The 300 to 500 sperms which strive to enter into egg meet with the cell layer (corona radiata) which is being serially positioned around the zona radiata. A liquid is secreted from this zona radiata which punctures the euchromosome¹ placed on tip of sperm. Each of various enzymes set free following the puncture of euchromosome is assigned to overcome a separate obstacle before the sperm. Duty of the hyaluronidase enzyme, for instance, is to puncture the outer cell layer (corona radiata) which is assigned to protect the egg. Resultantly, the sperm passes through this cell layer and sticks onto the zona radiata (zona pellucida). The quasi-trypsin dissolutive (proteolytic) enzymes are employed for overcoming the zona radiata. Only one or rarely two of the few sperms which stuck onto this zona radiata manages to penetrate into the egg. It has been estimated that plurality of sperms around the egg, contrary to their rarity, facilitates their entry into the egg.

The sperm penetrates into the egg with its tail but tail membrane stays outside. The protective membrane of the ovum (zona pellucida) starts diffusing calcium within the very first minutes of sperm’s penetration and resultantly, granules are released, receptors are exterminated and the egg becomes structurally transformed. Consequently, a thick layer is formed over the protective membrane (zona pellucida) for prevention of penetration of another sperm.

Following the sperm’s penetration into egg (cytoplasm), the “fusion” process starts. Fusion is the unification process of sperm and egg cells (pronuclei) each of which are separately containing 23 chromosomes. Thus, construction of a genetical library which is containing 46 chromosomes and being prerequisite of formation (creation) of a new human baby is completed. Afterwards, the first mitotic division gives way to a double-celled zygote and the embryo starts forming while settling into the secure base of the uterus. As the outcoming child is going to be a mixture, i.e., a genuine and particular blend of the genetic codes available in the inherited gene pool, he/she will have resemblance to his/her parents and thus to their reciprocal kins (paternal and maternal grandparents, uncles and aunts and etc.).

Prophet Muhammad and Genetics

Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, pointed in his various sayings and explanations to the fact that the baby in mother’s womb carries a number of genetic features (characteristics) which are being inherited from the parents:

When a Jewish person asked Him, “what is man created from?” he replied: “Man is created from a blend (mixture) of zygotes of both man and woman.” Then the Jew said: “Moses as well said the same before you.”²

Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, also shed light onto the fact of resemblance or inheritance of character by way of genes:

“Is bathing a must for women?” asked Umm Sulaim to the Prophet.

“Yes, it is a must when her seminal fluid outflows and seen,” he replied.

“Do women have wet dreams?” she asked.

“May God grant you goodness! How otherwise a child resembles to his/her mother?” He replied.³

….

As seen and understood by His above hadith (saying), He who was the great teacher of mankind was the first person who said that women do also see wet dreams.

He has also been the first person who articulated the concept of “dominancy,” which was not understood before 1850s.

He said:

“The child resembles to either side of the parents whose seminal fluid comes to the fore and surpasses the other’s in mother’s womb during the intercourse. If there is an equilibrium, then, resemblance is also in equilibrium for both sides.”⁴

“If, during the intercourse, seminal fluid of the man precedes and surpasses that of the woman, then, the child resembles to the father, and if semimal fluid of the woman precedes and surpasses that of the man, then, the child resembles to the mother.”⁵

“If seminal fluid of the woman surpasses that of the man, then, the child resembles to his/her maternal uncles, and, if seminal fluid of the man surpasses that of the woman, then, the child resembles to his/her paternal uncles.”⁶

In another one of His sayings, He points out to the fact that the recessive characters (features) in the grand ancestorial gene pool would dominantly and collectively emerge after following a couple of generations:

“A man having a blackish baby boy approached and said to the Prophet:

“I am suspecting my wife.”

“Do you have camels?” the Prophet asked him.

“Yes,” he replied.

“Then, how are their colors?” The Prophet asked.

“Red.”

“Is there any one with grey color among them?”

“Yes, there is.”

“Then, where did this grey color come from?” asked the Prophet.

“Presumably from a line of its ancestors,” the man responded.

“Here you are! This child of you is also presumed to be coming from a line of your ancestors,” the Prophet told the man.⁷

Dr. Arslan Mayda is a medical doctor at Sifa Hospital in Izmir, Turkey.

Notes and References

1. An euchromosome zone enriched by lysosome enzymes is noticed on stem of a mature sperm cell. The lysosome enzymes penetrate into the egg cell and impregnate it.

2. Ahmad Bin Hanbal, Aynee, Ramouz Al Ahadeeth, Kanz Al Ummal, Jami’ul Saghir

3. Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawoud, Aynee, Ahmad Bin Hanbal.

4. Muslim, Ibn Majah.

5. Bukhari, Ahmad Bin Hanbal.

6. Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawoud.

7. Abu Dawoud, Muslim, Ahmad Bin Hanbal, Ibn Majah.

Yet, despite all the attention devoted by academic observers, activists, and policymakers, progress in remedying these still endemic social problems has been limited, uneven, and all too reversible. Why have the efforts of an army of social scientists working over several generations not yielded more tangible progress in combating our most pressing social problems? In this essay, I argue that the lack of a coherent conception of human nature has contributed to the frustrating results of our attempts to advance human society through scientific inquiry. I suggest that greater understanding of the human spirit can contribute to the overarching project of improving the human condition that unites all of the social sciences.

Speaking broadly and simplifying vastly (as limited space necessitates), two meta-paradigms concerning human nature have guided much social science research in the past several decades. On the one hand, there is a rationalist paradigm that theorizes human beings as egoists rationally pursuing their self-interest. This understanding of human nature provides the foundation for the discipline of economics and has become increasingly dominant in political science. In emphasizing that actions follow a “logic of consequences” in which decisions are based on how expected outcomes will affect an individual’s utility, the rationalist paradigm does not consider morality an inherent dimension of human action. In this framework, people are portrayed as largely amoral, only taking normatively proper actions if doing so benefits them personally or if they happen to derive unusually high utility from virtuous behavior due to idiosyncrasies in character.

In political science, the assumptions underlying the rationalist paradigm lead to a rather pessimistic outlook on the likelihood of arriving at morally agreeable outcomes. For instance, there is no reason to believe that a dictator will stop employing violence against his own citizens just because the international community urges that it is the right thing to do; rather, such behavior will continue until the leader’s incentive structure changes, making political repression too costly to continue. However, characterizing people as rational actors need not entail such a bleak outlook. In economics, for example, there seems to be an almost axiomatic faith in Adam Smith’s notion that the rational pursuit of self-interest benefits the entire collectivity.

In contrast to the rationalist approach, there is a normative paradigm that conceives of human beings as primarily concerned with aligning their actions to standards of appropriateness for particular roles and identities in different social situations. While the rationalist paradigm thrives in economics and political science, the normative paradigm is most prevalent in sociology. From this perspective, people are less concerned with doing whatever it takes to achieve their aims than with determining which actions are prescribed for given circumstances and behaving accordingly. In this way, actors do what is perceived as right for its own sake, operating according to a “logic of appropriateness” rather than a “logic of consequences.” In a sharp contrast to the amoral egoists that populate rationalist models of the world, human actors in the normative paradigm are conceived of as fundamentally moral beings, deeply influenced by what their communities consider right and proper.

While acknowledging the potential for a gap between standards of appropriate behavior and the capacity to adhere to those standards in practice, the normative paradigm tends towards an optimistic estimate of the possibility of achieving morally desirable outcomes. Problematic behavior can be corrected through moral suasion based on clearly articulated normative standards, without necessarily appealing to the self-interest of deviant actors, as in the rationalist paradigm. For instance, pro-democracy international institutions might be able to socialize officials from authoritarian countries into valuing democracy for its own sake, transcending their rational inclination to perpetuate oppressive arrangements.

