Religion is still profoundly embedded into today’s contemporary, postmodern, and secular society. A major facet of this intermingling between religion and society is the way individuals communicate with society as a whole, via their religious rituals and myths. Though myth is not entirely scientific, it is undoubtedly one of the best instruments for revealing the oftentimes hidden and complex meanings of religious beliefs, tenets, creeds, and principles. Thus, I would like to clarify the ambiguity and different connotations of myth for present-day readers. While myth in common parlance has come to mean “what is not true,” religious and academic connotations are quite a different story.

The English word myth comes from the Greek muthos, meaning “word” or “speech.” It owes its significance to its contrast with logos, which can also be translated as “word,” but is used especially in the sense of a word that elicits discussion or an argument. Muthos in its meaning of “myth” describes a story about gods and superhuman beings.

A myth is an expression of the sacred in words: it reports realities and events from the origin of the world that remain valid as the basis and purpose of all there is. Consequently, a myth functions as a model for human activity, society, wisdom, and knowledge. (Gale Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 9)

This aforementioned definition of myth serves us well and points to several aspects of a myth. For instance, the story of Abel and Cain is a wonderful description of the horror, terror, and disgust of murder, as well as the evil of envy. As the story well illustrates, both Abel and Cain were supposed to sacrifice something of their most beloved to God. One did so wholeheartedly (Abel), while the other did not (Cain). Eventually, God accepted the sacrifice Abel made (since it was sincere), but rejected the half-hearted sacrifice of Cain, which made him very jealous of his own beloved brother. Then, in spite of his brother’s heartfelt efforts to help him repent his sin, his deeply felt envy caused him to murder in the name of evil. Thus, this myth perfectly portrays a model for us to adapt in order to refrain from vicious and destructive acts like murder and envy. It becomes a timeless paradigm of a human action that, no matter how unrealistic it may be, can still guide individuals to good by illuminating life’s deeper meanings. Even if such a story never happened, it would still function as an outstanding model for those who want to understand the perils of envy.

Furthermore, the story of Prophet Adam and Eve, and their corruption by Satan, has a very pertinent meaning and message. As the myth goes, Satan was an obedient servant of God, who even temporarily led almost all the angels in the name of the order of the universe. But when God willed and created Adam out of clay and infused into him His word (spirit), and then decreed all the others to prostrate before Adam, Satan did not comply. After that, even though Satan had the opportunity to show regret for his disobedience before God, he insisted on his own mistake, an error that was ultimately greater than his previous mistake. Then, his infamous efforts to seduce both Adam and Eve to follow the very same way, caused Adam and Eve to commit the first sin, leading to the Fall. But soon after, Adam and Eve realized their rebellion against the decree of God and earnestly repented. While Satan could not admit his own mistake, Adam and Eve were able to humbly repent. This led to them, in spite of the Fall, rising above even the great angels in attitude and character.

One can find a lot about the nature of human beings in this myth. For example:

1. We are prone to mistakes – that is, we are not infallible. Therefore, we need to admit the fact that we can/will err. But what matters most here is our recognition of fallibility and our efforts to rectify the mistakes we make.
2. Some beings are not obedient to humans
3. Human beings are composed of both physical and metaphysical aspects. (God created man out of clay and instilled His word/spirit to this clay-made physical body).
4. Repentance is the only way to redemption.

As illustrated above, these myths can serve good examples of ideals, paradigms, and models for human beings. As a matter of fact, together with parables and other symbolic languages like metaphors, myths build a splendid essential bridge between the addressees of religion and the scientifically incommunicable realities of religion.

As for ritual, though it might seem easier to define compared to myth, in religious studies it is rather troublesome to thoroughly describe what ritual is. While some famous scholars like Edmund Leach maintained that the term ritual should be applied to all culturally defined sets of behavior (the symbolic dimension of human behavior as such), others like Otto and Eliade argued that ritual arises from, and celebrates the encounter with, the “numinous” or “sacred” (Gale Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 9). Still others, like Robertson Smith and Emile Durkheim, have presented ritual as the very heart and soul of religion, and put more emphasis on ritual than myth. As Durkheim contended, “Societies image themselves in their ritual symbols and the sacred is the essential social idea” (Gale Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 9).

Having admitted the difficulty in defining ritual, I would like to pay attention to its simple definition according to James Livingston:

Ritual can be defined as an agreed-on and formalized pattern of ceremonial movements and verbal expressions carried out in a sacred context.

Of the several dimensions of the definition above, I want to underline the fact that for a ritual to be qualified as religious, it should be carried out in a sacred context. Otherwise, it wouldn’t have any taste of religion; it would rather be a mere formalized systematic model of ceremony or verbal expression. Therefore, not every ritual is a religious ritual in the sense that it does not carry the meaning of the encounter with the sacred or the numinous.

The role ritual plays in religion is of the lofty consideration in religious life. While Aristotle held, “We are what we repeatedly do,” Kant argued that the ultimate truth cannot be known just through theoretical cognitive research; it must be internalized by means of habitual repetition of some formalized patterns of behavior or verbal expressions – in other words, ritual conceptualization or communication (he called it the “practical mind” in critique of pure reason). 

Religious ritual is a crucial part of holding the members of a society together (the idea of “we” interdependence, rather than “me only” independence), and maintaining the continuity and congruity of the social body or organism. As some scholars reason, three individuals (1+1+1=3) are equal to 3 in mathematics, yet in a society of three individuals held together by the invisible but practical bond of ritual, the sum is not three, but 111. [When three individuals line up next to each other and have a complete consensus and synergy about the purposes of their society socially add up to almost 111.]

Ritual unquestionably serves many significant psychological and social functions. For example, through religious rites and rituals, individuals can cherish an opportunity to synchronize one’s own ideas and emotions with those of others. Moreover, social togetherness via rituals is most likely the best remedy for individual anxiety and selfishness, as the maxim “it takes the whole village to raise a child” depicts. Rituals can also cure some social tensions, whether they are due to uneven distribution of wealth and material resources, or apparent injustice because of allocation of social status. For example, a janitor in a faithful society can stand side by side with a President while praying before God in a mosque or a church. The two of them are equal in the sight of God. Rituals are also the best means for the realization and application of the archetypal patterns made manifest in myths and other symbolic languages like parables and metaphors. Therefore, rituals serve as “the practical mind” for the adherents of a religion, allowing them to embed the sophisticated meanings communicated in the sacred scriptures and myths. Ritual is to religion, what light is to the act of seeing – indispensable. Rituals keep faith alive.

In regard to the interconnectedness of ritual and myth, they are like two facets of one reality, implementing one another’s functions and meanings. Neither ritual nor myth is superior; each has its own peculiar role and functions in religion. I would describe ritual as the realized and applied perception of religious myths and sacred scriptures. For this reason, neither myth nor ritual can exist on its own. While myth presents perfect archetypes and paradigms of the doctrinal system of religion (the theoretical mind), rituals function as conducive platforms to realize what the theoretical mind puts forward, by means of systematic repetition (the practical mind). Together, they form a united reality of both the theoretical and practical mind of religion. As the great Rumi contended about the vital importance of practicing religious tenets and beliefs through rituals, “We either appear as we are or we become as we appear.”

In conclusion, ritual and myth are two angelic wings of the same heavenly system of religion. For the modern students of world religions, both serve as celestial lifts or launchers that can enable the believers to pass beyond the boundaries of this three-dimensional realm and enjoy the sacred bliss on the opposite shore of existence, the transcendent realm: the experience of encountering the numinous. A religion functions best when it has these two angelic wings – myth, the theoretical mind, and ritual, the practical mind.

References

• Gale Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd Ed.
• Livingston, James C. 2008. Anatomy of the Sacred: An Introduction to Religion, 5th Ed. Pearson.
• McAuliffe, Jane Dammen. Encyclopedia of Qur’an.
• Pals, Daniel L. 2006. Eight Theories of Religion, 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press.
• Pals, Daniel L. 2008. Introducing Religion: Readings from the Classic Theorists, Oxford University Press.

