to God, three-fourths believe in the possibility of life after death, and about seventy percent think that “people who have led good lives” receive some reward in the hereafter, while more than fifty percent also believe in hell. Importantly, neither of these percentages has changed significantly in the last fifty years. In addition to the statistics in the U.S., a study conducted among European scientists has found that the scientists who believe in God outnumber those who do not. In a 1996 study, Larson and Witham found that only 14.5 percent of eminent scholars in Europe said that they had no definite belief in God.⁵ The sociologist Peter L. Berger, who, after being a strong advocate for the secularization thesis during 1960s, felt compelled to recant his earlier claims and acknowledges that “the world today, with some exceptions, is as furiously religious as it ever was, and in some places more so than ever. This means that a whole body of literature by historians and social scientists, loosely labeled the ‘secularization thesis,’ is essentially mistaken.”⁶ Similarly, sociologists Rodney Stark and Roger Finke suggest it is time to bury the secularization thesis: “after nearly three centuries of utterly failed prophesies and a misrepresentation of both present and past, it seems time to carry the secularization doctrine to the graveyard of failed theories and there to whisper ‘requiescat in pace.’”⁷

In light of all these failed predictions and current statistical facts, one cannot help but wonder where those early scholars and their many followers were mistaken, and why and how belief in God is still so high today all over the world. From the very beginning of the debate, the predictions of the secularization thesis were twofold: since the Enlightenment, a decline in both individual piety and religious influence in state affairs has been expected by the intellectuals. As far as the influence of religion in the social system is concerned, the predictions have turned out to be partially true. The church lost its once secure and absolute authority in state affairs and accordingly its power in society also diminished. Europe then went through a metamorphosis and apparently emerged as a giant power that had grown too fast to be caught up with. This temporal relationship made many scientists speculate that it was God who had handicapped human advancement on earth. Marx claimed belief in God was the opium of the masses, which made people sedated, numb, pacified, and too content with the world. For him, belief in God made people accept their lot in life and it caused a lack of drive to succeed in a world which was mortal and worthless compared to eternal life in heaven. Consequently, once the opium were taken away from the miserable men, human advancement and the evolution of society would follow.

This mentality that linked the birth of science and technology to the disappearance of God introduced science as the antonym of religion. As a result, the predictions that a decrease in belief in God would cause an increase in scientific advancement, while an increase in knowledge would bring about a decline in religion were supported by many. In other words, the assumption was that once the ignorance was eradicated, the opium would be unnecessary, and the secularization of the world would be imminent.

There was a major fallacy in their way of thinking as far as the origin of religion was concerned. Many thinkers assumed that religion and the idea of “God” were fabrications by the human species; they served as a vehicle for humans to make sense of the mysteries of natural and supernatural incidences. For them, religion was a solace for human suffering and powerlessness. According to their view, if God was nothing but a consolation in times of suffering, a safe harbor in times of powerlessness and scarcity, and a meaningful explanation for everything that happens out of our control, then God could just as well disappear and be replaced by knowledge and science. For instance, in the past it was understandable that when ancient tribes could not comprehend why their fellow tribesman had started to act strangely they had only one explanation: he was possessed by evil spirits.

The supporters of the secularization doctrine incorrectly imagined that once humankind had attained more information about neurotransmitters, hormones, and acquired the ability to interpret magnetic resonance imaging of brain waves, such advancements in science and technology should eradicate the need for supernatural explanations and also the need for god/s. Yet, it is apparent that science has not succeeded in replacing the belief in God in peoples’ lives.

In his famous book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Francis Collins, the director of the National Human Genome Research Institute since 1993, suggests that the main deficiency with these predictions was the fact that they did not take into account the kinds of questions we humans ask, such as “Why am I here?” “Where did I come from?” and “What happens after I die?” From an evolutionary perspective, on which the predictions about the end of religion and particularly belief in God relied, these existential questions were unnecessary since all existence and life in the universe started by chance after the Big Bang. Accordingly, there was no specific purpose to existence in this world and thereby no such possibility of a Hereafter. All human distress, fear and weakness in this regard were the result of ignorance, and thus only a full knowledge of the universe would be able to eradicate them. However, despite enormous advancements in science and technology, people in the modern world do not seem to be fully satisfied with such answers. It is evident that the great steps that have been taken to eliminate human ignorance have not been able to prevent high rates of suicide, depression, or new searches for meaning, even in the most developed countries.