How can we reconcile these profoundly disparate visions of humanity in analyzing and attempting to remedy social problems? Many acknowledge that social action can follow both the rationalist “logic of consequences” and the normative “logic of appropriateness,” but social theorists have yet to construct a coherent framework that can explain when action might follow one or the other logic. Far too much energy has been expended in unproductive debates in which analysts draw on limited empirical findings to assert the superiority of their favored approach.

To be sure, both paradigms are intuitively plausible, and one can easily find cases that fit the predictions of each. But both approaches are incomplete, and unable on their own to account for the full range of human behavior. The rationalist paradigm offers no explanation for why discourses about norms and morality comprise such an essential part of everyday human experience, while the normative approach fails to account for the pervasiveness of anti-social and immoral behavior. But if we are neither the self-seeking sociopaths envisioned by the rationalist paradigm nor the perfectly socialized automatons imagined by the normative paradigm, then who are we?

I suggest that social scientific analysis and policymaking might be well served by drawing on conceptions of human nature that derive more from the inherited wisdom of religious traditions and less from the abstract deductions of contemporary theoretical paradigms. The perspective I advocate takes up a broad theme of the Abrahamic faiths – the universal corruptibility of the human spirit, beginning with the transgressions of the very first human beings in the story of the Garden of Eden. In other words, I argue that it is analytically useful for social science research to conceptualize human beings as sinners.

With this characterization, I suggest that people are highly aware of and concerned with the normative prescriptions of the various social groupings to which they belong, and typically act to uphold and reinforce these standards of behavior. However, as the fallible creatures that we are, we fall prey to a range of spiritual lapses that lead us to use to violate even our most sacred moral codes. Common-sense reflection on the historical record of human behavior can shed light on how our penchant for sinfulness expresses itself. We have shown that we disregard the lives of others in the pursuit of profit and power. We dehumanize and oppress those whom we perceive as different from ourselves. We grow comfortable in positions of wealth and influence, protecting our own standing against changes that would benefit the rest of society. We think only of our own short-term gain rather than our long-term responsibilities to those who will come after us. We are indifferent to the suffering of strangers. We break promises, tell lies, and act hypocritically. We take for granted and hurt the ones we love.

Of course, our propensity for sinful behavior does not mean that we are only capable of depravity. Indeed, most of the time we follow the moral standards of our communities in an unreflective, straightforward fashion. And we are certainly capable of deep compassion and heroic self-sacrifice. But our spiritual imperfection means that we all have an inherent potential to stray from a righteous path, especially during extreme conditions like warfare, political instability, poverty, and economic depression. This potential is universal and timeless, and exists within men and women, rich and poor, traditional and modern, educated and illiterate, believer and skeptic alike. The exact nature of our vices, and the extent to which they impact other people, might vary according to our social positions (a prince’s failings can cause greater harm than a pauper’s), but corruptibility is something we all share.

Imagining human beings as sinners makes sense of the paradoxical views of humanity offered by the rationalist and normative paradigms while overcoming their limitations. This perspective incorporates the normative paradigm’s insight that people care about upholding the standards of appropriateness of their communities, but sheds the naïve expectation that they will almost automatically abide by these standards. This perspective also accepts the rationalist paradigm’s premise that people often engage in aberrant, self-serving action. However, while the rationalist paradigm suggests that people pursue their own satisfaction without considering the normative implications of their behavior, the view of humans as sinners recognizes that people generally aspire towards decency, even if they are sometimes susceptible to moral breakdown. Eschewing firm a priori assumptions about people’s inclination towards normatively appropriate behavior, the spiritual paradigm I propose starts from acknowledging our demonstrated capacity for both upstanding and immoral behavior. A social science research program built upon such a vision of humanity would aim to investigate the social conditions under which people engage in different types of behavior – virtuous and vicious – and draw upon this knowledge to design policies that will better confront the most lasting and pernicious social problems.

An inadequate understanding of humankind’s spiritual character can lead to two types of problems that have plagued modern attempts to shape our societies for the better. First, we often craft policies that rest on naïve assumptions about human nature, and which could only work in practice if we were saints rather than sinners. For instance, a laissez faire approach to economic regulation stems from the notion that allowing people to freely pursue their economic self-interest leads the economy to thrive. But this position underestimates the extent to which economic actors, left unchecked, are prone to greedy or shortsighted behavior that can harm society as a whole. The current financial crisis resulted from the creation of high-risk financial instruments that led consumers to take on mortgages they could not afford and companies to over-invest in dubious mortgage-backed securities. These policies enriched the finance industry and expanded the ranks of homeowners in the short-term, but the bursting of the housing bubble led to an epidemic of foreclosures, a stock market crash, a drying up of credit, and a global economic recession.

The policy of abstinence-only sex education is another case in which the likelihood of virtue is overestimated. This policy relies on the sexual restraint of young people to reduce pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections among teenagers. Such programs have been found to be ineffective because they fail to appreciate the difficulty of resisting the temptation to engage in risky sexual behavior for even the most steadfast advocates of abstinence. These examples suggest that policies too dependent on the proper behavior of those involved will tend not to be very successful.

A second problem deriving from our inadequate understanding of human nature is our tendency to divide the world into rigid categories of those who are righteous and those who are wicked, often succumbing to the hubristic assumption that God is on our side. Rather than recognizing that we are all equal in our potential for moral failure, we forget our own sinfulness, with the ironic result that those most ostensibly committed to social progress along Enlightenment principles can be guilty of the most brutal inhumanity.

Idealistic political movements have frequently illustrated such a dynamic. The French Revolution, for instance, produced the Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789, proclaiming liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression to be natural rights. Just a few years later, Robespierre’s Committee for Public Safety launched a program of arbitrary executions to protect the revolutionary government from the perceived threat of internal enemies, an absurd blasphemy of the Revolution’s foundational principles. Similarly, the vanguard of the Bolshevik Revolution viewed itself as leading the world towards a communist future that would eradicate inequality and establish the conditions for universal human flourishing. Yet this project devolved into a paranoid police state that imprisoned and executed millions of kulaks, Cossacks, and other class enemies for the sake of the unquestionably righteous Revolution.

As casual observers of history, we tend to attribute such atrocities to the uncommonly evil character of the key figures involved: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao. But such horrors as chattel slavery, colonialism, the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, and the Darfur crisis are not simply the work of a single monstrous leader or a few bad apples. They require many hands, and arise from an all-too-human capacity to inflict harm on others, to be overcome with hatred, to turn a blind eye to suffering and injustice – in short, to be inhumane. The urge to dissociate ourselves from such evils is powerful, as we like to think of ourselves as good people, incapable of such savagery. But the history of human suffering is the story of allegedly good people doing terrible things to each other. Thus, we must accept any sin committed by another person as potentially one of our own.

Treading a righteous path – as individuals, as corporations, as nations – is difficult, but certainly not impossible. Bringing our aspirations for values like equality, liberty, and peace closer to fruition requires not just technical knowledge, but also attention to how the spiritual character of human beings shapes the implementation and effectiveness of policy initiatives. When we acknowledge the darker aspects of our nature, the design of policies becomes a matter of identifying and protecting against the sources of temptation we may face.

The structure of American political institutions might serve to illustrate a well-crafted policy in this regard. Wary of the concentration of power in the hands of any one entity, the drafters of American institutions dispersed authority among three distinct branches of government. While members of each branch have worked to enhance their own power, the separation of powers ensures an ongoing wrangling between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, the result being that no one branch can accumulate absolute authority. Instead of trusting political actors to refrain from power seeking, the founders anticipated the temptation to extend one’s reach and devised mechanisms to check that tendency. In this way, democratic rule has survived for over two centuries.

The modern social sciences offer an impressive array of techniques for acquiring systematic knowledge about human societies. But scientific knowledge will not lead the world on a linear march of progress if not coupled with an honest and accurate reckoning of human nature. Turning with humility to the insights into the human spirit offered by religious traditions may be the best way to appreciate and temper the shortcomings we have shared from the beginning.

P. Geoffrey Bakken is PhD candidate in Sociology at the University of Wisconsin.

There are many possible explanations for this, not least of which is the presentation of science and the use of reason in Islamic texts, but also sociological factors, such as different economic situations during the Middle Ages, and internal political structures. There is also the fact that the Qur’an simply doesn’t contradict scientific findings .

The Middle Ages (or the Dark Ages as they used to be known) of European civilisation extended between the 5th and 16th centuries, encapsulating the Islamic Golden Age spanning the 7th to 16th centuries. It was once thought that Islamic science during this time was little more than a translation of Greek conclusions, however there is now sufficient evidence to suggest that this was a scientific revolution in its own right, and it contributed greatly to the basis of modern scientific thought. Part of the reason science played such a key role in the Golden Age of Islam is surely because of the importance placed on it in Islamic texts. There are hundreds of references in the Qur’an related to human knowledge and contemplation, including the first command of God, instructing humanity to “read.” The hadith also contains hundreds of references the Prophet made to seek knowledge, including one instance of the him saying, “Seek for science, even in China” ; the significance of China being that it is the furthest known country to the Muslim Empire. There is a moral obligation for Muslims to seek knowledge; in fact, learning is often seen as a form of worship and a quest for spiritual perfection through knowledge. This surely acted as an incentive that enabled them to become the great scientific civilization they were during the Golden Age. The Renaissance, which followed the Middle Ages, could be described as the Western equivalent

There is nothing in the Bible to discredit specific scientific discoveries, though it also doesn’t encourage the scientific pursuit in the same manner as the Qur’an. The Bible does convey an ordered world in which science is not only possible but should tend towards the truth, but any such scientific commendation can also be levelled at the Qur’an.

What’s unique about the Qur’an, however, is that it is not as susceptible to the human fallibility excuse, in that it was written immediately after the Archangel Gabriel imparted the Revelation to Muhammad, it was arranged by Muhammad himself, and has remained unchanged since, at least when speaking of the original Arabic and not a translation. The areas of science explored in the Qur’an range greatly from astronomy to physics to biology, and all seem to be in well keeping with modern scientific findings.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the Qur’an does not contain any hardline indisputable science, however. The meanings of many of the Arabic words are subtle and open to interpretation, and different interpretations of the same passages have been used to support different scientific enquiries at different times.

The rapid expansion of the Muslim empire beginning in the 7th century brought great wealth and security, and this naturally led to great advancements in science and technology, similar to the Greek and Roman empires before them. Once an empire establishes itself and can comfortably support its population in terms of food and security, it can turn sights on its lesser problems, and attempt to solve them using its ingenuity, thus making great strides in science and technology. The West had, as already noted, become stagnant in these fields following the collapse of the Roman Empire. Europe was unified once more under the Catholic Church, but there was much animosity between the destitute working class and the self-interested ruling class. It was a time of prosperity for few, and the Muslim empire attracted great minds and became the hub of scientific achievement. Viewed in this context, the Islamic Golden Age is not so much a religious achievement as it is a cultural achievement of a burgeoning civilisation.

The contrast with the Western Renaissance is clear. Galileo, a friend of the pope and of the church, is the most famous example. Upon expressing his approval of Copernican theories, he was incarcerated for heresy. The pope famously rebutted Galileo’s arguments by stating that Galileo could not assert a scientific theory that contradicted the scripture unless it could be shown that God, in his infinite power, could not have brought it about that all the evidence in support of the theory existed and the theory itself not be true. This is of course an impossibly high standard of truth for science to achieve, and furthermore put in jeopardy all scientific knowledge. Galileo was, however, purposefully antagonistic towards the church, and may have done more harm, especially for the relationship between religion and science, than he is usually given credit for. Rene Descartes was on the verge of publishing a similar paper in support of Copernicus, but suppressed it upon seeing the treatment that Galileo received. During this time, it was required that all work be approved by representatives of the church before it was published in order to avoid the publication of any heretical material. This was catastrophic for any scientific theory that may have contradicted the interpretation of the scripture as advocated by the Church. Islamic science avoided this problem. While the Church, as a figure of authority, advocated a particular interpretation of the scriptures and had in the past exercised this authority with punitive measures such as excommunication and incarceration, Islam had no centralised authority with the same level of control. The closest analogous administration is the caliphate, whose role has changed over time, but never gained the overarching power of the Christian church. This could well be due to the Muslim Empire being founded by many small tribes with Bedouin roots, and city states, who had no history of being subject to a greater authority. Also, due to their disparate nature, both culturally and geographically, such an overarching authority was a logistical impossibility. Furthermore, the legitimacy of any one caliph was always controversial; the most divisive split of course being between Sunni and Shi’a Muslims, the former believing Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s father-in-law, was his rightful successor, while the latter preferring his cousin and son-in-law Ali ibn Abi Talib. Such disagreement continued and constantly threatened the supreme power of the caliphate, despite Muhammad’s assertion that Muslims should fulfil oath of allegiance to only one caliph. This disagreement in turn led to a lack of a single ruling authority, and a lack of one single interpretation being enforced across the empire. Often, the interpretation of the Islamic texts varied from community to community. Further supporting a lack of enforcement was the Qur’an. “There is no compulsion in religion” can be interpreted both as a decree of tolerance to other religions, and also a decree of tolerance within Islam itself. This aspect of religious tolerance must surely have played some part in the ability of Muslims to abide alternate interpretations of their text, and also rationalise discrepancies between the text and the constantly evolving hypotheses of science. Without an authority to push an anti-scientific agenda, the Muslim Empire became a hub of scientific enquiry which, along with an unusual tolerance for religion, attracted scientific minds from across the entire region.

There is another hypothesis that should be noted, which is that the view of Christianity and science being in direct opposition to each other is unwarranted. After all, modern scientific prosperity grew out of the Christian West, and it can also be argued that without the fundamental view that nature is uniform and has an observable order and organisation, provided initially only by religion, science would never have even had a grounding on which to start. Perhaps religion and science are not as diametrically opposed as they seem, and their previous confrontations have been due to misunderstandings that are not fundamental to their positions. While it is undoubtedly true that Christianity and science have in the past had a tolerant, if not a symbiotic, relationship, it is nevertheless the case that for quite some time the two held hostile policies in regard to each other, and these policies have resulted in animosity that exists even to this day. This animosity is not a necessity, however, as demonstrated by Islam.

It seems it can then be concluded that the roots of the Islamic propensity for science are a product of both Islamic texts and sociological factors, such as a lack of a centralised authority pushing a particular interpretation of the text. The search for knowledge which the Qur’an advocates must surely have helped initiate this scientific resurgence, but it was also the ability of the Muslim population to interpret the findings of the scientific community (and it should be noted that Muslim and scientific groups were by no means mutually exclusive) in a way that didn’t conflict with their theological beliefs which allowed science to flourish. The Golden Age of the Muslim Empire should stand as an example to all cultures that science and religion can coexist, and not just tenuously, but harmoniously.

Stephen Pant is a freelance writer in Australia. He has a degree in philosophy and history from Monash University, Melbourne.

Notes

1. H.R. Turner. 1997. Science in Medieval Islam: An Illustrated Introduction, Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 5-9.

2. George Saliba. 2007. Arabic Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance, Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.

3. A.H. Syed, Islam and Science, New Delhi, 2003, p. 111.

4. Ibid.

5. Maurice Bucaille. 1978. The Bible, the Qur’an and Science: The Holy Scriptures Examined in the Light of Modern Knowledge. Indianapolis, p. 92.

6. Syed. 2003. p. 116.

7. Syed. 2003. p. 115.

8. F. M. Donner. 1981. The Early Arab Conquests. Retrieved 16/5/2009 from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/donner.html

9. John Cottingham. 1991. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Cambridge: CUP, pp. xi–xiii.

10. Sachiko Murata, William Chittick. 1994. The Vision of Islam. New York, p. xxiv.

11. A. H. Siddiqui. Translation of Sahih Muslim. 2007, 20:4543.

12. Qur’an 2:256.

13. Syed. 2003. p. 112–113.

In the mountains, people use mason jars for everything: canning, flower vases, gifts, moonshine, drinking glasses, treasure jars – the list goes on and on. There’s not much a good old mason jar can’t do for us country folk. Believe me, a person has never had a good glass of tea until they have drank it from a mason jar full of ice, with a slice of lemon shoved down in it. It is m…..m….good!

The treasure jar is the one I want to write about. The name treasure jar explains itself. It’s very simple. People decorate the jars and then put items in them that they treasure themselves. The treasure can be a simple recipe passed down generations through the family, or it can contain rare old coins worth a fortune. It all depends on what the person holds dear to them in their own hearts. Once the jars are filled, they are given as gifts.

When I was a child, I would catch lightning bugs and put them in an old mason jar and set them on a table beside my bed. I would watch them light up until I fell asleep. It was a “simple” but “great” treasure in my young eyes. But no matter how hard I would pray for them to live forever beside my bed, they would always die.

I have thought about it a lot, and if I only had seventy-two hours to live, this is what I would do: First, I would buy five-hundred mason jars in different sizes, then I would put my “prized” possessions in them. Next, I would distribute them in unique ways so that the people getting them would surely smile. Remember that where I’m from, “prized” possessions do not have to have monetary value. They only have to mean something special to the one giving the jars.

The people that I would give my jars to would be chosen very carefully because, after all, I’m giving away “my” prized treasures. The first jars made would be for my four grandchildren. I have three boys and one girl, ages running from newborn to age seven. In my granddaughter’s jar I would put some pictures of us together, as well as a recording of my voice with a special message just for her. I would also add my pearls and ask her to wear them on her wedding day. That way a part of me will be with her on her special day. I would arrange for the jar to be given to her on her wedding day. The boys’ jars would also contain a recording of my voice and some pictures as well , but one would contain a watch given to me by my father. Another, a case knife I’ve had for years. The last one would contain an old engagement ring of mine, so that whoever receives it can give it to his true love someday. I would want their jars given on special days as well, such as their senior graduation or eighteenth birthday.

The next jars would go to my son and daughter. My daughters jar would contain the rest of my jewelry, and then I would share with her my whole life story. I would tell her things about myself that I have never told anyone. I think she would be very surprised about some of the things she would learn. I believe some things are better left unsaid until the time is right to share them.

My sons jar would contain some old coins that belonged to his father and all of my old love letters written by his father when I was only fifteen years old. I would also include the poetry and songs I’ve written over the years that no one else has ever seen or heard.

The next thing I would do is take twenty of the jars and write down all of the hopes and dreams and goals that I had, but never got to accomplish. I would release them into the river along with a note to those who found them that would say,” live everyday like it’s your last, because it may well be.”

The rest of my jars would travel across the seas, to other states, and hopefully to the White House. Some jars would be painted red, white and blue and sent over seas for the men and women serving our country. Their jars would contain thank-you notes for their brave gestures, and also a lucky penny in each one. Next, I would love for one of my jars to make it to the president and his family. In their jar I would place inspirational notes for them to read to lift them up when times seem really hard. I would also explain how happy I was to have lived long enough to see a historical moment in time. I would also include two handkerchiefs that were embroidered. one would say, “MR. PRESIDENT’ and the other one would say, “FIRST LADY”. The only way I can think of to get it to the president is to go to the media, so that’s exactly what I would do.

Finally, the rest of my jars would be divided in half and shipped to The Shriners Hospital and to The ST. Judes Hospital, because they treat very sick children for free. The jars would be decorated and filled with small toys and trinkets along with an inspirational note to encourage them to keep on fighting until they find a cure for their diseases. I would want the jars to be given to the children as soon as possible, because these children are fighting for their lives, and some may not make it.

I believe my jars would bring peace to others as well as myself because they would know they were on my mind in my final moments of life. It would also bring me peace to know that I left a part of myself all over the world. And that’s something special, considering I’ve always lived in the mountains and have lived a very simple life.

Once my goal was achieved, I would spend time in prayer. I would pray for my loved ones as well as myself because I would not tell them I was going to die, because I want to remember them with a happy, joyful spirit, not with a sad broken one. But if, for some reason, I was given more time to live, I would do the things I’ve always wanted to do, like write a book, record the songs I’ve written, and I would love to be able to travel to places I’ve never been to.

Life is short, and time passes quickly, but I want to live. But just like the lightning bugs I caught as a child, I will eventually die. Life and Death walk together hand in hand. Life screams, “LIVE!” and Death screams, “YOU BETTER LIVE BECAUSE I AM COMING AFTER YOU SOONER THAN YOU THINK!”

Belinda Sturgill is a freelance writer. She lives in McRoberts, KY, and she can be reached at belindasturgill12@yahoo.com. With this essay, she won an honorable mention in The Fountain Essay Contest 2010.

Introduction

Human beings have wrestled with questions about the origin of our existence and the fabric of our universe for thousands of years. This questioning formed the discipline of cosmology. Dr. Natarajan explores the nature of our world and shares her perspectives about how new scientific discoveries are reshaping our understanding of the universe and our place in it. Until very recently, the universe had been considered a vast empty space. But the Dark matter theory states that the universe is not empty, but rather filled with an invisible matter. As new mysteries unfold, Dr. Natarajan points out that it is our fundamental human curiosity that leaves us no choice but to explore the universe and how we fit into its grand picture.

M&B: Dr. Natarajan, you work on dark matter in the universe. What is the theory?

It turns out that the bulk of the matter in the universe is not made of ordinary atoms that you and I or the universe that we know and experience is made of, but instead made of this mysterious particle. Ninety percent of all the matter in the universe is dark matter, and we believe this is a set of particles that was created very early in the universe. These particles do not have charge, but they have mass. Since they dominate the mass of the universe, it turns out that they really form the scaffolding in the universe around which all galaxies, stars, and so on, form. They are sort of the basis or the framework within which normal atoms actually cool to form star galaxies, and then have generated us.

M&B: What is the evidence for their existence?

The reason dark matter remains a mystery, – although there is incontrovertible evidence for the existence of dark matter – is the fact that you only detect it indirectly. What I mean by that is you detect its presence because it has mass, and since it doesn’t have any charge it doesn’t couple to any radiation. So you don’t see radiation in any wavelength in the electromagnetic spectrum: no X-rays, no gamma rays, no visible light, nothing. But since dark matter has mass, it aggregates gravitationally, so they feel gravitational pull towards each other and they cluster. It’s the clustering of the dark matter, the fact that it gets compact, that we detect the effects of dark matter.

M&B: What happens near the regions where dark matter clusters? In your research papers you use the bending of the light rays. How do you observe it?

The primary evidence is the gravitational bending of light produced by these aggregates of dark matter. The universe is really composed of a smooth distribution of dark matter, with a lot of clump regions where this dark matter has aggregated, and then enabled the formation of galaxies. The presence of these large amounts of dark matter causes light from background galaxies coming towards us to bend. The actual shapes of galaxies that are behind a big clump of dark matter, which is along our line of sight, are actually distorted when we see it. The dark matter in general is smoothly distributed everywhere in the universe. But there are these particular regions that are denser. So we can look at regions in which the dark matter is not so densely distributed, look at the shapes of undistorted shapes of galaxies, and then use that to infer how much distortion we’re actually seeing when we see a lump, and infer its existence from the distortion. Because the strength of the distortion is directly proportional to the mass, you can directly infer how much mass there is between us and those objects.

M&B: Is there evidence other than the bending of the light rays?

The other evidence eludes to the fact that dark matter actually gives the basis for the formation of stars and galaxies. If you look at the motions of stars and galaxies, you find that, unlike the solar system, if you look at the velocities of the planets in the solar system as a function of distance from the sun you find that it’s falling. So the planets in the inner regions are moving very fast; they feel the gravity of the sun much more strongly than the outer planets, which are not actually moving as fast. So if you plot the velocity from the center or from the sun outwards in the solar system, the velocities are falling. Whereas if you go to a galaxy and you do the same experiment, you look at stars at different radii and you try to see what their speeds look like. They are speeding up as you go outwards. And the only way they can do that is there is something that is sitting outside the galaxy that holds it up as it were, and has gravity. And it turns out that our current picture is that most galaxies have very extended dark matter halos. The key point is that there’s a lot of dark matter sitting outside the galaxy well beyond where we see the stars.

The other compelling lines of evidence for the existence of dark matter come from larger scale observations of the universe. One of the leftovers of the big bang or relic of the big bang is this microwave background radiation that is detected today in the universe. It was a very hot radiation that has cooled with the expansion of the universe, and we are bathed in it. I mean it’s everywhere, in every direction, and measurements of the directional dependence of the microwave background shows that it’s very uniform. But in one part it’s anisotropic, so there are cool zones and hot zones in the sky. On very small scales we see these cold and hot spots. And these and isotropy’s in the microwave background are exactly predicted by this model, the cold dark matter model, which I said you know is postulated on the very early generation of the universe and these dark matter particles.

M&B: So we know that they exist. But what is their essence? What are their properties?

This is still a mysterious kind of beast. In fact, we don’t know the nature, but it appears that it’s collisionless. It’s very counterintuitive. That’s one of the things I find fascinating about the fact that it is so counterintuitive. These particles are actually collisionless. What that means is that when two dark matter particles approach each other, they pass through each other, they don’t actually bounce off of each other, so these particles don’t collide, which means they don’t have pressure, because pressure is generated by collision. So they are pressureless particles that have mass. Gravity holds them together, but they don’t actually collide.

So a current understanding of dark matter is that it’s definitely generated very early in the universe and that it clusters very strongly and it’s distributed on very different scales in the universe, so there’s like a smooth background and there are lots of clumps on top of it and so on.

M&B: As far as the mass of Dark Matter how much mass are we talking about? If there is no clustering, something like in the volume of the earth, for example, how much total dark matter mass do we have?

Well I guess the thing is at the position of the earth and at the position of the sun from the center of our galaxy. We are not really dominated by dark matter anymore, so dark matter at that radius doesn’t constitute significant portion of the mass. We are bathed in it, but the density is quite low. It’s at the innermost part of our galaxy where the density is very, very high, so we actually expect that the inner most regions of our galaxy is a very complicated, violent place where not only do you have a black hole which we know exists. This is a black hole that is not made of dark matter. This is a black hole that has gobbled gas and grown to about a million times the mass of the sun, and which is sitting at the center and it creates a very violent place for stars because it can rip them apart and so on. And this whole system is sort of embedded in this very, very dense region full of dark matter.

M&B: How is your everyday work? Where do you get data about the light rays coming near the regions with high Dark matter density?

A: I’m a theoretical person and what that means is that I actually build models but models that are guided by observations. The theory has transformed in the past 10 to 15 years because of the amount of data that technological progress has given us.

For example, the Hubbell space telescope has really transformed the kind of modeling that can be done. So I actually use data that other people have procured. They’ve cleaned it up and they give it to me. These are very distorted images of background galaxies whose shape has been distorted because of the huge amounts of dark matter that is contained in a cluster of galaxies.

M&B: The bending of the light rays is predicted by the general relativity theory. Is it what you use for your calculations?

A: It’s a beautiful theory. I think that people really have understood the iconic status of Einstein. What is most fascinating about him for me is the profound insights that he had of such despaired phenomenon. There was a way in which he was able to see connections and synthesize. You know the whole understanding that the geometry, the fate and the contents of the universe ought to be linked is a profound insight. And I think you know it’s incredible that he enabled, you know, his mind enabled him to formulate it in the way that he did, which has allowed people like me to use general relativity and the sort of elegance of general relativity because of how simple it is in fact to apply and test.

M&B: This looks like an intriguing line of work?

I want to stress that this is a particularly wonderful time for cosmology. It’s a particularly special time. I don’t want to use the sort of often abused golden age as it were, but it’s the confluence of technological progress with the kind of data that we can obtain and the level of understanding that we have built up. This is a very special time to be doing this kind of work. And while the mystery of what dark matter might be made of, you know, it may or may not get solved in my lifetime.

M&B: If you want to describe your work, what term would you use?

In a more descriptive way, I guess. What I really do is I build a story line. I build a story line for the universe. I mean, I build a story of the sequence of events of how a structure forms and assembles. The key there is that you are guided, you have a few snapshots, so you have a bit of data, but then you have to extrapolate and you make some predictions. The goal of the kind of work that I do is to make predictions, and have them be taken seriously, to either be falsified or shown to be true, and what’s exciting about this particular time is that people can falsify your theories or your models in a very short time.

M&B: Isn’t it interesting that we can actually make a story out of universe?

Well, I mean, I think that what is fascinating, and this is a personal view, what is fascinating about cosmology is the… you know it’s mystical and it’s mysterious at the same time and it’s highly abstract. It’s not intuitive because the scale that I’m working with in terms of distances, masses, and energy are just unfathomable. So there’s a real irresistible pull for certain kinds of people to do this kind of work. And I think the universe is a pretty good subject for a narrative because of the range of phenomena that occur in it. This is possibly why in all ancient civilizations there is some notion of cosmogony and this idea of fascination with where we came from. I don’t want to sound arrogant by saying that it’s the fundamental question, but you know it’s an inescapable question for anybody to ponder where we came from.

M&B: Is there a sense of awe that motivates you in your studies?

There is a sense of wonder that the universe generates and I think that you know personally for me I’m a bit of an adventurist, and I think if I can imagine myself, if I had been born 200, 300 years ago I would have been one of those explorers. And I think there are people like that amongst us always, who want to explore in different ways. I mean, there are some people who want to explore via music. And there are frontiers that they want to break through in music, and they have the creativity to do that. And I think that for a lot of us who are doing science, and cosmology in particular, there is a sense of exploration, there’s a sense of examining or grappling with things that are really at the limits of our capabilities in a way.

M&B: In some ways one of the most important fruits of the process and coming along it’s our imagination. And the human imagination is also a part of the universe.

Absolutely. It is an inescapable part of the universe and what is fascinating is the idea that we have the capability to even contemplate the origin of the universe given that we are a part of the universe.

M&B: Many people approach science in a utilitarian way and this is not what you are doing.

I think that the fact that it is not utilitarian is precisely what attracts me to it. I think it is the other side of the coin of this, which is why we probably aren’t as well funded and we ought to be better funded than we are, because this is such a fundamental human curiosity. There is enormous public interest in what we do and the level of funding that we have does not reflect that. For instance, obviously medicine is very critical. It’s critical to our existence. But the disparity in how they are funded and how the pure sciences are funded is sort of disturbing. Because I think as a culture, as a world, we can afford to indulge in understanding basic sciences partly because there are spinoffs from all the work that we do. It is unpredictable, and I think that is what’s fascinating. There are no guaranteed benefits to human kind and society today that cosmologists can bring. However, they satisfy this hunger for knowing and going beyond, you know, satisfying your hunger and thirst on a day to day basis.

Mustafa Tabanli is a producer at Ebru TV. He conducted this interview for Emmy Award winning television series Matter&Beyond.