Regarding someone who is responsible for administering and governing others, there is a great difference between his bearing the responsibility of the duty he carries out and seeing his field of responsibility as his personal property. However, this fact is unfortunately ignored and abused by many. When people responsible for others do not follow the righteous path of the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, and the Rightly Guided Caliphs, may God be pleased with them, when they do not see themselves as trustees in the position they occupy but as the owners of that place, it means that they have begun to pave the way that leads to tyranny.

Lay the blame on yourself Essential to being protected from such a danger is for people in power to be self-critical and take personal responsibility for any negativity that occurs related to their area of responsibility. The attitude of Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, is a perfect example for us in this respect. Within the ten-year period he served as caliph, there were glorious conquests. Despite being such a great state leader, during a time of famine, he prostrated himself among some ruins and beseeched God Almighty, asking Him not to destroy people because of his sins. Similarly, people in leadership positions must firstly hold themselves accountable for arising negativities, failures and breakdowns; they must constantly beseech God and strive their best to solve problems.

The devoted souls who keep endeavoring for the good of humanity in order to pour the inspirations of their soul into the needy hearts might occasionally encounter problems while fulfilling their responsibilities. For example, God Almighty blesses them with certain accomplishments to gain people’s appreciation. On seeing these accomplishments, some people with weak characters might desire to appear within the same frame as those devoted souls. Consequently, when those who are motivated by personal gain are not able to find what they expected, they might resort to all kinds of evil including slander and libel. God Almighty will surely bring to account those who commit such evil. However, those who are in charge where this problem is experienced must say, “I wonder what kind of wrong I committed that led us to experience such a misfortune?” and bring himself to account first of all.

Do Not Lay Claim to Achievements When people in leadership positions do not engage in self-criticism and self-supervision they do not want to admit any fault, even for the problems that are directly due to their own wrong decisions, and therefore they keep accusing and laying the blame on others. When the wrongs and mistakes are highlighted, they perceive it as a threat to themselves and wish to silence those who highlight them. In short, they become tyrannical. Leaders who lay personal claim to achievements that have been granted by God Almighty as a result of concerted efforts from society will become deluded into thinking that everything begins and ends with their own person. This delusion of seeing themselves as the beginning and end is actually an implication of claiming to be a deity. The grim end of a person who dares to make such a claim is stated as follows in one Prophetic tradition (hadith qudsi): (God Almighty says) “Pride is My cloak and greatness My robe, and whoever competes with Me with regard to either of them, I shall throw him into Hell.”[1] A person who sees himself as great and thus takes pride in it will be considered to have attempted to be a partner with God regarding these attributes. The Almighty Lord gives the warning that He will throw such a person into Hell.

Collective reason and favorers of consultation In fact, as nothing has begun with our person, nothing will end with our person either. On the contrary, deeds we attribute to ourselves will yield no fruit; whereas deeds carried out far from egotism and self-importance will not be irrelevant or fruitless. This is how a person should always see himself and the services for which God employs him. Instead of acting as one person, and always thinking he alone is the best person to make a decision, one should value collective reason and never take an indifferent attitude toward the mechanism of consultation. When one sees that he cannot fulfill his responsibility properly, he should know to step down righteously and easily say: “With regard to my position, I am trying to develop the feeling of concord and unity in people, and inviting Divine help by trying to reconcile their hearts. If I am not giving my position its due, not achieving practical aims and if I cannot be convincing with my manner and behaviors, then you can take me from this duty and assign me to a lesser one.” The feelings and thoughts of those who claim to have dedicated themselves to the path of truth and for the good of the people should be thus.

No worldly or otherworldly expectations The devoted souls should not have any worldly or otherworldly expectations for the duties they carry out. Desires such as achieving high ranks, acquiring different titles or being the center of attention must never settle in their hearts. Continually seeking higher worldly positions in a greedy fashion is an indication of pride and conceitedness. However, it is very difficult for conceited people to act in a balanced way regarding this issue, to give their position its due and to become aware of their responsibilities; for they see themselves as the same as Atlas, supporting the world. They think that when they recede from duty, it will mean inevitable disaster for the world. This is nothing but gross misguidedness and deviance.

Most of the principles Bediüzzaman gives in his chapters, “On Sincerity and Brotherhood” are golden criteria related to this issue. Complying with them is very important in terms of preventing such deviations. For example, he advises preferring being a follower to being a leader, which brings responsibility and is therefore risky. Namely, a person should prefer following a person who is eligible for a certain position rather than becoming the leader of others, which entails responsibility, danger and risk.[2] For example, imagine that a group of Muslims is going to observe congregational Prayer somewhere. One should not be eager to be the imam to lead the Prayer, but should withdraw to the side and know to pray behind someone else. Unless one is accepted by others as eligible and is offered the position, one should not even wish to be the muezzin, but rather should leave this duty to another. If such cautiousness is observed about issues such as leading the Prayer or delivering a speech somewhere, this quality will be ingrained in individuals’ hearts and become a character trait in them. If people can manage to withdraw in this way into the depth of their character, they will not seek to become tyrants and will not adopt despotic attitudes.

Humble people who avoid esteem and applause It is narrated that after returning to the palace triumphantly, the great Sultan Süleyman the Magnificent had his bed made up in the corridor in order to challenge his ego and not let it become arrogant. Likewise, when the blessed Sultan Selim I returned from his campaigns in the Middle East, he did not directly go to the palace but waited in Uskudar until midnight. When the people were sleeping in their homes, he quietly went to the palace in order to avoid the people’s praise and applause.

Spiritual nourishment should not be neglected So, it is very important for people who have dedicated themselves to serving faith and humanity to undergo such edification right from the beginning. A person should not become a minor tyrant when responsible for a small sphere so that when his responsibility grows he will not assume himself to be sovereign of the world, pursuing impossible projects, oppressing people and taking no advice in the case of failing at all of these. On the contrary, he should believe that positive results are only realized with God’s permission and grace; he should not forget that he is merely an apparent minor cause and should humbly know his place no matter what position he occupies.

For this reason, in terms of administrative positions from the lowest to the highest, nobody should be neglected in terms of spiritual nourishment within the frame of religious, humane and universal moral principles. Otherwise, people follow a path of misguidance that ruins them, causes them to lose the true friends and makes them fritter their life away in the narrow prison of their ego.

[1] Sahih Muslim, Birr, 136; Sunan Abu Dawud, Libas, 26.

[2] Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said, The Gleams, New Jersey: Tughra Books, 2008, p. 215.

The material aspects of Austria are also entirely evident. Other than a few shabby streets in the larger urban areas, there are no slums, no ghettos. Austria is home to the best water in the world, as well as some of the best medical services and surgeons. Austrians are tough minded and diligent. From a material point of view Austria has it all. Moreover, they probably donate more per capita to charity than any other nation in the world. Germany, of course, is much the same.

Above all, Austria is a tidy country of great beauty; like a gigantic golf course landscaped by a hand from above. Where else would a refugee wish to head for if not an earthly paradise?

When the United Nations decided to cut, by more than half, the funds needed to maintain its refugee camps in the Near East, its members were apparently unable to foresee the consequences. The more than fifty percent saved has now resulted in costs amounting to three or four times the supposed savings. With little hope of a decent existence, the refugees fled the camps, bound for Europe. Hundreds of thousands have come. In response, the politicians talk, and the tax payers groan. Without volunteers there would have been little chance of helping the refugees at all. But the challenge is not really about giving –  it is about how!

We added our names to the list of those offering accommodation and got caught up in a bureaucratic muddle to end all muddles. Our idea was to have a neat little family – one husband, one wife, one child. We were informed that personal wishes were not part of the deal, something we were bound to admit was fair enough.