One of the reasons why belief in God has survived, whereas the idea of the secularization of the world has not, lies in the fact that, contrary to the cold and cruel answers of the materialistic perspective which dooms people into nonexistence forever, belief in God attributes a purpose for life and existence in this world by virtue of the afterlife. Death, a primal fear of human beings, in this regard, is not non-existence: things do not go into nothingness, they rather pass from one sphere of reality to another; they go from the manifest world to the world of the unseen; they turn from the world of change and transience to the world of eternity. Moreover, since the material aspect of the world is transient and mortal it is full of pain for humans. We human beings are endowed with a desire for immortality and an intense love for existence.

It is belief in God that fulfills this desire and love for existence by guaranteeing an afterlife. In addition, belief attributes purpose and meaning to all beings and events on the earth. The denial of an afterlife turns human existence into worthlessness and human nature can never be satisfied by such emptiness. Yet, without belief in a merciful Creator, all beings are condemned to meaninglessness. This meaninglessness produces a feeling of loneliness for humans, as all calamities and acts that incur evil or harm are attributed to chance alone. Belief in God, however, saves human beings from loneliness; the fears and grievous sorrows that loneliness produces can only be eliminated through reliance on God’s mercy. That is, believers know that there is One who listens to them, who is aware of their most trivial needs, and whose power encompasses everything with His boundless mercy.

Contrary to the unkind path that non-belief offers to people, belief in God appeals to the spiritual side of humans, a side that has been widely ignored for so long by Enlightenment thinkers, as well as by modern intellectuals and scientists. While science helps people partially to understand the questions of how, it falls short in explaining why: why I am here, why things happen the way they do, why they all end. Because these existential questions are perennial and the solutions are beyond rational determination, people today, as in the past, will find those answers in another realm: the realm of the Unseen.

Notes

1. Tillich, Paul. (1957). Dynamics of Faith. New York: Harper & Row.

2. Stark, Rodney. (1999). “Secularization, R.I.P” Sociology of Religion. 60(3):270.

3. Hadden, J.K.1987. Toward Desacralizing Secularization Theory. Social Forces 65:587-611.

4. Greeley, A.M.1989. Religious Change in America.Cambridge,MA.:Harvard University Press.

5. Larson, E.J., and L. Withan.1997.Belief in God and immortality among American scientists: A historical survey revisited. Nature 386:435.

6. Berger, Peter L (1999) The Desecularization of the World. Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center.

7. Stark, Rodney and Roger Finke. 2000. Acts of Faith. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. P.79

In general, the most common approach in tissue engineering is to develop tools as needed. Physicians treat patients and define the requirements for a better cure. Then, biologists study the targeted problem and learn what the mechanism is that caused the failure. Later, chemists and materials scientists manufacture the tools needed to treat the problem. Finally, the tools are delivered to doctors to treat the patients. Thus, tissue engineering requires a good understanding of how body parts work and come into existence, and this involves precise and sensitive application. Precise, aware and regular study of the interactions involved in tissues and organs must be practiced by the researchers who are interested in developing techniques for the manufacture of potential body parts. One of the first scientific approaches used for tissue engineering is to simply inject the body with molecules, such as growth factors, which are known to promote organ formation.

The growth factors are naturally occurring proteins which are assigned for cell proliferation and differentiation. Different parts of the body require different types of growth factors to signal to the cells to multiply or to replace the cells which have died or have been damaged. For example, it has been discovered that bone morphogenic proteins are responsible for the beginning of bone cell reproduction. For someone with a fractured bone that can not heal on its own within a reasonable period of time, the injection of bone growth factors to the site can direct the body to where bone cells are needed to be produced to repair the fracture.

In more severe conditions, the body may not receive the signal only with a simple injection of the growth factors. In this case, there is a need for more intricate treatment. Another way to treat organ malfunction starts with the harvesting of cells from the patient. The harvested cells can be multiplied in an artificial scaffold to eventually be implanted into the wound site. Because cells inhabit a different world than we do, we need a way to speak their language. The artificial scaffold should provide everything a cell needs and be able to direct the targeted cells toward the desired purpose. Basic knowledge gained from biology can help us to design potential artificial environments for cells.