Bio

Dr. Priya Natarajan is a Professor of Astronomy and Physics at Yale University, and an Associate at the Dark Cosmology Center, which is part of the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Her research interests include cosmology, gravitational lensing, and black hole physics. She earned a B.A. degree in physics and mathematics at M.I.T. and her doctorate at the Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge in England, where she was a member of Trinity College and elected to a Title A Research Fellowship that she held from 1997 to 2003. She is currently on leave from Yale to take up her Guggenheim Fellowship. She is deeply invested in the public dissemination of science and is currently a member of the Science Advisory Board for the public television series NOVA.

http://www.astro.yale.edu/priya/

We are three pairs of large glands that secrete into the mouth through canals and hundreds of very small glands around the throat. The large glands in front of the ear area are called the parotid glands, the glands under the chin are called the submandibular glands, and the ones under the tongue are called the sublingual glands. The parotid glands secrete saliva from the sides of the upper molar teeth, the submandibular glands from the front under the tongue, and the sublingual glands from many openings in the mouth’s base. There are also many more salivary glands in your inner cheeks and lips, and in all other wet spots in your mouth and throat.

Every sugary and starchy food you eat must first interact with our secretion in order to be digested. For this, an enzyme called ptyalin has been placed within us. But for this enzyme to work properly you must chew your food well. Also, you shouldn’t eat anything that is too hot or too cold, or anything that could change the pH (acidity) level of your mouth. Otherwise, this enzyme cannot function correctly. We produce an average of about 1000 milliliters (one liter) of secretion every day; however, we have the capacity to produce 1.5 liters of saliva per day.

Sometimes, the calcium in our enzymes may precipitate and form tartar due to acidic foods. Tartar can sometimes block our secretion canals. When you eat something, saliva production accelerates; but if our secretion canals are blocked by tartar, then the saliva cannot flow. This causes infection accompanied by severe pain and swelling. If our canals aren’t completely blocked, we may swell a little while eating, but we will slowly deflate after a while. Microbes can reproduce easier in accumulated saliva that cannot flow, thus causing severe pain and swelling. Our most frequently seen infection is the one that makes the parotid glands swell up, and is called the “mumps”. Even though it is seen more frequently in children, it may also be observed in adults. The swelling of both of the parotid glands is more frequent in alcoholics.

The thiocyanate ions that have been put in our saliva secretion kill the bacteria in your mouth by breaking them apart. In addition, lysozyme enzymes attack and kill bacteria in your mouth while digesting food remains to prevent the bacteria to feed and reproduce. Hungry bacteria perish more easily. Our infinitely merciful Lord put special proteins called anticorps in our saliva to prevent many diseases that can enter from the mouth before they develop. These anticorps act like special agents that attack and destroy bacteria. If we don’t secrete enough saliva, ulcers will develop in your mouth frequently. If they last long enough, they will get infected and also cause tooth decay.

The control of our secretion is connected to an area that includes the appetite center in the brain stem through the involuntary nervous system. When you smell or taste foods you like, we immediately start secreting saliva as a reflex. When you come across foods that you don’t like, or when you get scared or excited, we slow down saliva production, again reflexively. Suspects in the past used to be given a handful of rice to swallow, with the thought that the real culprit would not be able to swallow them, because the excitement caused by the feeling of guilt would cause his/her mouth to dry.

Diabetes, which is a systemic illness, also has a negative effect on our functioning. Diabetes presents itself with drying of the mouth, along with excessive intake of water, and the frequent need to visit the restroom. One type of rheumatoid arthritis may also cause dry mouth and dry eyes together with joint pain.

As you see, Peter, I’ve briefly explained to you how invaluable and necessary your saliva is. I have not even mentioned our histological and anatomical structure, which resembles a bunch of grapes. I believe you can imagine how each and every one of my gland cells is like a perfect biochemical factory. You wouldn’t relate all these to your mouth being wet for no reason, would you?

Irfan Yilmaz is a professor of biology in Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.

The media continues to influence our lives with an ever growing capacity, for it is no longer solely in print form and thus commands a much larger potential of accessibility in a much shorter span of time and space. For many, the print edition still offers the best experience of the news but with a much smaller frequency, velocity, and flexibility. Such an influence that comes along with the amount of exposure and yet instant mutability of new media forms brings up concerns about the “values” that set the main guidelines for this power and change in media outlets. This was our main topic of discussion this past March and April in Singapore, Jakarta, Melbourne, Sydney, Kuala Lumpur, and Shah Alam. We are thankful to local organizers in these cities for their cooperation. We are especially indebted to Professor Radhi al-Mabuk from the University of Iowa and Professor Jon Pahl from The Lutheran Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, who generously spent their time with us during this tour and gave presentations in each of these cities on our behalf. You will find in this issue brief notes and photos from the “Media and Values” panels, in addition to two other The Fountain Talks events in Austin, TX and Manhattan, NY. We would like to offer our appreciation to the local organizers of these events. For more information, please visit www.fountainmagazine.com.

“An Ardent Prayer” leads the current issue. It is the prayer of a painful heart filled with sorrow for our weakness in responding to the blessings bestowed on us; a heart that is concerned with the troubles of our society and yet hopeful for the divine mercy as he prays to be treated not according to our distance from Him, rather in light of His proximity to all of His creation.

“My Treasure Jars” comes from a lifetime resident of the Appalachian Mountains. Belinda Sturgill shares with us a very thoughtful piece on what a woman, a mother, and a grandmother can leave behind as a legacy to her family, to her nation, and to humanity. This is an award-winning essay from The Fountain Essay Contest of 2010.

Our interview with Dr. Priya Natarajan from Yale University is another “treasure jar” in this issue. She describes her job as “building a story line for the universe.” Who else other than a cosmologist could dare to offer such a description of her work? Or perhaps we should put the question the other way around: who on the face of this earth does not want to learn the story line of the universe?

The place of some individuals in altruistic work cannot be denied; however, individuals are not all there is to this work. Personalities are important, on the one hand, for the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is a personality and God commanded us to become bound to him. The most important factor in this is virtue. People become tied to others because of their virtue. For example, if it were not for Abu Hanafi, we would not know the Hanafi school of thought. For this reason we have a heartfelt tie. In the same way, someone from the Shafii school is tied to Imam Shafii, a person from the Maliki school is bound to Imam Malik and someone from the Hanbali school is tied to Ahmad b. Hanbal.

Just as virtue is a means for connection among people, everyone’s applauding it is a sign of appreciation. Yes, as an expression of appreciation, it is necessary to salute those who enlighten humankind. This is our duty. However, if the person who is saluted sees the situation as connected to himself, then he has attributed a partner to God.

In a hadith the Messenger of God says, “Let the person who awaits the salute of others prepare his place in Hell.” For example, you need to stand up when your teacher comes to your side. However, if your teacher wants and expects others to stand up, then he is at a loss. In fact, one day drawing attention to the sensitivity of this matter, the Prophet said to the Companions who stood up for him, “Don’t stand up when I come upon you as others do (who stand up to exalt their master)!” Of course this is the refined manner of a great person or, in other words, the attitude a great person should take. It is our responsibility to behave respectfully to them in spite of this kind of wish.

Another aspect of the matter is that good works, which require full, comprehensive, and strong support, should not be built on personalities. People in service to others should establish agreement and accord among themselves and in view of their successes they should say, “God is bestowing all of this on our collective body.” They should convince their egos of this because the blessings coming to them come as a result of their coming together.

Meanwhile they should cast from their minds the thought, “If such and such a person leaves this circle, it will give harm to our group.” For if a cause is really for God, no one can give harm to His cause by leaving the circle. Consequently, becoming tied to certain individuals and knowing everything to be a result of their efforts within the understanding, “Our group will disintegrate and disperse,” is contrary to Islam’s pure and clear belief. In order for the matter to be better understood, I would like to give one or two individual examples:

It is not possible to imagine a person who could love the Blessed Prophet as much as Abu Bakr. In fact, in one hadith the Messenger of God expresses this truth, “When everyone denied me, he affirmed me.” Ali expressed Abu Bakr’s love and attachment to the Prophet as follows: “When it was time for the Prophet of God to go, no one had the courage to go with him. Abu Kuhafa’s son (i.e. Abu Bakr) stood up. When everyone was making suggestions in the apostasy events, he mounted his horse and said, ‘I will follow the Prophet’s path even if I am alone.’”

We see that although he loved the Messenger of God this much and never left his side for a moment, Abu Bakr was not at Ali’s side during the Prophet’s funeral. For at that moment there was a more important matter; achievements of the Prophet could fall apart, some could sow discord among Muslims and irreparable division could occur.

Just at that moment Abu Bakr immediately appeared and said, “Whoever worships Muhammad should know that he has died. Whoever believes in God should know that He is the All-Living and the Self-Subsisting.” When he recited the verse, “Muhammad is no more than an apostle. Many were the apostles that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will you then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God. But God, on the other hand, will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) in gratitude,” (Al Imran 3:144) Umar, who reflected the general feeling, would say, “(Upon Abu Bakr’s recitation) I felt like that verse was just revealed. Abu Bakr warned us.” Later, as is known, very conscientious believers who grasped the Messenger’s cause well, like Abu Bakr, Umar, and Abu Ubayda, gathered at Bani Saqifa and resolved the matter of caliphate there.

All Companions loved the Prophet very much and all were bound to him from the heart. Actually there is no harm in such a tie. However, seeing the message he brought as tied to him and thinking that everything is finished when he left is wrong.

We also see this portrait of consciousness that Abu Bakr displayed in Umar’s time as well. Halid was the commander of Caliph Umar’s army. When he rode his horse over Persia, he demolished all of Persia’s forces. When he rode over the Roman Empire, he destroyed its walls as well and showed an unequaled military genius.

Umar discharged this great commander and gave the following reason for it: “Halid! God knows I love you very much. But the people are attributing victories to you. But I know that God is bestowing these victories. For this reason, I am relieving you of your duty.” After Halid was removed from duty, the victories continued and the people understood that the victories were from God, not Halid.

Just as in the past, today there are those who fall into this mistake and attribute matters to individuals. Whereas, just as conquests in Islam continued after the Prophet’s death, conquest in the spiritual field always continued. For example, Abd al-Qadir Gilani and Shah Naqshiband have died, but their followers have continued until today.

Bediuzzaman, the great thinker of our time, died, some viewed things as if everything was over. However that great man said, “While I am an individual in this life, when I am under the ground I will be like an ear of corn. In comparison to service to the faith appearing in one place, after my death it will appear in perhaps one hundred places.”

Again this same great man gave us this yardstick on this subject. He once said that his students confused the real cause with the apparent cause when they said, “If our teacher had not come here, we would not be learned.” Bediuzzaman continued that he would do the same confusion, “I once was saying that if there had been no one holding a pencil like these brothers, how could a half-literate person like me serve this cause (and produce books)? Later I understood that after giving you the sacred blessing by means of a pencil, God bestowed success in this service upon me. Two things that have conjoined one another cannot be the cause of one another. I do not thank you, I congratulate you. As the price of your gratitude to me, you, too, pray and give congratulations.”

Actually every believer should think like this. For God’s grace comes to all of us commonly. There is a conjunction everywhere from the doorkeeper who opens the door to an institution to the director who manages the institution. May God give us success in showing effort in this comprehension and association!

Given that the entire creation bears witness to all this, here I pray:

O King of Kings, whose signs of Lordship we perceive from the collars around our necks! Make us feel and understand our servitude to You fully and execute Your decree on those who make use of Your blessings a means of getting wild and straying into evil ways.

All those endless range of shades and hues of the realm of divine mercy and blessings which are present in human consciousness quiescently and which flow into the heart with heavenly joys on different wavelengths, even before getting into the Heavens-all these endless variety of shades and hues are from the divine grace and favor which are incommensurable with any quality or quantity. Were it not for divine favor and liking for us, what difference would there be between us and the flesh in the butcher shop? He not only livens up the earth with the fluffy clouds, rain falling down to the earth in drops, running rivers, and effervescent seas, but also enlivens our inner world and faculties, opening them into eternity through the inspirations, breezes, and springtides of divine grace.

It is He who has created the soil mixed with rocks and has filled the earth with infinitesimal creatures, turning all the corners of the world into heavenly gardens. It is He who introduces the human being, which He has created with flesh, blood, and bones, to the angels and other celestial beings and has them strive as if in a race toward good works. It is He who has paved the ways from the passageways-which can also spread out to the cesspools-to Paradise and from the seventh heaven to the observation of the divine “countenance” and has shown how coal can turn into diamonds.

O King of Mercy, who restores life to the rocks and soil and with His grace brings those whose spirit is also open to devilry into the realm of angels-furnish us with endowments beyond our capacity and improve us in our endowments! Either show those who are ignorant of You, with souls as black as coal, how to turn into diamond-like souls or condemn them to punishment!

If the pulses of the faithful quicken with hope now, if their hearts beat with the excitement of future bliss, and their minds are enraptured with the beauties of the otherworld, this is because of the divine breezes we feel in our conscience and due to God’s making us aware of the divine presence at every stage. From Him is the light of the heavens and the earth; the openings to the treasuries of both this and the other world are not even like a keyhole to the door of His Kingdom. In comparison with the real worth and virtue in God’s sight, the world that we constantly run after, filled with fancies, has not as much value as even the wing of a fly before God. Even a particle of this world-which is in fact futile in its entirety, but which gains a manifest value in accordance with Divine principles-becomes great enough to pave the way to eternal bliss.

O Mighty King who brings-through His Existence-all existence out of non-existence, who endows a drop of water with the immensity of the sea, and who grants an atom the power to be the sun! Every thing and being, from the animate to inanimate, from human to animals, from the faithful to the nonbeliever, from the conscious to the unconscious, and from the fortunate to the unfortunate, subsist under Your banner-may this divine banner always fly above us and may we continue to live in the shade of Your light which emanates from Your existence! Were it not for Your special Will and turning towards them, nothing would have come into existence, humanity would not exist, faith would be unattainable, Your existence would be imperceptible, and those fortunate souls upon whom You have bestowed an endless depth of thought with faith would not excel themselves.

You are the source for all the sparkling and fading lights. We come into the world, grow up, and die, whereas You are the Necessarily Existent One beyond any time or space. You call hundreds of thousands into being at every moment, You manifest Your existence through them, You remind us of Your will and knowledge by the divine wisdom in their creation. You draw attention to Your perpetuity by evolving and transforming everything, whispering the secrets that lie behind things and events to those who are on the way to God, and talk confidentially about the glamour of the road. Your Name is the dearest thing in our conscience-may it reside in our heart constantly! Your Essence is the one and only source of light for our spirits. Our hearts, which have been seeking for an eternity on each and every horizon-as if they are programmed for an awareness of eternity-shout out the infinitude of Your Mercy. The earth cringes in servility and submissiveness to Your command and has been on a blessed journey since the very first day it was created: The heights and mounts stand in awe of You, showing their readiness for Your commands. The rivers bow down onto the ground, rapturous with the flood of Your light, flowing with vivacity and calling out Your beautiful name, the All-Living. Gardens and orchards, and birds and chicks are in a cheerful rush everywhere so that they can observe the beauty of the manifestation of Your “face.” The snow and the ice, and hail and storms accompany the composition of Your majesty and grandeur. The spring and the fall, and the night and the day make constant mention of You in their diverse languages, as they change colors, turning green, yellow, white, and black.

It is blindness not to have knowledge of You despite seeing all this, and it is ingratitude not to adore You in servitude while being blessed with Your favors in all places, at all times. It is our duty, as Your servants, to remember You all the time, and it is a need of our spirit to flee to You at every moment in every situation. What is left for us other than displaying our displeasure and taking a stand against those who deny Your mercy. It is the voice of conscience and the very requirement of being a loyal servant at Your door to not mention those people who do not mention You.