It took about four weeks before a man from a refugee agency knocked at our door. He brought with him a young woman and two children from Afghanistan. The woman was an attractive 32-year-old; the children were lovely. The little boy, aged seven, was delicately serious. The little girl, aged three, was tiny, her face reminding me of a Burgundy grape. She was also a bundle of determination on two legs. Their father was still lost in a crowd of ten-thousand currently getting ousted from Hungary and being ushered, without ceremony, through Croatia and Slovenia. After four days we got a call that he was on his way to us and his arrival was about par for the course, which means nobody knows anything until it happens. He brought a ten-year-old boy with him. Romana and I had visions of collusion. We felt put upon (something we were to regret). Our house is not that big and already our ideal three persons had become four, and then five. It turned out that the ten-year-old boy was separated from his parents a full month prior. Our man had taken care of him as they trudged and bussed the last hundred miles to the Austrian border. Endless telephone calls finally located the boy’s parents, down-country at a camp near Klagenfurt, in Carinthia. A trip was made, and the boy was reunited with his parents.

As a writer living in Austria, I am bound to be writing about the current influx of refugees. I will be ashamed if I find myself attempting any sort of stylistic flourish; there is obviously no fun to be found in the matter. Mr. Hemingway’s reporting mode would be most appropriate. The winter is coming. They sleep on the earth, wrapped in a blanket. There is frost on the blanket at dawn. They shiver, waiting for the sun. This is what Mr. Hemingway called the “real” and “true,” given in a writing style that is no style at all.

But I can afford to be lighter now because our guest family has integrated with amazing speed and is doing well. Romana switched into high gear and got her network of lady friends into the deal. Stuff arrives daily. There are now more clothes than any family could reasonably need. We heard the funny story of our neighbor, Inga, informing her husband, Franz, that he needed a new anorak. This was news to Franz, but our man from Afghanistan got rigged out for the winter. The flow of cakes has accelerated, with no end in sight. Toys arrive for the children. I’m running around putting up shelves and rails to hang things on. Romana took on the paperwork and within a week the young boy, Milad, was attending school, going in stone-cold, without a word of German. The little girl, Setahesh, is now attending kindergarten. Their dad, Nazar, and mum, Shaima, are amazed at how things can change so quickly. They have asylum-request cards, but acceptance is by no means guaranteed. The cards bear their names and dates of birth. The family name is given incorrectly. Dates of birth are often unknown and guessed at. Many of those getting registered say, “1st of January,” and then add an approximate year. The paperwork seems somehow pointless, but the people do get a lot of government support.

These people are Shia Ismaili Muslims, of which Romana and I have not the slightest knowledge. It is enough to know that the Ismailis are persecuted by extremists. The horror stories about life in Afghanistan are sobering, indeed.

Everyday life at our house has been reduced to pure logic, when and where possible. Cultural differences are largely ignored. Shaima had a toothache and I was quick to point out that the pain is definitely the same the world over. We slowly instill the idea that there is little fun to be had at our house, but from here they can build their lives. Shaima is a sensational cook who, to my delight, uses tons of spice. Her meat is placed in the oven in onion water, which makes it wonderfully tender. Our meals are now sublime.

What has become evident is that we, Romana Madar and Lawrence Padar, have achieved the status of family chiefs. Seldom have we experienced such deference and seldom felt so grand. I get the feeling that I should be exercising gravitas. We are aware that families in Afghanistan are almost tribal, and run strictly on hierarchal lines. There is a distinct danger of Romana becoming a sort of ersatz tribal mum. Lord knows how I shall cope with such unaccustomed respect. Our own children, who are all grown up, keep a wary watch. They have, anyway, always considered us to be a bit daft.

Since Romana and I are retired we are all thrown together each day. Shaima speaks a little broken English, Nazar a bit of simple German. Finding a Quran on our shelves must have been baffling, not to mention my suddenly muttered “Allah” when I bang a knee. We have come to terms and get along well. Although we are Christians, our openness to Islam has helped.

We have adopted an Inshallah attitude. Trusting in God, in Life, in Anticipation.

“By the way,” Romana said the other night, “did you know that Shaima is pregnant?”

I sighed, stroking an imaginary beard.

Takagi R. et al. Bioengineering a 3D integumentary organ system from iPS cells using an in vivo transplantation model. Science Advances, April 2016.

Skin is the human body’s largest organ, weighing 3.6 kg and having a total area of 2 m2. It acts as a waterproof shield against extreme temperatures, harmful chemicals, and infectious agents. Once skin is damaged beyond the ability of the body’s self-repair mechanisms, re-generation of patient-specific skin cells in lab conditions could be an essential tool used for successful skin grafts. Although there have been many methods developed to generate skin cells in lab conditions, none of these approaches gave rise to functional skin cells, complete with hair follicles and exocrine glands. In a recent study, scientists demonstrated the first lab-grown skin that contains hair follicles and sweat glands, making this skin akin to biological skin. Using a special cocktail of chemicals, scientists were able to first convert gum cells from mice into undifferentiated stem cells, then they directed these stem cells into mouse skin cells. Next, they grafted the artificial skin cells onto genetically modified hairless mice. The grafted skin cells ended up maturing into skin cells capable of growing hair, excreting oil, and connecting with the nerve and muscle cells of the test animals. Although these experiments were conducted only on mice, it still represents a leap of sophistication in the development of artificial skin. In the future, researchers hope that this technique will have applications for patients with serious burns, scars, or alopecia, and it could potentially be an alternative to animal testing for chemical products.

More Friends, Less Pain

Johnson KVA & Robin IM. Pain tolerance predicts human social network size. Scientific Reports, April 2016.

According to a recent study, people with large groups of friends have higher pain thresholds. In this study, scientists focused on the chemical endorphin, a major regulator of the brain’s pain and pleasure circuitry. Although these two senses seem like opposites, both are fundamentally reward behaviors, since we search for things that give us pleasure and avoid painful stimuli. Endorphins not only make us feel good, but also act as a pain reliever – one that is even stronger than morphine. Endorphins have also been shown to build and maintain social bonds. Scientists hypothesized that if endorphins help social bonding, people with more friends would have a higher endorphin count – and thus, a higher pain threshold. The research team recruited 101 adults, aged between 18 and 34, and asked them to fill out a social network questionnaire, which asked how many people they contacted on a weekly or monthly basis. Next, researchers tested the participants’ pain tolerances through the wall sit test, in which participants had to squat against a wall with their knees at a 90 degree angle and to hold the pose as long as possible. Interestingly, those with larger social networks showed significantly higher thresholds to pain. This study is one of many studies that linked social behavior and physical fitness. There has been a lot of evidence that suggests having an active social life and a bigger circle of friends can prevent depression, contribute to successful aging, and promote longevity. Our social lives are as critical to our overall health as our diets and exercise habits.

Three Potentially Habitable Planets Discovered

Gillon M et al. Temperate Earth-sized planets transiting a nearby ultracool dwarf star. Nature, May 2016.

The search for life on Earth-like planets beyond our solar system has been very active, thanks to new high-precision instruments and advanced analysis techniques. Scientists have discovered hundreds of terrestrial worlds over the past few years, including some that are the right distance from their host stars to contain liquid water. Astronomers have been investigating these habitable planets, and one research group, using the Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope (TRAPPIST) at the La Silla Observatory in Chile’s Atacama Desert, recently discovered three Earth-like planets orbiting an ultracool dwarf star just 40 light-years from Earth. The planetary system is named TRAPPIST-1 and the three planets are designated TRAPPIST-1b, c, and d. These three planets orbit very close to the star, at 1-3% of the distance that Earth lies from the sun. A year on them passes in only 1.5-4.5 Earth days. They have sizes and temperatures similar to those of Venus and Earth, and are the most promising candidates found so far in the search for life outside our solar system. Scientists are already excited about further studying these planets in greater detail. They plan to use the Hubble space telescope to investigate whether the planets have their own atmospheres or not. If they do, analysis of the presence and proportions of water, carbon dioxide, and ozone in their atmospheres will shed light on the real possibility of “life” on these planets.

If a gecko’s feet used a secretion to stick to surfaces, they wouldn’t be able to move. And geckos can stick to surfaces, even if there is no air, meaning they don’t use sucking discs. Some scientists suggested an electrostatic charge might help geckos resist gravity, but they’re too heavy for such a charge. Research has shown that  geckos can still cling to surfaces, even if the air is charged with electron ions. If geckos were resisting gravity thanks to electrostatic charges, then the air filled with ions would prevent such resistance.

It turns out geckos are able to adhere to surfaces thanks to the numerous microscopic hairs, or setae, on the bottoms of their feet – as many as 2 million hairs on just one foot. Each of these 2 million hairs further branches out to 1000 more miniscule hairs, totaling 2 billion hairs per foot. The thickness of each hair is one five thousandth of a millimeter. To make a comparison, there are around one hundred thousand strands of hair on a human head. If we had the same number of hairs found on the foot of a gecko, then our hair would cover a surface as large as a football field.

The hair on a gecko’s feet are directed towards its heels. As a gecko steps forward, it presses on the ground and pulls back a little, enabling a maximum level of contact and generating a weak attractive force at the molecular level, called van der Waal’s force, which connects the foot and the ground.

Van der Waal’s force is the bonds between molecules that arise from the forces between positively and negatively charged sectors. An atom has a positively charged nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. If the positive charge of the nucleus is equal to the negative charge of electrons, the atom does not carry a charge. Electrons move randomly around the nucleus, sometimes swarming on one side of the atom for a short period of time. When this happens, one side of the atom will have a negative charge, while the other side is positive. Such polarized atoms will momentarily enter into electrostatic interactions with other atoms. This results in an attractive force, which usually lasts for a short period of time. Even though this interaction comes into existence momentarily and then disappears, it is sufficient to hold atoms together in an environment where there are many atoms.

Van der Waal forces do not only appear inside matter and among atoms; they exist even between larger objects, like our hand and the wall it touches. Yet these forces are very weak. At the atomic level, our hand looks like a range of mountains, and only the atoms on top of the summits are in contact with the wall. What makes the gecko unique is that contact occurs between the wall and each one of the millions of hairs on the gecko’s feet. When the gecko lifts its foot, the attractive force is broken. It’s that simple – no suction cups necessary!

My anguish upon hearing about the attacks was magnified given that I had just eaten a waffle and bought artisan chocolate in the beautiful city center; that I had just taken the gritty metro with the help of kindly locals, discovered a trendy Moroccan café to read in, and visited the quirky landmark Atomium. Turkish conference organizers, residing in Brussels, invited me into their home for dinner, and became my friends. I bonded to the city during this colorful bouquet of moments. I was pained that they and all of Brussels’ occupants were experiencing intense fear and trauma after the attacks, and I was deeply frustrated that our efforts to create a coalition of global Muslims willing to combat extremism were overshadowed by actual terror.

The diverse Muslim community in Brussels, about 6% of the population,[1] will likely now not only suffer from the aftereffects of the attacks, but from heightened discrimination by those that will conflate all Muslims with the perpetrators, who reportedly included gangster-types who enjoyed watching IS (Islamic State) videos while smoking marijuana and drinking beer, even though intoxicants are forbidden in Islam.[2] Many non-Muslims, and (unfortunately) a few Muslims as well, believe that Islam mandates and sanctions “jihad,” which they understand as a violent holy war against non-believers, or at least a religiously-sanctioned armed struggle. The reasons for which the IS attacked Brussels are complex, and include alienation, lack of social integration, the high number of radicalized Muslims in the region of the city called Molenbeek, and the desire to profit from social chaos and the rift between Muslims and non-Muslims resulting from the violence.[3] Indeed, the “Molenbeek Jihadists” likely justified their violence as fulfilling their Islamic jihad. In glaring contradiction, the global Muslim religious leaders gathered for that conference patently rejected that interpretation of the term, instead reaffirming the diverse and positive meanings “jihad” connotes.

The many understandings of jihad

The term “jihad” is employed in a variety of ways. The Arabic verb jahada means to strive or to make an effort on the path of God. The question remains: how, and towards what? Many Muslims understand their religious duty to improve the external, material world as their “lesser jihad.” The “greater jihad,” on the other hand, refers to the internal, spiritual struggle to control one’s basest instincts. The Turkish Islamic scholar and mystic, Fethullah Gülen, notes that “believers find peace and vitality in such a balanced jihad.”[4] Ignoring the greater jihad has significant negative consequences for our mental and physical health, our communities, and the greater society in which we live. Ultimately, as Gülen points out, “those that succeed in their greater jihad will succeed in their lesser jihad, and those that fail in their greater jihad will fail in their lesser jihad.”[5] In other words, if we are not able to conquer our negative emotions and reactions internally, we cannot have a constructive impact on the external world.

Obviously, those involved in the attacks appear to have little understanding of Islam, and have also neglected the greater jihad. In fact, to work effectively towards halting this violence, members of the global community would do well to consider the universal applicability of the concept of the greater jihad, which has a greater potential to lead to thoughtful dialogue, diplomacy, and an understanding of the root causes of terrorism, than does reactionary violence.

Those advocating violent jihad form a minority current of Muslims, perhaps inspired by some figures who emphasized the combative meaning of the term, laying the foundation for future radical Islamists.[6] Some other scholars believed jihad should be used to counter tyranny and abolish “Satanic forces,” and argued that the Qur’an mandated fighting Jews and Christians until “they are subdued.”[7] Jihad, they believed, was not meant to be merely a defensive war, nor temporary. Rather it must continually be exercised to establish the centrality of God’s authority, and to cleanse the earth of corruption.[8] However, many others believe aggression has no place in Islam, although Muslims are allowed to defend themselves and their communities from aggression. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said, “Help your brothers whether they are oppressors or victims. You can help oppressors by making them stop their oppression to others.”[9] The Qur’an (2:190) states, “Fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, but do not aggress. Lo! God loves not aggressors.” If your opponent moves towards peace, you must also; “But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers” (2:193).

In other words, jihad can take the form of physical defense, but Muslims are not to instigate the hostilities. Clearly, jihad does not sanction terrorism; contemporary mainstream religious authorities have rejected the use of that sacred term to refer to killing civilians. They follow the precedent of classical Muslim jurists, who also had no tolerance for terror attacks against innocent civilians, including poisoning, rape, abductions, or attacks against travelers.[10] Jihad cannot be carried out in anger or for revenge. According to the Qur’an killing a human being unjustly is as violent as killing all humankind (5:32).

Even during the early rise of Islam, jihad was not used to convert Muslims by force, but to compel antagonistic non-Muslims to cease their aggressions towards the growing Islamic community, who were forging their way in a hostile tribal environment. Regarding this early period, Sherman Jackson writes, “The purpose of jihad, in other words, is to provide for the security and freedom of Muslims in a world that kept them under constant threat.”[11] Indeed, the Qur’an clearly states, “there is no compulsion in religion” (2:256)—no forced conversions are allowed. In the Qur’an, the word “jihad” is most often mentioned in its religious sense, meaning “to strive religiously,” and does not indicate that Muslims should kill non-Muslims for the sake of a holy war.

Lesser and greater jihad

While jihad can take a myriad of forms, there are two types identified in Islamic discourse: lesser jihad and greater jihad. This terminology apparently comes from a hadith (saying) of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), after the Battle of Badr, when he returned victorious from fighting the idol-worshiping Meccans that opposed him. He said to a companion, “You have returned from the lesser jihad (al-jihad al-asghar) to fight the greater jihad (al-jihad al-akbar).”[12] The greater jihad, he explained, was to struggle against one’s own passions. On another level, it’s his opposition to the idolatry that offers us the model for clearing one’s own soul from finding any trivial thing important. While some Muslims have questioned the authenticity of that hadith, the fundamental concepts are widely accepted in Islam. Sufis, in particular, have made use of those terms in their mystical understanding of that tradition.

Before turning to the potential of the greater jihad, let me elaborate briefly on the lesser form. The lesser jihad can simply refer to the external, material, physical struggle to better one’s world; for example, through combatting poverty, pollution, bigotry, or cancer. Your lesser jihad can be to raise children on your own, or to figure out how to get along with your in-laws. Life is a struggle; life is a jihad. According to a 2002 Gallup poll, the majority of Muslims polled in Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, and Jordan defined “jihad” as one’s “divine duty,” “promoting peace,” “struggling towards a noble cause,” “a commitment to hard work,” and “assisting others.”[13] The vast majority did not mention any militaristic meaning at all. The famous mystic and poet, Mevlana Rumi, offers a poem which illustrates a Sufi understanding of the lesser jihad:

The Sufi opens his hands to the universe
and gives away each instant, free.

Unlike someone who begs on the street
for money to survive,
a dervish begs to give you his life.[14]

These verses convey the urgency with which a Sufi mystic desires to give away everything, even his own life, to benefit the other.

Let us now shift our attention to the greater jihad. Frequently emphasized by Sufis, this is a spiritual struggle to seek God’s pleasure and closeness, to let one’s own light—God’s love—shine through, by metaphorically polishing the lamp of one’s heart. If a person can fully attain fana’, or the obliteration of one’s nafs or ego, she can do away with the binaries of mind and heart, emotion and reason, self and Godliness, and allow mindfulness of God to guide her actions.

Around 1915, Walter Bradford Cannon first described the “fight-or-flight response,” referring to the physiological processes involved when an animal perceives a threat.[15] In humans, this impulse also appears to be instinctual; without discipline, we are reactive beings. When we feel threatened, the tiny region in the back of our brain—the hypothalamus—sets off an alarm. This releases hormones, including adrenaline, which raises our blood pressure and increases our heart rate. If this happens frequently, we are at greater risk of depression, anxiety, heart disease, and impairment to our memory and concentration.[16] This impulse suppresses our use of judgement. We do not deliberate, or weigh options. Our egos react; our negative emotions take control. Within this cycle, we are unable to take charge of our own fears, hatreds, greed and, resentments; we are slaves of our own egos. Being reactive is stressful, aggressive, dysfunctional, and almost always leads to counterproductive outcomes.

According to the Mayo Clinic, humans are hard-wired with the fight-or-flight response. Perhaps this impulse was once helpful when ancient humans lived in primal hordes, because then they worried about being eaten or finding food to eat. Today, however, this instinct gives us life-shortening stress, and releases our own negativity on the world. This then flows in three directions: towards other communities, towards others in one’s own community, and back towards the self. Thus, the so-called “jihad” of the “Molenbeek Jihadis” is nothing more than violent, impulsive reactivity and undisciplined ego, resulting in considerable harm to those in Brussels, to other Muslims, and obviously to themselves.

Yet how can humans escape this negative cycle that appears to be genetically determined? To break this pattern, Islam emphasizes the purification of the soul through self-discipline. In other words, the greater jihad creates space inside the individual for God’s will to be remembered. Mevlana Rumi has stated, “The lion who breaks the enemy’s ranks is a minor hero compared to the lion who overcomes himself.”[17] Gülen encourages Muslims to struggle not against external enemies, “for the enemy is within ourselves.”[18] People can become enslaved by their passions, he argues. The greater jihad, in his view, leads to freedom of spirit.

The underlying concepts of the greater jihad are not unique to Islam, of course, but are found in many other traditions. One example can be found in the Buddhist Dhammapada (verses 334, 335, 336), which warns that if a person is unable to control his impulses, his miseries will multiply. The following verses illustrate this:

The craving of a person who lives carelessly grows like a creeping vine. He plunges from existence to existence, like a monkey seeking fruit in the forest. Whomever this miserable craving, this entanglement in the world, overcomes, his sorrows grow, like grass well rained upon. But whoever overcomes this miserable craving, in this world so hard to overcome, sorrows fall away from him, like a drop of water falling from a lotus blossom.”[19]

Returning to the Islamic context, however, several practices can help counter the fight-or-flight response.

Overcoming our nafs

To avoid being reactive, and to calm our brains when fired up, several practices may be of benefit. The Mayo Clinic advises us that if we feel we are about to experience the fight-or-flight response, we should be quiet, try to still the mind, and avoid impulsive responses. We are also reminded to seek support from others.[20] The Islamic tradition supports the wisdom of this medical advice. Prayer and spiritual meditation quiet the mind, and increase our ability to exercise self-control. Reading, or listening to the Qur’an, increases our ability to cope with stress, as does the devotional chanting of the attributes of God (the Sufi practice of dhikr). Meeting with other Muslims for devotional purposes supports our attempts to be mindful of the Divine. Regarding those who are on the spiritual path, Gülen writes, “Eliminating evil through goodness, loving ‘love,’ and being in a constant struggle against feelings of enmity are as sweet to them as the whisper of their own soul.”[21]

This concept of “eliminating evil through goodness” offers a conduit not only to deal with any evil or negativity within the individual, but also to confront and transform the specter of violence in our midst. Personal transformation leads to social transformation, Gülen implies. The global community has a responsibility to counter all forms of oppression and terrorism; however, the starting point is within the self.

Conclusion

Upon my return from Brussels, when I heard about the attacks, I felt fear —I only missed the attacks by four days. At the same time, I understood that others much more directly affected by the violence suffered immeasurably greater trauma. The peril in this cycle of violence is that no one is more dangerous than a person who is afraid. Allowing the fight-or-flight response to trigger a rush of adrenaline in our systems, creating panic, reactivity, and impulsivity, is not only hurtful to ourselves but to our relationships with others in our families, communities, and the greater social landscape. It is both tragic and predictable that many surviving victims of violence often respond with forms of violence; in this case, many devastated residents of Brussels might now be predisposed to retaliate against the Muslims and immigrants in their midst through discrimination, stigma, intimidation, or violent confrontations. The evening of March 22, however, people gathered in Bourse Square in tribute, many creating chalk drawings with messages of peace, love and hope, such as “we are one,” “BXLove,” “terror has no religion,” or simply a heart accompanied by the word “love.”[22]

This uplifting response touched the world, and mirrors the performance of the greater jihad. Gülen writes, “Love is the most essential element of every being, and it is the most radiant light, and it is the greatest power; able to resist and overcome all else.”[23] To release this love emanating from the Divine, we polish the lamp of our hearts through spiritual discipline, prayer, meditation, and mindfulness. Gülen adds, “…a person who is armed with love needs no other weapon. Indeed, love is strong enough to stop a bullet or even a cannon ball.”[24] Jihad is not a call to war, it is the expression of love.

[1] Pew Research Center: Religion and Public Life, “Table: Religious Composition by Country, in Percentages,” December 18, 2012.

[2] “Brussels attacks: Molenbeek’s gangster jihadists,” BBC News Magazine, March 24, 2016.

[3] Jason Burke, “Why Did the Bombers Target Belgium?” The Guardian, March 22, 2016; Pieter Van Ostaeyen, “Why have IS jihadists targeted Belgium?” BBC World News. March 25, 2016.

[4] M. Fethullah Gűlen, Towards a Global Civilization of Love and Tolerance (New Jersey: The Light, 2006), 172.

[5] Ibid., 173.

[6] Michael Knapp, “The Concept and Practice of Jihad in Islam,” Parameters 33:1 (Spring 2003), 84.

[7] Sayyid Qutb, “Jihad in the cause of God,” Milestones (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2005), 40.

[8] Ibid., 41.

[9] Gűlen, Towards a Global Civilization, 9. From Sahih Bukhari Vol. 3, Book 43, Hadith 624.

[10] Knapp, “The Concept,” 84.

[11] Sherman Jackson, “Jihad in the Modern World,” Islam in Transition: Muslim Perspectives, edited by John J. Donahue and John L. Esposito (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 401.

[12] Abu Hamid Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali, “The book of invocation,” Ihya’ ‘ulum al-din, translated by Kojiro Nakamura as Ghazali on Prayer (Tokyo, University of Tokyo, Institute of Oriental Culture, 1975), 167; also ‘Ali ibn ‘Uthman al-Hujwiri, Kashf al-Mahjub (The Revelation of the Veiled): An Early Persian Treatise on Sufism by al-Hujwiri, trans. Reynold A. Nicholson (London: E.J. Gibb Memorial Trust, 1911, 2000), 200.

[13] Richard Burkholder, “Jihad – ‘Holy War’, or Internal Spiritual Struggle?” Gallup, December 3, 2002.

[14] Joan Chittister, “Rumi: Icon of Wisdom,” A Passion for Life: Fragments of the Face of God (New York: Orbis Books, 2013).

[15] Walter Bradford Cannon, Bodily Changes in Pain, Hunger, Fear and Rage: An Account of Recent Researches into the Function of Emotional Excitement (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1915).

[16] Mayo Clinic Staff, “Chronic Stress puts your health at risk,” Healthy Lifestyle: Stress Management, July 11, 2013.

[17] Jamal Rahman, Kathleen Schmitt Elias, and Ann Holmes Redding, Out of Darkness into Light, (Harrisburg: Morehouse Publishing, 2009), 53.

[18] Fethullah Gűlen, The Statue of our Souls (New Jersey: Tughra Books, 2011), 87.

[19] Glenn Wallis (translator), The Dhammapada: Verses on the Way (New York: Random House), 70.

[20] Mayo Clinic Staff, “Chronic Stress.”

[21] Gülen, Towards a Global Civilization, 120.

[22] Brian McBride, “Chalk Drawings of Hope, Solidarity Fill Brussels Square,” ABC News, March 22, 2016.

[23] Gülen, Towards a Global Civilization, 1.

[24] Ibid., 6.

At first glance, it sounds frightening that the Earth’s magnetic poles are about to shift. But when we study geologic history, we’ll see that such a shift has happened before – many times. When scientists study the direction of the Earth’s core, it suggests that all sediment cores must have the same direction. But research shows that some sediment cores from the deepest parts of the ocean have the opposite direction. This helped scientists confirm that magnetic pole reversal is a natural event which happens, approximately, every half a million years. Since the last one occurred 780,000 years ago (the Brunhes-Matuyama reversal), the Earth is overdue for another reversal.

Some scientists say that this upcoming reversal will be drastic. During a magnetic pole reversal, solar winds could punch holes in the ozone layer. This could damage power grids, and affect cancer rates and the climate. The aurora borealis, normally only visible in the extreme northern hemisphere, would be visible every night all over the world.

Such a magnetic pole shift is a physical rule, not the exception. Each reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years; it is not a clean flip. Magnetic fields morph and push and pull at one another, with multiple poles emerging at odd latitudes throughout the process. Scientists estimate reversals have happened hundreds of times over the past three billion years. And while reversals have happened more frequently in “recent” years, when dinosaurs walked the Earth, a reversal was more likely to happen only once every one million years.

Many conspiracy theorists like to claim that a magnetic pole shift will mean doomsday. But according to scientists who have studied geologic history, such a pole shift is nothing to fear, as it has happened hundreds of times throughout the Earth’s history. Though it could mean big changes for human civilization, we cannot be absolutely sure whether it will be the end of the Earth or not.

Muslim theologians who have been compelled to respond to such claims have also offered a number of philosophical and rational arguments to prove the existence of God. This paper aims to explore the arguments for the existence of God put forward by some of these Muslim theologians. Islamic Scholars such as Nursi (d. 1960), Al-Kindi (d. 870), Gulen (2000), and others have provided sound arguments based on theological, philosophical, and scientific reasoning that consists of comprehensive and valid premises, which taken together make a strong case for the existence of God.

The cosmological argument is one of the primary arguments of the kalam theology, which states that the initial point is existence, and thus the universe must have an origin. One of the original developments of the cosmological argument in Islamic tradition was formed by Al-Kindi (d. 870), who was one of the earliest Islamic philosophers to initiate an argument for the existence of God based upon purely empirical grounds (Nasr 1964). His main contribution is the cosmological argument (dalil al-huduth) for the existence of God, in his “On First Philosophy” (Nasr 1964). He provided four different variations of this theory, all of which state that a cause must be required.

Al-Kindi contends that the creation had a beginning in time and that the universe cannot bring itself into existence; thus, diversity in the universe must be caused by an external agent and the origin of variety within the universe indicates a creator. Ultimately, this creator is God (Ozalp, 2014, Slide 29). The cosmological argument had been rejected by some philosophers, because the notion of causality upon which it rests its foundations has been open to doubt since the commencement of Kalam (Fakhry, 1957). Al-Ghazali (d. 1111) however, rejected these doubts, on the basis that the requirement of this foundation is only a perception (Ghazali, 1997).

Taking this viewpoint into consideration, it is necessary to note that others still regard the cosmological argument highly, and it is still used by Muslim and western theologians today. In response to the claims about the universe being infinite in time, modern scholars use the following argument: if the universe was infinite in the past, there would be no such thing as the present. In other words, if there was no beginning in time, we would have never arrived at the present. This means that both time and space had a beginning and therefore need a (creative) cause. According to the cosmological argument, this cause is none other than God.

The default argument is another important argument for the existence of God, and it was first advanced by Nursi. He offered four possibilities for existence to come into being. He then claimed that if the first three are proven to be false and refuted through valid arguments, God’s existence will be proven by default. He argued that since creation exists; that every single being comes into existence in a necessary and great manner; and that all beings are finite and not eternal, they were either:

• Created by ordinary causes or formed through causes;
• Formed of their own power;
• Created by nature;
• Created by God.

According to Nursi (1995), human justification cannot find any other explanation apart from these four possibilities. Nursi then refuted the first three claims by using logical arguments.

In regards to the first three possibilities, Nursi’s refutations are based on the argument that causes do not possess intelligence. For example: the availability of ingredients are not enough to make a cake, hence a chef is required. If the universe was to occur by itself, then atoms and particles (which are the ingredients of the universe) require infinite knowledge to create something by themselves.

The following analogy may also shed some light onto the argument: If an architect is not accepted as the designer of a building, then each brick must possess complete knowledge of architecture. Furthermore, nature cannot cause the universe to come into being because nature, itself is a work of art; therefore, nature itself cannot be the artist. Nature is a set of laws, therefore it cannot be the lawgiver. Since the initial three theories are impossible, by default, God’s existence is proven. (Ozalp 2014, slide 20).

Nursi also provided another analogy in regards to the existence of God: a commander of an army can achieve many accomplishments by commanding a large quantity of soldiers. However, if the soldiers were required to perform these duties themselves, without guidance, it would result in disarray and have chaotic consequences. Similarly, assigning all astronomical occurrences to God develops a simple methodology to comprehend that God, Who through controlling astronomical circulations and orbits, and displaying art in the course of certain phases, proves there is Divine wisdom displayed in the universe. There is one Commander of the universe, and undoubtedly, that is God Almighty (Nursi 2001).

Nursi also explained the fact that God is the eternal one, without beginning or end. Non-existence is insubstantial to Him, for He does not require anything to exist, owing to the fact that life begins in His Essence. Without a creator, it is impossible for life to originate by itself, hence the only plausible and logical reasoning would be to accept a creator that has power over all things (Nursi 1993).

As we shift to a contemporary Muslim theologian, we first look at the idea of “Occam’s Razor,” a popular philosophical idea, which states that, “The simplest answer is usually right” (Clark, 2007). Supported by Occam’s Razor, Gulen appears to have a straightforward approach in regards to the existence of God. He argues that the existence of God is too obvious to require any arguments (Gulen 2000).

Gulen (2000) contends that it is impossible to prove the non-existence of God. In relation to creation, Gulen (2000) argues that anything can exist, at any time or at any place, and in any form. Therefore, everything is contingent, meaning it is possible that things can exist or not exist. As Gulen (2000) contends, things that are isolated are able to receive different qualities. The reality is that living and non-living things are provided with particular chosen forms; therefore, these chosen forms that exist require one who determined them to exist. Nothing can dictate how something will come into existence, except an infinite power behind all things, and possessing infinite will and knowledge over all things – and that power is God. Furthermore, Gulen argues that everything changes and thus everything has a beginning and an end. Therefore, whatever had a beginning requires something that has no beginning. Moreover, since physical agents cannot originate themselves, and since infinite regression is not possible, reason states that a creator is necessary, and this necessary creator is God Almighty.

Gulen (2001) also responds to the question of “Who created God?”, put forward by those who make a counter-argument to the causation argument for God. He (2001) states that the causation argument is not valid for God because if this criteria is applied to God, there will then be a never ending chain of creators. This is also elaborated on by Ergi (2013), who offers an analogy of a train and its carriages, and asks: what pulls the last carriage? The answer is the one in front, and then the one in front again; however, when arriving at the locomotive, it is utterly nonsensical to repeat the same question again, since the locomotive is self-powered and does not require an external power. Thus, the same question cannot be asked when reaching God in the chain of creation of matter. Taking this into consideration, this argument unequivocally proves the existence of God, since it would be logical to accept one creator who has no beginning than to enter into the impossible argument of infinite regress.

Can the life be self-originated? Is life a process that uncoiled corresponding with laws that could be comprehended by mankind? Natural laws do not have a real existence. Natural laws and causes draw the inference from the connections of events seen in the universe. This being the case, as they are dependent upon exterior components, they are not self-existent. Furthermore the universe is contingent.

As Gulen (2000) argues, two types of existence are reality: there are those things that exist necessarily and those existing on a conditional level. Those that exist incontrovertibly, exist only by a perquisite of their individual characteristics and attributes. Thus, nothing in it must exist, since it is not necessary for it to exist. Anything whose existence is conditional and contingent is not infinite. For that reason, life cannot be self-originated, because someone has to have preference over its non-existence or its possible existence. Anything that begins, will definitely end, so the idea of eternal creation is deemed to be false. Everything is dependent on something, so when tracing this chain as far back as possible, it is beyond reasonable to accept the fact that it is God who has no beginning and is the creator of all things. Taking these irrefutable arguments into deep contemplation and examination, it is logical and plausible to accept the fact that God is the only reasonable explanation for the origin of the universe and all of existence.

Through the thoughts and explanations of rational arguments regarding the proofs of God’s existence, it is evident that Muslim theologians have aspired to provide a sturdy and forceful structure to Islamic theology. After deep reflection, thought, and consideration surrounding the arguments that were provided by Muslim theologians, in this respect, it is clear that the evidence put forth unambiguously demonstrates that God exists and is the creator of all things. It is useful to ponder over analogies and to exercise scientific and rational reasoning as these scholars have put forward, so that we can have a better understanding of our existence.

Before the emergence of theories proposed by disbelievers, it was unnecessary to even engage in proving God’s existence. Obstacles like these theories are still being debated over, but via irrefutable analogies, scientific and rational reasoning, the existence of God is evident.

REFERENCES

• Clark, J. (2004). How Occam’s Razor Works. Retrieved from: http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/occams-razor.htm
• Ergi, O. 2013. Can a bridge build itself: essays on belief and moral values. [S.l.]: Ipg-Academic.
• Fakhry, M. (1957). The Classical Islamic Arguments for the Existence of God. The Muslim World, 47, 2.
• Ghazzālī, ., & Marmura, M. E. (1997). The incoherence of the philosophers =: Tahāfut al-falāsifah: a parallel English-Arabic text. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press.
• Gülen, F. (2000). Essentials of the Islamic faith. Fairfax, Va: The Fountain.
• Gulen, F. (2001). Who created God?. Retrieved from: https://fgulen.com/en/fethullah-gulens-works/1363-questions-and-answers/24495-who-created-god
• Nasr, S. H. (1964). An introduction to Islamic cosmological doctrines: Conceptions of nature and methods used for its study by the Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʼ, al-Bīrūnī, and Ibn Sīnā. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
• Nursi, S., & Vahide, S.. (1993). The Words. Istanbul, Turkey: Sozler Publications.
• Nursi, S. (1995). The Flashes collection. Istanbul, Turkey: Sozler Nesriyat A.S.
• Nursi, S., & Vahide, S. (2001). Letters. Istanbul: Sozler Nesriyat.
• Ozalp, M. (2014). Lecture 2: Existence of God (World view and Faith Essentials). [PowerPoint Slides]. Retrieved January 8, 2015, from Charles Sturt University website. (Link no longer available)
• Ozalp, M. (2014). Lecture 4: Proof of God’s Existence. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from Charles Sturt University website: http://interact.csu.edu.au/access/content/group/ISL202_201490_UC_D/Lectures/Lecture%204%20-%20Proofs%20of%20God_s%20Existence.pdf

The first steps to be taken on the way of truth are belief, righteous deeds and wakefulness. For this reason, lightning can be regarded as the first step of, not this journey, but rather the spiritual states (of sainthood) that one steps through during the journey.

The difference between lightning and ecstasy is that ecstasy emerges in the home of meeting with the All-Beloved, while lightning flashes when permission to enter the sanctuary of the All-Beloved to meet with Him is given. For this reason, ecstasy sends zeal into the heart, awakening in it a burning desire to meet the All-Beloved from among the lights of state, urging the petitioning of more and more of His gifts and to rise to higher ranks. As for lightning, it hits the eye like a dazzling light and reminds one that the door of the All-Beloved is ajar. For those who are to cross the threshold of sainthood, we recall the following couplet of Ibnu’l-Farid,  a couplet full of excitement:

Has a dazzling lightning flashed from the direction of Mount Sinai, Or have the veils over the face of Layla been opened part way? So it is that while living in the dark night of corporeality and bodily desires, Layla began to show herself step by step and to send the hope of union into the hearts, and in the end the nights changed into days in the hearts of those who had been burning for union with her.

Because it signifies permission to enter the way to union, lightning is considered as the start of the journey for the travelers on the way to the Ultimate Truth. At this setting out, God Almighty makes His servants, who are candidates for sainthood, aware of His offerings and Grandeur and of the servants’ own helplessness and poverty, enabling them to awaken to the love of God and to form a sincere relationship with Him, abandoning attachment however slight to transient, decaying, earth-bound things. These are the first gifts of God. In addition, like the favors offered to Moses on Mount Sinai, initiates need to feel some things and change their solitude into company (with the True, Eternal Friend) to better endure the difficulties of the journey and the loneliness. So lightning can be considered as the pleasure of feeling God’s friendliness, and a favor given to counter the difficulties that a traveler is bound to face during the journey.

Lightning has another face, by which an initiate is reminded of God’s omnipresence and given the signal of self-possession. Initiates are warned that entering the Realm of the Holy Presence requires self-possession. Fear and alarm are aroused in their inner world by this warning. So, with its two aspects—one bringing deep pleasure and desire, the other causing fear and alarm—lightning serves to prevent the traveler both from falling into despair and from uttering words of pride incompatible with the rules of the Shari‘a.

The gifts coming on the wavelength of lightning are the Lord’s favors to the traveler; they are provision for the journey. These favors are the means of innocent delight for the traveler, because of Him Who sent them, and as a result of the recognition of poverty on the part of the one receiving. The traveler acknowledges this favor, as indicated in the verse (10:58), Say: “In the grace and bounty of God and in His mercy—in this, then, let them rejoice.” Reflecting on the Divine favors received, the person confesses that everything is from Him and proclaims: “All praise be to Him,” expressing the feeling of unworthiness for such favors, as Gedai did: That which I have—I am not worthy of it; this favor and grace—why are they bestowed on me?

Thereupon the traveler journeying to God bows in humility and thankfulness. The saying of the pride of humankind, the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings, I am the master of the children of Adam, yet I am not proud at all,33 is the crystal in which this reality is reflected, from whichever side it is looked at.

O God! I ask You for good in its entirety, with all its beginning and end and with its visible and invisible, and high ranks in Paradise. And bestow blessings and peace on the Prophet, the intercessor whose intercession is acceptable to God, and on his family and Companions, those of great merit and loyalty.

What many Jews and Muslims do not realize is that they share many similar religious beliefs. I believe that if more people were taught about the many connections between Judaism and Islam, they would see them as a bridge toward greater interfaith understanding.

Shared belief in one God

One of the most fundamental ways in which Judaism and Islam are similar is their firm monotheistic belief in one God. Jews recite the following verse from Deuteronomy 6:4 as part of their daily prayers:

“Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.”[1]

This is probably the best-known declaration of faith in all of Judaism, because it establishes absolute monotheismand belief in the absolute unity of God. The medieval Jewish philosopher Maimonides affirmed that “God is one. He is not two or more, but one, unified in a manner that surpasses any unity that is found in the world.”[2]

This is certainly similar to Shahada, the first pillar of Islam, in which Muslims state that “there is no god but Allah,” as well as the declaration in the Qur’an, 112:1, which states, “Say: ‘He – (He is) God, (Who is) the Unique One of Absolute Oneness.”[3]

Both Judaism and Islam teach that it is God who created the universe. The Hebrew Bible opens with this statement in the book of Genesis:

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

So too does the Qur’an 7:54 state:

“Indeed your Lord is God, Who has created the heavens and the earth in six days.”

Both religions affirm that it is God who creates and forms human beings. The Hebrew Bible states in Genesis 2:7, that “The Lord God formed man from the dust of the earth.” A parallel verse is found in the Qur’an 40:67: “He it is Who created you from earth.”

Shared reverence for the Hebrew Bible and Biblical prophecy

Traditional Judaism is based on the belief that the Hebrew Bible is the sacred word of God. Within the Bible, the Torah is considered the most sacred, because according to Rabbinic tradition, Moses received not only the Ten Commandments from God at Mount Sinai, but also the entire Torah. The Torah’s commandments, teachings, and theological beliefs form the core of what Jews believe and how they are to behave.

The Qur’an sees the transmission of the divine word as a process that encompasses both the Hebrew Bible and the Christian New Testament. 3:3-4 confirms that “He sends down on you the Book in parts with the truth, confirming (the Divine origin of, and the truths still contained by) the Revelations prior to it. And He sent down the Torah and the Gospel in time past, as guidance for the people.”

While Islam views the Qur’an as the culmination of divine revelation, it accepts the divine origin of both the Torah and the Gospels.

The tradition of prophets, who received messages from God and transmitted them to the community, is very ancient in Judaism. Moses stands out as a prophet, because he was able to receive prophetic messages “face to face” with God (Deuteronomy 34:10). Islam also reveres prophets. The Biblical prophets of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament are accepted by Islam as authentic, with Muhammad as the pinnacle of prophetic activity:

“We have believed in God (without associating any partners with Him), and that which has been sent down to us, and that which has been sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the Prophets who were raised in the tribes, and that which was given to Moses and Jesus, and that (knowledge, wisdom, and Prophethood) which was given to all other Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them” (Qur’an 2:136).

Shared belief in the Afterlife, Final Judgment, and Resurrection

Both Judaism and Islam share a belief in an afterlife – that as human beings we are created with both a body and a soul, and that after death our soul continues. The ancient Rabbis stated in Talmud Shabbat 152b, “After death, the souls of the righteous are kept beside the Throne of Glory in heaven.” Concerning the soul, the Qur’an 89:27-30 states, “O you soul at rest (content with the truths of faith and God’s commands, and with His treatment of His creatures!) Return to your Lord, well-pleased (with Him and His treatment of you, and well-pleasing to Him.”

Both Judaism and Islam also believe that human souls will experience a Final Judgment at the end of time, when all the righteous will receive their ultimate reward and the wicked their ultimate punishment. For both Judaism and Islam, the righteous will be resurrected after death, with their bodies and souls reunited forever, and will enjoy eternity in a heavenly realm. The prophet Ezekiel in the Hebrew Bible describes resurrection in dramatic, poetic terms:

“Thus the Lord God said to the dry bones: ‘I will cause breath to enter you and you shall live again. I will lay sinews upon you, and cover you with flesh, and form skin over you. And I will put breath into you, and you shall live again.’”

So too does the Qur’an 39:67, 73-74 describe resurrection in uplifting terms:

“The whole earth will be in His Grasp on the Day of Resurrection, and the heavens will be rolled up in His Right Hand… Those who keep from disobedience to their Lord in reverence for Him and piety will be led to Paradise in companies. When they finally arrive there, its doors will be opened (as sheer grace from God), and its keepers will welcome them saying: ‘Peace be upon you! Well you have faired and are purified (from the foul residues of sin, and delivered from all suffering), so enter it (Paradise) to abide!’ And they say: ‘All praise and gratitude are for God, Who has fulfilled His promise to us, and has made us inheritors of this land (of bliss).’ ”

The centrality of prayer and ritual

Both Jews and Muslims are required to pray daily, and daily prayer is the second pillar of Islam. For Jews, there are three daily prayer services, and for Muslims, five. These consistent times of prayer are meant to remind us of God’s continuous presence in the world and to give us opportunities to give praise and thanks to God.

Both traditions also have times of fasting, during which neither food nor water is permitted. Jews fast on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), when we confess and atone for our sins, resolve to turn from evil, and ask for God’s forgiveness. Muslims fast during the month of Ramadan, which is the fourth pillar of Islam. Like Judaism, the Qur’an 2:183 states that fasting during Ramadan is “so that you may deserve God’s protection (against the temptations of your carnal soul) and attain piety.”

Both Judaism and Islam affirm the spiritual value of religious pilgrimage. For Jews, there are three pilgrimage festivals each year (Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot) that are ideally observed in Israel, and many Jews make the effort to be in Israel for these sacred times. Similarly, the pilgrimage to Mecca, the fifth pillar of Islam, is a supremely important religious observance.

Jews and Muslims are also required to observe dietary laws. They share the prohibition against eating pork. These restrictions cause us to think about God every time we eat, provide us with a daily discipline of paying attention to what we put in our mouths, and cause us to see eating as a sanctified ritual, rather than mindlessly consuming whatever food is readily available.

Shared values

One of the most cherished values in Judaism is that of tzedakah, which involves acts of charity to those in need. Leviticus 19:9-10 teaches us, “When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap all the way to the edges of your field, or gather the gleanings of your harvest. You shall not pick your vineyard bare, or gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger.”

Similarly, the third pillar of Islam is Zakat, the duty of Muslims to give charity to the poor and needy. The Qur’an 2:177 praises the person who “gives away of his property with pleasure, although he loves it, to relatives, orphans, the destitute, the wayfarer, and those who have to beg (or who need a loan).”

Both religions have a very high regard for the value of humility. The Hebrew Bible notes that humility is the outstanding trait of Moses:

“Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth” (Numbers 12:3).

The same is found in the Qur’an 25:63:

“The (true) servants of the All-Merciful are they who move on the earth gently and humbly.”

Lastly, both traditions emphasize the power of forgiveness. In the Hebrew Bible, Exodus 34:6-7 lists God’s qualities of forgiveness:

“A God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in kindness and faithfulness, extending kindness to the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin.”

Islam also emphasizes the qualities of Allah as “the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful” in the Basmala. We are all imperfect human beings who rely on God’s boundless mercy to forgive us when we sin and help us to repent for our wrongs.

Judaism and Islam also expect believers to be forgiving of each other, just as God is forgiving of us. The medieval Jewish philosopher Maimonides emphasized that we are required to forgive those who have harmed us:

“It is forbidden for a person to be cruel and refuse to be appeased. Rather, he should be easily pacified, but hard to anger. When a person who wronged him asks for forgiveness, he should forgive him with a complete heart and a willing spirit. Even if he aggravated and wronged him severely, he should not seek revenge or bear a grudge.”[4]

The ideal of the forgiving person is described in the Qur’an 3:134 as the kind of person who is “ever-restraining their rage (even when provoked and able to retaliate), and pardoning people (their offenses). God loves (such) people who are devoted to doing good.”

A bridge to interfaith understanding

These are just a few examples of the many ways in which Judaism and Islam share common beliefs and values. In today’s fractured world, it is vital that Jews and Muslims understand what they have in common and reach out to each other in friendship and support. We need to repair the gaping hole where ignorance currently resides. Knowledge of each other is the only way to prevent future religious bigotry and violence, and to replace hatred with love.