A critical challenge in tissue engineering is how to design and make the artificial scaffolds. The cells must be fed through the blood vessel and are grown in the scaffold by the body; the scaffold should be able to communicate with the cells and finally the scaffold should disappear when its mission has been completed. The best example of a perfect scaffold is the natural environment of the cells, the extracellular matrix (ECM). The ECM provides support and anchorage for the cells and regulates communication between cells. There are various biological signals found in the ECM that help cell survival. For example, proteins called collagens provide mechanical support for cells through adhesive proteins in the ECM and the handles on the cell surface, known as integrins. Cell adhesion is crucial for cell survival and proliferation. Growth factors are also found in the ECM for cell organization. Some growth factors promote blood vessel formation, which can provide nutrients for cells. Therefore, a simple artificial environment should include various biological signals found in the ECM.

Currently, there are natural and synthetic scaffolds that are being used to generate the optimal environment for cells. Natural polymers such as collagen, chitosan or glycosaminoglycans, and synthetic polymers, including polylactic acid, polyglycolic acid, polycaprolactone or self-assembled nanofibers, are some of the materials used or considered for scaffold production. Natural polymers can be obtained easily, however biological contamination is a concern since they are produced using components from animals or microorganisms. Synthetic polymers can usually avoid the problem of contamination. Sometimes the ability to process the polymers can be problematic. Researchers have developed self-assembled nanofibers to overcome the problems that arise with synthetic and natural polymers. These nanofibers are composed of small molecules which are programmed to come together under control and to form larger structures. The nanofibers in the solution can form a three-dimensional network and convert into a self-supporting gel which can encapsulate cells as an artificial scaffold. In general, small bioactive molecules can be conjugated to the self-assembled molecules or can be encapsulated in situ in the 3-D network of fibers.

One of the recent uses of tissue engineering is to replace tissue that has been damaged by cancer. Cancer surgery is one of the most challenging types of surgery in that the defective tissue must be reconstructed afterwards. Improvement in surgical technology gives the chance of transferring a tissue from different sites of the body but unfortunately most of the time it is not the same tissue, and does not have the same texture or function. Reconstructing a resected tongue or the feeding tube is possible with the use of skin from the leg or forearm. But this skin does not provide the normal mucosal function, so it does not enable taste or sense to be perceived in the same way nor does it produce mucus in the same way. Together with advances in tissue engineering surgeons have started using the tissue-engineered mucosa of patients to reconstruct the mouth and feeding passage defects, instead of using the skin from chest, leg or forearm skin. These clinical applications of tissue engineering are in their very early stages, but it would not be surprising if we were able to reconstruct a lost organ from a similar one in the future. It would be exciting to be able to replace the tongue of a tongue cancer patient with a brand new tongue grown from his/her own tissues produced in a laboratory. Tasting the same…sensing the same…moving and even articulating the same…instead of having a piece of meat from another part of the body…

Innovative and imaginative work which has been inspired by natural materials demonstrates how the treatment of organ malfunctions is feasible. Efforts in biotechnology to develop tissue-engineered products will benefit many people who are searching for a healthier life. Potentially, in the near future, tissue-engineered products will be more widely used to treat bone fractures, serious skin burns, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, and heart diseases. Before implanting the tissue-engineered products, it is vital that there be extensive testing of the materials to be used. Toxicology and efficacy studies should be performed on the materials to prevent damage to the original healthy cells, and the new cells and regenerated tissue must be compared to original healthy cells and tissue.

Mustafa Guler has a PhD in chemistry. He is currently a research associate at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. Joseph Coreman is a medical doctor at the Ohio State University Medical College, Columbus, OH.