O the eternal King, even the dust of Whose doorway is kohl powder to apply in a fine line around our eyes! We are constantly on this journey since the day we achieved-or we supposed we achieved-an awareness of being on Your way, laying our head on Your doorstep. We enthuse our hearts through Your guidance and persevere to be Your guests. Your unceasing favors-which are reference to Your blessings for the future as well-give so much vitality to our hopes that we become distanced to everything and everybody, turning to You only with expectations that cannot fit even into our dreams. With the shackles of Your Messenger on our ankles and the collars from the divine will round our necks, we are zealous, determined, and bound by our oath to not let a stranger touch even one strand of hair on our head.

If we are like much-loved doves in Your private garden, then bless us with an unending breath and a tongue that never tires out in our requital for our existence and everything You have given us! We become enthusiastic only if You enthuse us and experience feelings that only You make us feel. We accept all that which is not from the Divine abode as senseless prattle and seek refuge in You from the tongue that does not mention You.

If all this is nothing but spelling out our state and situation to You, then loose any knot from our tongue, elevate our speech in the shade of Your speech, give our hearts steadfastness, and deepen and bolster our breaths with divine breaths. We cannot have anything if You do not give it to us; we can never drop a word if You do not cause us to speak. How can these poor wings of ours be capable of reaching the horizon of Your pleasure? How can this poor heart open up to the secrets of the treasury of the knowledge of You? How can this poor tongue be adequate to praise You? We are doubled up and ashamed of our withering conduct and grating talk, but at the same time we are relieved from worry due to our turning to Your immense lenience and mercy. Our sins are of the same magnitude as the revolt of those who have been sunk into the earth and our aloofness is within the borders of Your wrath; however, Your forgiveness is so immense that it will exterminate all wrongdoings and faults, and Your proximity is nearer to us than our jugular vein. Admit us not in accordance with our rebellion, but rather in accordance with Your forgiveness; treat us not with our remoteness, but with the warmth of proximity. Make us feel Your being with us, comfort our weak hearts, and foster our spirits with Your favors.

The ways ahead are difficult and steep: many evil spirits are waiting guardedly at every corner for an ostensible motive to attack, always wheeling out words of retrogression, backwardness, theocracy, and fundamentalism in their denunciatory language, holding every means and power in their hands, and a great many intrigues in their mind. O God, if we are against faith, knowledge, science, or progression in any way-as some claim-save us then from going in this wrong direction! If we are not good enough for this, take us then to Yourself and open the ways to those who are pious, refined, erudite, and progressive! If those who claim us to be as such are, however, in the wrong, then favor those among them whose spirits are open to faith and salvation with Your guidance; destroy the unity of those who obstinately persist in their deviance and who continually engage in evil! Bring their schemes to nothing and let them fall into their own traps! Leave them with unalleviated misery and sorrow! Safeguard the loyal servants of Your door and all the believers from the outrages, derision, scorn, and schemes of such evil minded, extremely wicked, and demonic people!

Original Article: Ichinohe T. et al., PNAS (published online before print 2011).

Influenza, also known as seasonal flu, affects up to 5 million people annually. Flu viruses infect and damage the animal respiratory tract, especially the lungs. Upon flu virus infection, a life or death battle between an animal’s immune system and the flu virus begins. To defeat the flu virus, the animal’s immune system synthesizes important flu-fighting molecules. Researchers at Yale University discovered that mice on the antibiotic regimen, a treatment that wipes out certain bacteria which normally live in the guts of the animal hosts, showed deficiency in immune responses against flu virus in the lungs compared to mice that had not been treated. This finding suggests an unexpected link that the bacteria living in the animals seem to control the production of these flu-fighting molecules. These commensal bacteria, or good bacteria, prime the immune system in making flu-fighting molecules even before infection, and this priming is important for subsequent flu-fighting strategies. The exact bacterial species that helps fight the flu are yet to be identified. It is interesting to contemplate why the immune system trusts bacteria with such an important job. Whatever that reason might be this finding warns against misuse or abuse of antibiotics. We don’t want to kill the good bacteria that might just protect us in the next flu season.

2- Less talking with longer words

Original Article: Piantadosi S.T. et al., PNAS 108, 3526 (2011).

What factors affect the length of a word? Do we prefer to use short words or long words while we are talking? For many years, researchers believed that the most frequently used words tend to be short in order to make the language more efficient. It is intuitive when we think of words such as “a,” “the,” “but” and their popularity in our everyday life. However, according to a recent study done by Piandatosi and coworkers in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT, the length of a word reflects the amount of information it contains. They observed that people use many words in predictable sequences along with other words in their daily life. Most of the time a short word may not contain information per se, but carry information as a collection with other familiar words. This observation led the researchers to look at the problem from an ‘information content’ perspective. A word is said to have more information if it is less predictable in a sequence. An analysis was done on the Google text database in 11 different languages. The results show that word length closely correlates to information content. Once again, it is not important how much you talk. It is important how much you mean.

3- Ups and downs of sleep with alpha waves

Original Article: McKinney S.M. et al., PLoS One 6, e17351 (2011).

Why do we randomly wake up in the middle of the night? Searching for an answer for this question, researchers at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) discovered a brain rhythm that determines one’s susceptibility to disturbance by the outside world while asleep. Scott McKinney and his colleagues conducted a study where they analyzed the electroencephalographs (EEGs) of 13 volunteers, who spent 3 nights in MGH’s Sleep laboratory. EEG devices use electrodes on the scalp to detect electrical activity in the brain. There are four major brain waves that can be detected by EEG: alpha, beta, delta and theta waves. Alpha waves usually emanate from the back of the head during relaxed wakefulness, particularly when your eyes are closed, and they are thought to gradually disappear when a person goes to sleep. Researchers developed a special computational method that can probe EEGs in much deeper data resolutions. Their analyses revealed that alpha waves never disappear during sleep; they just go below conventional detection levels. Moreover, when alpha wave activity spikes just before an obnoxious auditory stimuli (e.g., loud talking or traffic noise) is played, volunteers seems to wake up more easily than when alpha wave activity was low. These findings suggest that maybe the alpha wave activity is the brain’s way of keeping us aware of our surroundings during sleep, and perhaps it enables us to wake up quickly in case of danger. Of course, too much alpha activity might also have a downside: it can make you a light sleeper and give you restless nights.

4- Killer whales imitate enemies and friends

Original Article: Wei B.M. et al., Marine Mammal Science (published online before print 2011).

In marine mammals, as individuals frequently cannot see each other, sound is particularly important for communication. Killer whales live in groups or clans, and these different clans have their own dialects. A recent study showed that whales can do more than just talk in their own language: they can mimic calls from other groups with a different dialect. While analyzing the social behavior of wild orcas living near Vancouver Island in British Colombia, a group of researchers from the University of Vienna discovered that resident whales occasionally produce call types from the repertoires of other vocal clans. The calls resemble the calls of foreign groups that the original group interacted with before. When different clans are in close proximity, it is quite challenging to reliably distinguish original calls from resembling calls. For this reason, researchers recorded calls that resemble call types of a different clan in the absence of that clan and compared them to the originals of the respective call types by analyzing their sonograms. Sonograms reveal distinctive information about the structure of the sound waves, i.e. the spectral density of these signals, and this information can be used to classify animal sounds. The comparative analysis clearly shows that killer whales can imitate calls from other groups even when members of that group are not around. Researchers suggest that this could be a way of labeling outsiders or keeping tabs on their location. Maybe by impersonating the calls of a group, they are conveying a message about that group to their own family members. It is exciting to see that vocal mimicry is not limited to songbirds and dolphins, and that killer whales have more complex social lives than we previously thought.