References

• Khariwala SS, Vivek PP, Lorenz RR, Esclamado RM, Wood B, Strome M, Alam DS. Swallowing outcomes after microvascular head and neck reconstruction: a prospective review of 191 cases. Laryngoscope. 2007 Aug; 117(8):1359-63.
• Sauerbier S, Gutwald R, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Lauer G, Schmelzeisen R. Clinical application of tissue-engineered transplants. Part I: mucosa. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Dec; 17(6):625-32.
• Hotta T, Yokoo S, Terashi H, Komori T. Clinical and histopathological analysis of healing process of intraoral reconstruction with ex vivo produced oral mucosa equivalent. Kobe J Med Sci. 2007;53(1-2):1-14.
• Ratner, Buddy D. “Biomaterials Science – An Introduction to Materials in Medicine” Elsevier, 2004.
• Lanza, Robert P., Robert S. Langer, William L. Chick, “Principles of Tissue Engineering”, Academic Press, 1997.
• Alberts, Bruce, Alexander Johnson, Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, Peter Walter, “Molecular Biology of the Cell” Garland Science, 2002.

Today, the Western world is seen by many as the representative of freedom and democracy. How has freedom been understood and treated in the history of the West? To answer this question, we will go on a journey through history, in which we will restrict ourselves to continental Europe, focusing on different periods in terms of how freedom has been approached and used. Here, we basically define freedom as being free from suppression or obstacles which have deliberately been placed before an individual by others to impede said freedom.

In the Middle Ages, freedom was not relevant to the masses in Europe. Most people did not even dream of it, since inequalities in society were the norm. A person could not attain freedom, but some were born free. Freedom was a privilege inherited from the class that your family belonged to. Being born into the lower classes was a fate one had to accept. This limited concept of freedom based on social status was further acknowledged or legitimized by the dominant religious authorities, that is, the Christian clergymen. “Keep silent and obey the orders of the feudal lord; hope you will be rewarded in the next life” became the common prescription for the masses that kept them subjugated to and suppressed by the political authority. . In other words, if one was not of the upper-class, one could “freely” make a choice between the despotic order of the feudal lord and the in justice of the clergy, who were abusing the social role assigned to them as the unquestionable judges.

A breaking point in the stable intellectual line of the Middle Ages was certainly the Renaissance and the Reformation. Those who had the opportunity to study and read the works of the ancients directly, without the filtering of the Church, became aware of new directions for human thought. This current, propelled by these newly educated people, nurtured the idea of freedom of “thought” and “belief.”

The development of gunpowder and the cannon brought an end not only to the feudal-lords but also to the age. These changes reduced the importance of the skilled cavalry in warfare, which were supplied by the feudal lords to the kings, and in turn reduced the importance in the lords. Even well-fortified cities fell when faced by this immensely destructive force. Therefore, small feudalities had to unite, or else be erased. The strength of the state/king increased, while the lords’ sovereignty was reduced. Centralized authority became the dogma. Everything belonged to the monarch, including the authority to decide who had the freedom to do what.

Ironically, the concept of sovereign states was fortified through strong and able monarchies, which later produced the nation state. As the France of Louis XIV grew stronger, for instance, it started to dominate the surrounding territories. In its effort to support military campaigns, the powerful French state pushed forward the idea of a “French nation.” This new concept of nation superseded all local bases of identity, particularly, at the expense of religion.

Freedom under the shadow of capitalism

In the age of monarchy, everything was controlled and directed by a supreme state, the symbol of sovereignty. The idea of individuals with basic freedoms, such as freedom of thought or freedom of speech, was inconceivable as the state demanded complete obedience of its subjects. In other words, individual freedom would have been a threat to authority. Therefore, despite all the changes in the overall picture, the main component of society, the individual, was still overlooked.

While the feudal order became history with an alliance between the king and the rising bourgeoisie in towns and cities, in turn the bourgeoisie played a key role in introducing the concept of a state with limited powers. In the end, such limitations on the state meant greater freedom for the citizens.

With the new discoveries and inventions that led to industrialization, the bourgeoisie demanded more freedom. Its power was its wealth, which directed politics, its weapon was “reason,” which was used to challenge and abolish the monopoly of the Church on ideas, and its flag was “freedom for all.” For all? Could there really have been a chance of freedom for a person who could hardly make living? However, for the bourgeoisie, the answer was in the affirmative. To them, freedom was two-fold: freedom of thought and economic freedom, the core idea of a freely operating market. Both of these were held sacred and were considered to be closely intertwined. In this sense, the bourgeoisie, the primary agent of capitalism, was the first social agent to celebrate and pursue human liberty.

Demanding a market free of all kinds of controls was the fundamental idea of economic liberalism. In response to the concerns of justice, economic liberalism claimed that the invisible hand of the economy would balance out the inequalities in due time, provided that it was able to operate free of control. Although not everyone supported these notions of freedom, the poorer classes did ally with the bourgeoisie against one common enemy: the royalty. As the bourgeoisie’s power reached a critical stage they united with the lower class, overthrowing the king and holding a revolution. However, this was not a revolution for all of society. In fact, for some thinkers, all that the bourgeoisie had done was to present the old ideas in a new suit. The bourgeoisie set the bottom line of freedom at the possession of property. This was quite apparent in the constitution of France for example, where those who could pay a certain amount of tax were allowed to vote. In other words, freedom for all meant freedom for those who could afford it. One’s right was proportional to the tax one paid. If you did not have enough money, you had no right to be represented.

Freedom vs. justice

Certainly, the liberal understanding of freedom was far from pleasing to everyone. The lower class had no teacher at that time. They started slowly to become aware of Marx’s teachings, who claimed that the “evil capitalist system” was due to collapse. The new teacher of the lower class also preached to them that “history is the history of struggle between classes, and we are in the final round. We must win this battle, and begin a new life in a new world.” Thus, the socialist/communist notion of “social justice” grew stronger. The Marxist thinkers revealed the hidden realities of the society and gathered the working class around one goal, i.e., getting rid of the “evil capitalist system.”

This kind of interpretation of the new order was very attractive for some. It appealed to the angry masses and asked that they raise their voices in response. The Marxist theory dealt primarily with economic justice and the distribution of wealth. It spoke not of the “freedom of human beings,” but of the economic independence of the lower classes, for in Marxist thought human beings were “working animals.” As a solution, people’s future was closely tied to the dominance of the proletariat, who were seen to be the true owners of the wealth produced in a society. In this scheme of thought, individual freedoms were of secondary importance to the well-being of society.

Thus, one can say that the Marxist view of freedom was an abuse of freedom. In brief, what it said was this: Freedom is good as long as it gives us reasons to complain about the existing system and permits us to rebel against the bourgeoisie. After all, we are exercising our freedom to speak! But it is fundamentally problematic in that it erases the individuality of the person in favor of the group (the proletariat, the working class), whose existence is based only on abstract notions of materialism and historical determinism.

Multi-dimensional freedom for multi-dimensional individuals

After the age of ideologies, freedom today is understood more properly as a personal dimension of being human, a quality that is directly related to individuality. Despite many violations of justice, at least fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of travel, are protected by most democratic governments. The demands placed by political authority on people’s personal lives seem to be less controlling in democratic countries as compared to authoritarian ones. Can we then say that issues concerning freedom have been settled? Unfortunately not.

To resolve this matter, one has to think of humans as multi-dimensional beings. As we know, everything we experience in social life has a reflection in our internal life and vice versa. Laws and regulations address the social, political or economic aspects of life. What about our internal capacities that affect our decisions? Do we not have a strong attachment to our desires and impulses, which sometimes makes us act according to emotions instead of reason? If the aim of any theory is to guide us to true freedom, it must account for the inner dimensions of freedom. Since this guidance cannot be provided by any political or social means, each individual must strive to attain inner freedom by using the means available to him or her. We may start searching for this guidance by contemplating the meaning of our existence and what freedom really means in relation with our status in the universe. Perhaps, complete freedom is never attainable as all of us are connected somehow with each other and with the rest of the creation.

However defined, freedom is the fundamental requirement for the flourishing of the individual. Through much of the historical developments in the concept of freedom, there are two certain conclusions we can draw. First, freedom as a human condition has been ignored and has become subject to violations. Our history is full of examples that support this contention in which everything is expressed in terms of abstract-plural concepts. Remember our history books: Nations migrate, armies fight, states make peace, or civilizations clash. The individual human being, if not an exaggerated hero, is individually absent in history.

Secondly, freedom has prevailed as an intrinsically valuable notion for our existence. Several unpleasant examples in history witness that negligence or resistance to the use of this fundamental right only results in drastic changes that make it more valuable.

Ozgur tagla is a teaching assistant at the School of Arts&Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh.