Doing or producing something good and beautiful and ensuring that others perceive these beauties as “beautiful,” and then sustaining these beauties, are two different things. Indeed, working on diligently like a laborer, opening educational institutions, shedding light on the paths people walk, and reaching out to all corners of the world despite limited material resources and means are beautiful services that deserve recognition and applause. However, maintaining this work flawlessly and without imperfections is just as important as starting it and bringing it to a certain level. For this purpose, serious intellectual effort, reasonable and strategic action, of course, are necessary. Regardless of the location of the service, it can be considered as the initial steps of this strategy to analyze it very well, to read the feelings of the individuals involved very well, to take into account the current conjuncture, and to preemptively address the problems that may arise in the short and long term.

If we delve a bit deeper, you may have initiated a task with very sincere feelings. Your emotions, thoughts, and attitudes are very humane. At the core of all your activities lies the pleasure of God and the benefit of humanity. You are progressing by building your plans on both the firm principles of religion and universal values. You have no issues with anyone. However, after a certain stage, you should not forget that there may be individuals with very different thoughts, intentions, and understandings who could have problems with you. Here, relying solely on your sincerity, good intention and authenticity would be incomplete. If you have not been able to read the feelings of others correctly and cannot foresee certain events that may occur in the future, despite showering some people with kindness and favors, your acts of goodwill may not yield the expected results and could lead to antipathy towards you.

That’s why it is necessary to step back appropriately and consider various approaches for those you interact with. This could involve saying, “You know this job better and can do it better,” engaging in collective work with them, presenting the matter with different perspectives, colors and patterns to broaden their horizons, and assuming a role as an enlightening and stimulating guide through the support you provide. These are different ways of action that today’s dedicated individuals should contemplate.

By acting with humane feelings, you can rush to the aid of people affected by disasters such as earthquakes, floods, and storms in different parts of the world. However, if you do not consider the different dynamics in those places, even in such a well-intentioned endeavor, you may eventually draw the hostile feelings of certain local or foreign groups. For instance, the continuous applause for some of the commendable work you do, the attention directed towards you, can breed envy in some individuals.

To provide a concrete example; let’s say you’ve opened schools in a country, and these schools have been remarkably successful. Students from your schools consistently win medals in various competitions and science Olympiads. As other schools fail to achieve the same level of success, envy might develop towards you. Some may view you as a competitor and engage in a rivalry, or even go to great lengths to try and shut down your schools. It’s essential to foresee all of these possibilities in advance, take necessary precautions, and develop the right approaches accordingly.

Wherever we serve, we must thoroughly understand the conditions of that place and act accordingly. There is no need to suspect secrecy or ill intent in this; it’s simply about ensuring the continuity of the good deeds and acts of kindness. As mentioned earlier, not everyone can interpret everything correctly and appropriately. That’s why we must proceed not only with good intentions but also with knowledge and research. Some societies may not want individuals educated in your institutions to have a say in the future of their own countries as intellectuals, fearing that a foreign culture might erase their values and replace them with its own. We shouldn’t cause a situation where they will say, “A culture came and wiped out all our values, replacing them with their own, and they did this with our generation.” Therefore, flexibility and assurance should be prominent in the education of individuals in these places, not causing them concern. Our fundamental principle was, after all: When we go somewhere, while sharing our own beauties with people by explaining and endearing them, we should also learn and appreciate the beauties of that place, enriching our own values. In this way, by melting all of humanity’s values into one pot, we can generate a universal collection of human values where everyone can find something of themselves within it.

However, in your determination to act wisely and strategically, you should not compromise your character and your own values. You have to stand yourself, maintain your own position, where you want to hold someone else and lift them up. A person who rashly and unpreparedly jumps into a swamp to save someone who is drowning, perhaps admired for their courage, but in such a situation, neither of them can be saved.

A good example of acting wisely is found in the 65th verse of the Surah Al-Anfal in the Qur’an. In that verse, God states that one person in an ideal community of believers equipped with the power of patience is worth ten individuals. Yet, in the 66th verse, our attentions are drawn to realities of the human condition, and the ratio is revised to one to two, upon which it is stated to establish the strategy. This means that it is not right to engage in a struggle in the name of heroism where such a balance of power does not exist. If you march against a powerful army with only a handful of people, the result will not be good neither for you nor for those you are setting out to save. Your sacrifices should have a goal to achieve. This requires them to be done consciously, thoughtfully, and well calculated.

Reason is a significant gift from God to humanity. Thought is its product. Humans should not live disconnected from reason and thought; they should make their conscience a companion to these faculties and, as believers, test their approach against the Prophetic tradition. This means, for Muslims for instance, evaluating the blessed life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), his expressions, actions, and judgments, taking into account the conditions and circumstances of today, and trying to solve our problems on this solid foundation.

“The architects of the heart” should act in accordance with the fundamental disciplines found in the sources of faith, and they should prioritize taking action. This means that they should start their journey – i.e., take action – as soon as they can, with a firm adherence to fundamental disciplines and an overarching plan. Subtle details for thought and theoretical aspects will emerge later based on the circumstances they will come across during the journey. Then, while progressing on the path, intellect and thought should be employed to solve encountered problems, and more detailed plans should emerge regarding how and where to act. During the implementation of these plans, reasoning and collective consciousness should continue to be applied. As a result, this process will become a virtuous cycle where thought fuels action, and action, in turn, enriches thought, leading to the desired goal. If you claim to plan and project every detail from start to finish and then implement it right away, your plan may not align with the conditions you will face later. This can cause those in the leading positions to take on oppressive and totalitarian methods, and impose their views on others. This may eventually result in the formation of oligarchic structures, and the emergence of irresponsible, unaccountable charismatic leaders.

Every essential oil gets its uniqueness not just due to one of its components but because of its delicate and complex admixture. The individual perfume and therapeutic value of each essential oil depends on this balance.

What is aromatherapy?

Aromatherapy is the practice of using essential oils, also known as volatile plant oils, for physical and psychological health. These essential oils and/or essences are concentrated liquids that are extracted from many different types of wild or cultivated plants. Essential oils can be obtained from different parts of the plant, such as the flower, leaves, fruits, bark, roots, and resins. Some examples of essentials oils are Agar oil, highly coveted for its wonderful fragrance, and Geranium oil, used in herbal medicine. As for essences, they can be obtained not only from flowers and resins but also from chemicals such as benzoins, and plants such as gaiacs and pines. Some examples of resins that can be used for their essences are Asafoetida, which is dried latex that certain Ferula plants exude from their tap root, and Myrrh, which comes from thorny plants of the genus Commiphora.

A brief history of aromatherapy

It’s hard to say when people first started using aromatherapy, partly because the practice of using plant-derived ingredients for medicinal (and other) purposes is as old as time. There is evidence that the Chinese may have used aromatherapy several thousands of years ago, with an emphasis on maintaining harmony and equilibrium. Some years after this the Egyptians were able to develop a machine that could distill cedar wood oil. Later on, the Greeks adapted aromatherapy from the Egyptians. “Istenshaque,” a form of aromatherapy, was first practiced in the Greek system of medicine by Hippocrates (460-370 BC). In the 11^th century, the renowned Avicenna developed a coiled cooling pipe that made the essential oil distillation process much faster. The term “aromatherapy” was eventually coined by the French chemist and scholar Dr. Rene Maurice Gattefoss’e (1881-1950) in 1930 and thereafter practiced as a medical science for the treatment of various diseases.

What are essential oils composed of?

From a chemical analysis standpoint and by chromatography it is evident that essential oils are not single entities but can instead be classified as compounds. Additionally, essential oils are volatile in steam, which means they will turn into a gas in the presence of steam. They differ entirely in both chemical and physical properties from fixed oils, which are also known as non-volatile oils. Animal or vegetable oils are very common types of fixed oils. Essential oils consist of many organic constituents which unite in a delicate and complex balance to produce a wide range of therapeutic and olfactory qualities. For example, the oil of the eucalyptus leaf contains no less than 250 different constituents. In one study, researchers were able to identify 40 different compounds in tea tree oil using chromatography methods (Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry). Every essential oil gets its uniqueness not just due to one of its components but because of its delicate and complex admixture. The individual perfume and therapeutic value of each essential oil depends on this balance.

Scope & methods

• Olfaction (shamoom): Aromatic medicines either in dried or liquid forms are kept in a vessel and the fumes are inhaled. Rose oil is often used in this manner.
• Inhalation (lakhlakha): Aromatic medicines or pungent medicines either dried or liquid forms are kept in a wide mouthed bottle and then inhaled. With this method the vapors of the medicines not only reach up to the nose but can reach down in to the respiratory passage as well. Camphor is a common choice for inhalation therapy.
• Massage (dalak): Some treatments involve massaging the oil into the skin directly, and can be one of the more effective treatment methods.
• Poultices: Essential oils used in poultices bring out impurities of the skin. These treatments sooth irritation and relieve congestion and pain. Most frequently, poultices are made up of linseed (Alsi) or mustard. These are particularly useful for chest complaints and skin diseases.
• Compresses: Used externally, particularly on eyes. They can be either hot or cold depending on the effect required.

Base oils and carrier oils

Most essential oils are not used in their pure, undiluted sate. Rather, they are mixed into a fixed plant oil base, like almond, soya, or wheat germ. These base or carrier oils act as balancing and stabilizing agents. They are typically pure, have little to no smell, and are easy for essential oils to dissolve in. The ratio of essential oils to base oils differs for each oil. For example, 2 to 3 drops of essential oil to 5 ml of base oil can be used for the body, and 1 drop essential oil to 5 ml base oil can be used for the face.

Some commonly used oils

• Almond oil: Oil extracted from bitter and sweet almond.
  Constituents: Olein is the chief constituent. Other constituents are glyceride and linoleic acid.
  Action: Skin softening agent, lubricant, nourishing and revitalizing.
  Uses: Wonderful for dry, wrinkled hands. Very beneficial for eczema and skin irritation of any kind.
• Castor oil:
  Constituents: Major constituents are palmatic, fatty acids, ricinoleic acid and glycerine.
  Uses: as soothing agent for skin rashes, in embalming, eczema, dryness of the skin.
• Soya oil:
  Constituents: Oleic, linoleic, stearic and palmitic acid.
  Action: Lowers cholesterol levels.
  Uses: To be taken every day in salad dressing or with rice dishes.
• Sage leaf (Salvia officinalis)
  Action: Antiseptic, astringent.
  Uses: Mouth washes and gargle, Alzheimer’s disease, memory loss.
• Thyme & thyme oil (Thymus vulgaris)
  Action: Antiseptic, anti-tussive, expectorant, spasmolytic.
  Uses: Cough cold, spasmodic pain.
• Lavender oil (Lavendula angustifolia)
  Action: Masks disagreeable odors, heals skin burn and acts as relaxant in premenstrual tension.
  Uses: In ointment, rheumatic pain.
• Aniseed (Pimpinella anisum)
  Action: Carminative, appetizer, hepto-tonic, stomachic, diuretic, emmenogogue, galactogogue, analgesic.
  Uses: flatulence, loss of appetite, liver disorders, indigestion, renal disorders, to stimulate lactation, for pain.
• Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare)
  Action: Carminative, stomachic, diuretic, emmenogogue & galactogogue and vermicide.
  Uses: flatulence, loss of appetite, indigestion, renal disorders, to stimulate lactation and worm infestation.
• Cumin (Cumin cyminum)
  Action: General tonic, digestive, antiseptic, bactericide, carminative, detergent (Jaali)
  Uses:Indigestion, loss of appetite, infections, flatulence, skin disorders.
• Cinnamon oil (Cinnamomum zeylanicum)
  Action: Rubefacient, carminative, powerful germicide, anti-rheumatic, digestive, analgesic, detergent.
  Uses: Skin disorders, flatulence, infection, arthritis and indigestion.
• Camphor (Cinnamomum camphora)
  Action: externally: rubefacient, internally-mild antiseptic, carminative, antipyretic.
  Uses: skin disorders, infections, flatulence and fever.
• Caraway (Carum carvi)
  Action: Carminative, antispasmodic, galactogogauge and emmenogogue.
  Uses: Flatulance, colic, stimulate lactation and dysmenorrhea.
• Myrrh (Commiphora)
  Action: Antiseptic, antibiotic, stomachic, emmenogogue, diuretic, anti-inflammatory, wound healing properties.
  Uses: as an essence and in perfumes, mouth wash, in anti-ulcer treatment and is cytoprotective.
• Clove oil (Eugenia caryophyllus)
  Action: Stimulant, antiseptic, stomachic, expectorant, sedative, carminative, antispasmodic, digestive.
  Uses: Mouth and tooth infection, flatulence, rheumatic pain, bronchitis, cold.
• Eucalyptus oil (Eucalyptus globus)
  Action: Decongestant.
  Uses: Internally: Mixtures, inhalations, lozenges. Externally: In ointments and liniments.
• Chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla)
  Action: Antiseptic, anxiolytic, digestive, disinfectant, carminative antipyretic.
  Uses: Insomnia, headache, migraine, facial neuralgia, sinusitis, dermatitis, acne, eczema, abscesses, boils, amenorrhea, pre-menstrual tension, cystitis, colic, loss of appetite.
• Sandal wood (Santalum album)
  Action: Calming action on dry skin, aphrodisiac.
  Uses: For dry and chapped skin.
• Rose oil (Rosa domascena)
  Action: Cardio tonic, resolvent, anti-inflammatory.
  Uses: In perfumery, palpitation, inflammation.

Precautions while using essential oils

Although essential oils are useful for treating a number of ailments you should still take the necessary precautions before using them. For example, you should always perform a skin test before using an essential oil, since everyone is unique and reacts differently to different oils. Body size, age, and sex also makes a difference. As for storage, essential oils should always be stored in dark glass bottles away from sunlight.

In our era that is characterized by stressful environments and ever-changing life styles, essential oil aromatherapy offers an optimal answer to the emerging health burden of degenerative diseases. It not only offers therapeutic but also preventative and restorative health benefits, without most of the side effects of modern treatment schedules. Hence aromatherapy with its wide scope and application potential offers a therapeutic solution for not only diseased body systems but also soothes the soul and the spirit, thereby taking care of the stress component that is prominent in many illnesses.

Starting from the perspective of the description above, some scholars deal with wisdom in two categories, namely practical and theoretical, as they have done with reason. Theoretical wisdom is the effort that one makes along with a God-given ability to observe things and events as if they were an exhibition. It is also an attempt to penetrate the meaning behind and purpose for such events in order to study and read them like a book, to listen to them like a symphony, and to study and try to understand the mysterious relationship between the physical and metaphysical realms of existence.

As for practical wisdom, it is turning to the Owner of this exhibition, the Author of this book, the Composer of this symphony and trying to discover Him through worship, running to Him in love and yearning, and deeply experiencing the awe and amazement of being in His presence. So, to sum up, wisdom begins with reflection, curiosity, wonder, and the zeal to study and search, and continues with obedience and worship, ending in spiritual pleasures and eternal happiness.

Studying the Qur’anic verses where wisdom is mentioned, we can add to the above explanation the following points:

Wisdom means the subtleties and mysteries of the Qur’an. Since the Qur’an is, in one respect, the correlative of the book of the universe and, in another, its interpretation and explanation, its subtleties and mysteries are also those of the book of the universe. The Qur’an indicates this in the verse (2:269), He grants the wisdom to whomever He wills, and whoever is granted the wisdom, has indeed been granted much good.

Wisdom means Prophethood and the meaning of Messengership. The scholars of the Hadith have interpreted it as Sunna (the way of the Messenger). The verses, God granted him (David) kingdom and wisdom (2:251), and We granted Luqman wisdom (31:12), refer to this meaning.

Wisdom, in both its theoretical and practical aspects, means goodwill, which is mentioned in: Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation and preaching (16:125).

Some have defined wisdom as correct judgment, and acting as one should act and doing what is necessary to do at the right time and right place. We can elaborate on this meaning, which can be re-stated as being just, moderate, balanced, and straightforward as follows:

Giving everything its due, or right judgment, without going to extremes, viewing and discharging our responsibilities in the framework of the Shari‘a, fulfilling the necessary conditions and prerequisites for any desired result, avoiding extremes, even when doing good deeds, being careful to maintain the fact that religion can be practiced or lived under all circumstances, and leading a life in accordance with the Sunna of the Prophet.

Always preferring God’s decisions and judgments concerning us over our own choices, and leading our lives according to the rule, Submit to God and be saved,1 i.e. being resigned to all of God’s decrees and acts concerning our lives and nature, without ever forgetting that God has wisdom in whatever He does, and does nothing in vain.

Being steadfast in following the Messenger strictly in our thoughts and actions in full perception of his way, and as stated in the verse (12:108), Say: “This is my way: I call to God based on conscious insight and sure knowledge – I and those who follow me,” serving our religion and humanity in his way with conscious insight and sure knowledge.

The principal sources of wisdom are Divine Revelation and inspiration.16 This means that all the Prophets and all the spiritual guides, each according to his rank, are also sages or wise people whose special property is wisdom. Such people apply spiritual therapy to those diseased in mind and spirit (those who have followed wrong ways in thought and belief and who suffer from spiritual discontentment), and, by God’s leave, cure them, trying to keep their spiritual lives cleansed of the viruses brought on by evil nature and sin.

In view of the missions (special tasks and occupations) of the Prophets and saints, we can add to the definition of wisdom the following:

Wisdom is unity of thought, intention, and action. Right thinking, precision in expression, and acting in the right way are true signs of wisdom.

Certainty in knowledge, soundness in action, and perfection in any performance, which we can paraphrase as supporting knowledge with action or practice, and doing any work of art with efficiency, which adds to the artist’s zeal and ability, also demonstrate wisdom.

Grasping the aims of religion and, in addition to representing it in individual life, trying to make it prevail in life or ordering life accordingly, is a dimension of wisdom.

Perceiving the essence of existence together with its inner truth, as well as the peculiarities of each thing together with its relationship with all other things, and the Creator’s purposes for the existence and life of things, is another, important dimension of wisdom.

Approaching things in order to understand and analyze their uses and the benefits expected of them, and, as a vicegerent of God, to use them within the limits He has set, is an aspect of wisdom relating to art.

Seeing everything in the light of the Divine way, which is responsible for the perfect accord, order, and balance in the universe, where everything is in its exact place, the observation of this same order and the balance in our lives, and the development of sciences that study the earth and the sky to maintain the balance in them, is another approach to wisdom.

Pursuing the best goals in life, trying to make prevail what is good and preferable in the relationships between the rulers and the ruled, and, by adopting God’s way of conduct and treatment of His servants in our individual and social life, making heavenly the systems of government on earth, realizing God’s purposes for sending the Prophets, are other, excellent dimensions of wisdom.

In order to distinguish between reasoning and logic that are guided by the All-Merciful One, and those guided by the suggestions and misleading of Satan, one should submit one’s intellect to the guidance of God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, and always be on the alert. It is only by so doing that one can feel the Divine gifts of correct judgment, sound reasoning, and wise thinking appear within oneself; thereafter one begins to feel and think correctly and is saved from self- contradiction in one’s behavior. In the end, wise, right thinking and behavior become second nature—this means the adoption of the Divine way of conduct. We can also describe this as the transformation of theoretical reason into practical reason, and theoretical wisdom into practical, or, according to some Sufi leaders, the angelic aspects of a human being surpassing their satanic ones.

Knowledge, combined with action is an important dimension of wisdom. Although action is not a part of belief or, in other words, neglecting to practice religion in daily life is not a sign of unbelief, it is certain that action is an important aspect of religion. Putting knowledge into practice or practicing the religious commandments in daily life after learning them is an essential of Islam. The verse (51:56), I have not created the jinn and humankind but only to worship Me, warns us of this. Mere information without action will not help. As pointed out before, existence is a book or an exhibition of wisdom, with the Qur’an being its voice or translator or description. What falls on humanity is to read and study the book of creation in the Qur’an. Those who are able to do so are, in the words of the Qur’an, rewarded with abundant good, and gain great value in proportion to the depth of their inner world and the sharpness of their faculties. Contrarily, those who see the realities on the face of existence but cannot discern the truths lying behind it and the purpose for it alongside the magnificent order it displays, are doomed to not receive its messages. This is manifestly a loss or failure.

O God! Show us the truth as being true and enable us to follow it, and show us falsehood as being false and enable us to refrain from it. Amen!

Note

1. al-Bukhari, “Bad’u’l-Wahy,” 6.

Discussions over personal liberty and government intervention are as old as modern governments, as J.S. Mill’s writings show.

John Stuart Mill was among the many philosophers, both before and after, who attempted to determine when government intervention in the private lives of individuals was legitimate. The authoritarian regimes of 19^th century Europe triggered thinkers to study citizen’s rights and state powers. Mill attempted to regulate the actions of these authoritarian regimes by distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate government intervention in his book On Liberty. Mill’s ideas were one influence among many on the structure and laws of the modern nation state. Using his ideas on freedom and government as a starting point, we can discuss psychological harm, human fallibility, and social responsibilities.

Mill, in On Liberty, identifies two mechanisms for determining legitimate government intervention: the harm principle and utilitarianism. The harm principle states that government can only legitimately interfere with the actions of individuals if the actions of the individuals harm others against their will. Thus, if an action does not harm another against their will, the government cannot interfere. Notice that an individual can harm themselves or even other people with the appropriate consent. Effectively, the harm principle constitutes an absolute bar to government intervention on unharmful private action.

The second mechanism, utilitarianism, comes into play after government intervention is considered to be legitimate due to harmful consequences of private actions. At this point, the government must do a utility calculation, or a cost-benefit analysis, in which it must determine whether government intervention will result in more harm than the private action it will attempt to stop. If the analysis indicates that government intervention will result in more harm, government intervention would be considered illegitimate, and vice versa. Thus, while the harm principle constituted an absolute categorical bar, the utilitarianism mechanic requires a case-by-case determination of the legitimacy of government intervention.

In order to apply the harm principle it is important not only to know what the principle is, but also what constitutes harm. The broader the definition of harm becomes, the larger the pool of actions that the government can interfere with becomes. In general, the classification of physical damage to body and property as harm is generally accepted by society as well as by Mill. However, the definition of harm can include things other than just physical damage. In order to properly apply the harm principle, it must be determined whether psychological harm and failure to act can be classified as harm, warranting government intervention.

Psychological Harm

Can feeling distress, being upset, or experiencing psychological harm due to another individual’s actions be categorized as harm? If one were to accept distress as harm, then the definition of harm has effectively been broadened to include every instance in which one feels discomfort or is upset by another’s action, expanding the sphere of legitimate government intervention.

Mill does not determine distress or psychological harm to be harm. The distress or psychological harm Mill refers to is one originating from a disagreement of values between two individuals. For example, one individual may like the color blue while another dislikes it. The distress, anger, resentment, or any other negative feelings the other may feel when the first wears a blue shirt is the psychological harm that Mill refers to. A more consequential example would be the distress that a Democrat may feel about the ideas expressed at a Republican rally. The views expressed at the rally are clearly contrary to the individual’s beliefs, yet the distress originating from this ideological difference cannot be categorized as harm. If it was categorized as harm, then the government could intervene whenever actions or speech was contrary to the ideology and beliefs of the most powerful or the most vocal.

Mill, in On Liberty, states that “unless we are willing to adopt the logic of persecutors, and to say that we may persecute others because we are right and they must not persecute us because they are wrong, we must beware of admitting a principle of which we should resent as a gross injustice the application to ourselves” (1). Here he attempts to stop the use of the harm principle in attempts to impose beliefs or one’s own moral values on others. He argues that imposing views on another is wrong, because one would not want others to impose their views on them. Additionally, Mill emphasizes the fallibility of human reasoning and preferences, stating that despite one’s conviction in one’s own position in an argument, there is always the possibility of error.

Admittance of the fallibility is not only a sign of humility and recognition of possibilities, but also a very real demonstration of understanding one’s own limitations inherent in being human. This principle has been recognized and applied by many scholars and thinkers in addition to Mill, like Socrates and Said Nursi. For example, in The Republic, Plato quotes Socrates as exclaiming “[a]s for me, all I know is that I know nothing” (2).

Similarly, Said Nursi demonstrates the same recognition of the fallibility of human beings in his Risale-i Nur and attributes true knowledge only to God. This is clearly displayed in his use of text from the Quran at the beginning and ending of all the chapters in The Words. Thus, Nursi begins his work by drawing from what he considers the true source of knowledge and ends with that same infallible source.

Lastly, English philosopher Thomas Hobbes seems to support Mill’s position against persecution by arguing in Leviathan that “do not that to another, which thou wouldst not have done to thyself” (3). Hobbes’ view is in effect a version of the golden rule, limiting social interaction to only actions one would deem acceptable if done to him/her. In congruence with Hobbes’s golden rule, Mill argues that imposing one’s views on others is wrong, and that feeling upset due to the failure of others to conform to those views is not harm. Thus, even if the actions of an individual upset or cause psychological harm to others, the government cannot legitimately interfere.

Failure to Act

Though Mill prevents distress or psychological harm from being used to legitimize government intervention over an individual’s actions, he permits failure to act to be classified as harm. In situations where a failure to act causes a negative or harmful outcome, government intervention would be legitimate. For example, the government may prosecute a firefighter if his negligence allowed a building to burn down. However, classifying failure to act or inaction as harm is dangerous, because people are not capable of infinite actions in a moment. The jurisdiction of government intervention is expanded tremendously by this classification. Why would Mill, who constructed a mechanism for limiting government intervention, expand government power in this way? And what restraints can be applied to the failure-to-act classification?

Socrates’ ideas, as expressed in The Republic by Plato, provide some insight into answering the previous questions. After examining Plato’s views in The Republic, it is possible to claim that Socrates would agree with Mill in including the failure-to-act as harm. His definition of a just society is a society in which everyone is doing their job or role in society (4). From this, one can assume that a just action within a society would be whatever action is in accordance with the job of the individual as determined by his soul and position in society. Thus, failure to perform one’s job would then be classified as an unjust action by Plato, open to government intervention for the restoration of social justice.

Socrates’ view seems to emphasize the nature of the action that the individual is failing to do. If the failure to act involved the failure to do one’s job in society, then the failure to act would be considered unjust. On the other hand, if the failure to act involved inaction about an issue that was not the individual’s responsibility, then it is possible to conclude that the failure to act in this instance is not an unjust action. Thus, this approach distinguishes between a firefighter who chooses not to stop a fire from a regular citizen who chooses not to stop a fire. The firefighter neglects his responsibility, opening him to criminal prosecution, while the regular citizen’s inaction is not open to prosecution. By allowing the failure to act to be considered as harm, Mill avoided conflicting with the conditional nature of determining whether the failure to act is just or unjust as extrapolated from Plato’s views.

Socrates’ and Mill’s analysis regarding the failure to act is based solely on the legal and formal responsibilities of the individual. The police have a responsibility to stop crime, and parents have a responsibility to take care of their children, etc. Each nation’s unique constitution and laws make legal responsibilities country-specific and unique. For example, many European states, like Germany and France, require citizens to provide assistance to persons in danger (5). However, the duty to rescue those in peril does not exist in other countries, like the United States (6). Of course, most people call the authorities for help and attempt to provide first-aid, but the fact remains that in most of the United States, there is no legal obligation to rescue. Each country determines the legal responsibilities of its citizens, some choosing to expand and some choosing to restrict the extent of responsibilities.

For many people, informal responsibilities extend beyond formal responsibilities; these are often based on the individual’s religion, culture, and ethics. While government intervention may not be legitimate for failures of informal responsibilities according to Mill, informal responsibilities constitute an important piece of the society. For example, children have an informal responsibility to care for their parents, especially during their old age. If children ignore this responsibility, the government cannot and should not intervene. After all, the government is not the ultimate solution for every social problem, and each member of the country may not believe in the same informal responsibilities due to different culture, religion, and ethics. Instead, the true solutions to failures in informal responsibilities are education in social values and decency, social structures, communities, and institutions.

Mill’s principles on government intervention in the lives of free people provided a platform to discuss psychological harm and social responsibilities. Government can provide solutions for certain social issues, but not for all. In recognition of this, Mill wrote of an alternative limited government to the authoritarian regimes of his time. In this alternative, conflicting and controversial ideologies could co-exist, and government would only regulate formal responsibilities. The burden rests on the society to care for the informal responsibilities.

Notes

1. Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty, 155
2. Plato, The Republic, (Plato 354c, book 1)
3. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Pt. 1, Ch. 15, para. 35
4. Kara, Mahmut. “Rethinking Plato: Philosophical Idealism and Political Totalitarianism.” Fountain Magazine, April-June 2001.
5. Weinrib, Ernest J. “The Case for a Duty to Rescue.” The Yale Law Journal , Vol. 90, No. 2 (Dec., 1980), pp. 247-293 Published by: The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc. URL:<http://www.jstor.org/stable/795987>.
6. Yania v. Bigan, 397 Pa. 316, 155 A.2d 343 (1959)

Scientific psychology corroborates these truths and lays bare the inescapable responsibility to know and manage the self (C.G. Jung, 1957). Knowing and accepting realities about ourselves positively offers a platform for personal growth and development, and further permits cathartic motivations for transcending flaws. While religions approach the path to transcendence differently (e.g. based on organic time and place), each testifies to human dignity that is capable of finding safe passage through the contradictions of life without compromising the safety of others.

Religious and secular histories reveal tragic outcomes for humanity when these responsibilities are ignored. The current neoliberal, capitalist ideology, which was systemized by economic theorist Milton Friedman, externalizes, or factors out, human and environmental damage, for these interfere with the profit principle. His open defiance of social responsibility not only shows a separation between the rational mind and rational heart, but clears the way for nullification of the universal human rights principle and bows to nefarious economic warfare waged between groups.

Within earlier historical memory, power’s unwillingness to analyze the subjective and blame the objective played-out on the global stage with catastrophic consequences. Between 1914 and 1945, the world was at war with itself. Yet, national leaders and their people denied their own failed-policies, and chose to violently project responsibility onto others (Fromm’s, 1973). Analyses of Europe’s part in the atrocities of WWII illuminate a reoccurring historical fact: non-defensive wars are often complicated and motivated by un-dealt with personal projections of a nation’s leaders and its peoples. At the heart of humanity’s violent history lie legions of self-denials and self-failures, too colossal to list. Perhaps more ironic than the irresponsible projections themselves is the denial of responsibility, as expressed in the question: where was God?

With the beginning of the West’s wars in the Middle East, in 2003, human rights experts recognized that the topic of human rights was off the table, a frightening but conscious decision that reconfirms the warnings of sages and prophets: human history is a history of choice.

A catharsis for the events of 1914 – 1945 was the establishment of the Bretton Accords, which established international institutions aiming to prevent future crimes against humanity. The sets of principles laid out in the accords sought to mandate individual rights of vital protections, by humanizing finances, employment, and governance. Rights of human security were embedded within a constellation of personal, social, economic, and political rights. The United Nations, which signed the 1948 Convention on The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, agreed to this universal principle, and applied it clearly to the subjugated children and women of the global patriarchy by creating the special conventions: Rights of the Child and The Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

While many nation-states embrace moral responsibility to ratify conventions for universal human rights, many UN representatives continue to face non-ratification resistance at home. While the new, global power-brokers of trade and finance systemically and tactically block universal human rights, the global under-privileged are taking their arguments to the streets. Taking responsibility to occupy their own policies is a response validated by scholar Noam Chomsky (Occupy, 2012, p.89) and reflects the Jeffersonian idea of democratic action. Taking possession of rights far exceeds passive verbalization.

A watershed of responsible self-action is being witnessed around the globe: workers are organizing to buy-back their closed factories; students organize to undermine dictatorships and corrupt governments; sexually exploited children are naming criminal-priests; women are fighting the slave-trade; independent journalists air photos of government backed genocides and externally organized coups; neighbors take video of real-time police brutality; independent filmmakers document corporate damages; veterans bow to their own shame and expose military atrocities; whistle-blowers expose mass government fraud; and high-ranking bank officials make tragic, but telling testimonies against system-exploitation by committing suicide. While these examples reflect an existing depth of global darkness, self-responsible action affirms our awareness of our right to live change and change living.

Considering our ever changing universe and the human capacity to re-imagine new life, it is possible to more clearly understand the discreteness of the great religions which direct responsibility to each individual. By means of self-awareness, self-responsibility and self-regulation, we each hold the best possibilities for peaceful co-existence and the preservation of human rights.

June Dayle Jelm, PhD in International Relations, is a Professional Mediator specializing in Domestic Violence in Salt Lake City, Utah.

These situations entail the psychology of morality-an intriguing and growing topic of study. Significant and insightful research has been completed in an attempt to understand more about morality from a psychological perspective. Many questions have been raised in the realm of morality and ethics, such as: How do people think about morality? What are people’s concepts of a moral person? How do people apply morality in conflict and their everyday lives?

In psychologists’ attempts to answer these questions, we learn more about mankind as a whole and about our own individual selves. This article will summarize some of the most prominent studies in the field of morality psychology and use these perspectives to help attain a better understanding of who a moral person is and what they do.

Exploring differences in moral foundations between political liberals and conservatives is one interesting area of research in the psychology of morality. Graham, et al. (2009) established a definition of a moral foundation as consisting of five moral intuitions: harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, in-group/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity. The researchers found that political liberals were likely to chiefly judge a moral situation along the harm/care and fairness/reciprocity aspects, while conservatives were more likely to use all aspects equally. The results of this study seem to agree with the ideologies of liberals and conservatives. Considering that conservatives are less receptive to changes in political policies and culture, it makes sense that they would place a high value on the authority of a government, and also that they would give more weight to protecting their in-group from outside influences. This ideology may in turn stem from a Hobbesian worldview (Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679) in that everyone is at the most basic level self-interested, and therefore they must protect their own interests from the interests of others.

Liberals, on the other hand, would be more likely to go against the authority of the government or in-group concerns if they felt a moral injustice was being committed. This may be one reason why conservatives sometimes accuse liberals of not being patriotic.

As for the purity/sanctity condition, there is some doubt as to whether it can really be considered a moral facet. Conservatives seem to think that this is the case, but liberals on the other hand give nearly zero consideration to aspects of purity during moral judgments, as it seems to be an unrelated concept. Additionally, this idea may explain why conservatives tend to be against gay marriage, while liberals are more likely to support gay relationships.

Before moving on, let me pose another question: which action is more moral, volunteering time in a soup kitchen or keeping your vow to your wife not to go to the racetrack and gamble on payday?

Now we turn our attention to an enlightening study by Janoff-Bulman, et al. (2009) that analyzed morality in a different way: by categorizing it into two distinctive types, prescriptive and proscriptive. Prescriptive morality has a commendatory and encouraging nature, and it is characterized by taking positive action and the question what one should do to be moral. Proscriptive morality is more commanding and punishing in its aspects, and it is characterized by preventing negative action and the question what one should not do to prevent immorality. The distinction between the two can be states as helping versus not harming.

The researchers provide evidence for these two different types of morality in their studies. For example, in one experiment, participants were asked to describe what they thought it meant to be-depending on the manipulation-either moral or immoral. They had correctly predicted that proscriptive morality tended to have more concrete and defined language, so as to assist its adherents in knowing exactly what actions are wrong. Prescriptive morality’s language was more abstract so as to include more possible right actions.

It was also found that people were more disapproving when someone committed forbidden acts as opposed to someone failing to perform righteous acts. This finding-that it is generally more objectionable to see an overtly immoral act than to see a failure to commit a positive act-is strong evidence for the prescriptive/proscriptive distinctions of morality.

There are many more questions about morality researchers are asking. For instance, what lies behind the rationalization of a racist behavior or attitude? How are people’s moral principles influenced by the particular identity of the individuals involved? Uhlmann, et al. (2009) examined these topics. Most of us tend to think of ourselves as having a relatively stable moral standing, but this study showed that for most people, this simply is not the case. People were presented with different moral dilemmas that measured if they would support either a consequentialist solution or a deontological solution to the dilemma. According to the researchers’ hypothesis, changing some details of the scenario could influence people’s preference for either consequentialism (the idea that it is permissible to commit an action that would normally be considered immoral for the benefit of the greater good) or deontology (the idea that there are some actions that are morally wrong under any and all circumstances); this is in fact what they observed.

They observed that political liberals were more likely to sacrifice a white man to save a black group of people and less likely to sacrifice a black man to save a white group. The reverse effect was observed for conservatives in that they were more willing to sacrifice a black man to save a white group and vice versa. They also found that conservatives were more likely to endorse the unintended killing of Iraqi civilians by American forces than the unintentional killing of American civilians by Iraqi armed forces.

These results provides a striking example of how people’s moral concepts can change when the specifics of those involved in the moral equation change, which in turn suggests that people value some lives more than others. Conservatives, in particular, seem to value people who are part of the in-group over people who are not. This study also suggests that liberals may actually devalue in-group members in an attempt to maintain a non-racist morality.

Another major question is how do religious concepts and the knowledge that one’s actions are being judged affect how people behave morally? The following study (Shariff & Norenzayan, 2007) asked participants to play a game that would measure their generosity towards total strangers. The researchers discovered that people who were primed with words relating to God and religion were more generous on average than those who received no priming. The researchers also found that priming people with secular concepts of moral institutions had the same effect.

These results provide strong evidence that people will try to act more morally if they have some idea in the back of their minds, whether conscious or not, about being judged in some manner for their moral actions. This does not have to apply exclusively to religious concepts, as the results of this study show. As a matter of fact, related research conducted by Bateson, Nettle, and Roberts (2006) showed that just the indirect suggestion of being judged by other people was enough to reproduce this effect-an increase in moral behavior. Specifically, they saw a three-fold increase in the amount paid for drinks supplied on an honor system when the image associated with payment resembled human eyes versus a control image. Apparently, a pair of eyes is enough to trigger a conscious or subconscious idea of being watched and judged.

What is known about the neural activity of the brain itself with regards to moral judgments? What roles do cognitive and emotional processes in the brain play in thinking about morality? Greene et al. (2004) conducted detailed biological mapping of brain neuronal activity of individuals during their thought processes that went along with solving hypothetical moral dilemmas. It was observed that areas in the brain associated with abstract reasoning and cognitive control-regions noted included the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex-were found to be more active during very difficult moral judgments where utilitarian resolutions require violation of personal moral convictions. They concluded from their work that utilitarian moral judgments rely more on cognitive processes and abstract thinking, whilst more personal moral judgments relied primarily on social-emotional processes.

This is good evidence for two different types of moral processing-cognitive or more logical, and emotional or more personal. During this study, Greene and colleagues also considered the degree of personal relatedness of a scenario with the likelihood of utilitarian resolution, and therefore the associated cognitive processes and abstract-thinking brain regions. They looked at what happens when you alter the classic moral dilemma of the runaway trolley car (Thomson, 1986) by making it either more personal or less personal. It was observed that people were more likely to engage in utilitarian calculations when the harm was less personal-in the case, that involved pulling a lever to kill a person-as opposed to when harm was more personal, in the case requiring pushing someone off of a bridge.

Morality is often connected to religion and religious values, and a natural topic to investigate is the role that sacred values may play in moral psychology. Ginges et al. (2007) examined the Israeli-Palestine conflict in an attempt to answer the question of how sacred values are involved in the resolution of political conflicts. The researchers wanted to shed some light on several issues related to sacred values in political conflict – namely, how do instrumental incentives, such as monetary gain, affect compromise with sacred values?

Interestingly, they observed that adding instrumental incentives to hypothetical deals involving the forfeiting of some sacred value actually made the subjects who held sacred values more opposed to and outraged about compromise than if they simply offered the compromise on its own. They also found that these people were less opposed to compromise if the deal also stipulated that the opposing party would give up one of their own sacred rights.

These results are important in that they show how radically different sacred values are from instrumental values. Sacred values are, for the most part, non-negotiable, except in the cases mentioned above, and it seems as though the idea of offering something of instrumental value in an attempt to negotiate the non-negotiable only serves as an insult to those who hold these sacred values. It is only when some other sacred value is offered up that we see some willingness to compromise, suggesting that sacred values cannot be compared with instrumental values, but they can be compared to other sacred values. Because of this, one may wonder whether sacred values can really be considered truly uncontestable, as opposed to simply a different type of value that is not comparable with more material principles.

An important side of the psychology of morality concerns how people perceive the moral legitimacy of authority under different circumstances. More specifically, how much of a moral investment do the participants have in the moral issues. The researchers Skitka, et al. (2009) correlated an individual’s general degree of moral conviction with how much they either supported or agreed with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on physician-assisted suicide in 2006 that prevented the Attorney General from prosecuting doctors in Oregon who operated under state law. It was discovered that the degree of moral investment a person had about this decision increased the variance of people’s perception of the legitimacy of authority. More specifically, people who supported the decision with high moral conviction more strongly supported the post-decision legitimacy of the Supreme Court than people with lower moral conviction, and people against the decision with high moral conviction more strongly opposed the post-decision legitimacy of the Supreme Court than people with lower moral conviction.

These results are strong evidence for the idea that our perceived legitimacy of authority is intimately tied with our moral conviction on the issues that matter most to us. In other words, if the government made a ruling that we did not agree with, but did not care much about (for example, the ruling that pizza is a vegetable), we wouldn’t have much reason to deny the legitimacy of the government. However, decisions made about issues we have a strong moral standing on tend to either strongly reinforce or strongly undermine the perceived legitimacy of authority in our attempt to reconcile our moral standing versus the decree of authority. Additionally, a study could be run to test the hypothesis that liberals would be more willing to deny the legitimacy of the government, and conservatives would be more willing to affirm the government’s power.

We believe it is moral to care about others and give charity, but what motivates the moral response of giving? Some psychologists are interested in this question. Olivola & Shafir (2011) found that people were willing to give more money to a charity if they were required to run a marathon as opposed to simply attending a picnic. This finding shows that associating donations with self-sacrifice or suffering activates people’s concepts of morality.

How could we measure if having concepts of justice and fairness cause people to strengthen their moral responses as well? An experiment might be set up in this manner: one group of participants would be told that they would be donating to a village in Africa that is suffering from a drought, and as a result, running low on food. The other group would be told that local rebels are constantly raiding the village and taking their food, thus depleting their food supplies. We would then measure how much people would be willing to donate to the village in each situation. The condition of need arising from a natural disaster should not activate concepts of justice and fairness; however, even if some people think suffering from droughts is an inherently unjust event, the second condition – need arising from a military-type attack – should greatly outweigh the first in terms of justice/fairness considerations. Based on the results of the Olivola & Shafir (2011) study, it is reasonable to expect that people would donate more money to the people being raided, since that condition should activate moral concepts such as justice and fairness.

What do these studies tell us about what a truly moral person is? Let’s first look at the five moral foundations again, from Graham, et al. (2009). It appears that a truly moral person bases their judgments primarily on harm/care and fairness/reciprocity. This is because there can be situations where authority or in-group concerns can conflict with harm and fairness considerations, and in these situations the latter set of moral outlooks should prevail. One only needs to consider an example such as this: imagine you are asked to commit atrocities in the name of your country. It should be clear that these atrocities couldn’t be justified in this way. Based on the results of Skitka et al. (2009) such a request may even lead one to deny the legitimacy of whatever authority commanded this action-which is what a truly moral person would and should do in that situation. For reasons like these, harm/care and fairness/reciprocity should be on the forefront of one’s moral concerns.

Harm/care and fairness/reciprocity are also probably closely related to each other, and in many situations, one moral concept is found with the other. Consider an instance where a person beats his wife in an act of drunken violence. It’s clear that harm/care are involved in this situation, but also consider that we could say that what he is doing is an injustice to his wife. Similarly, suppose an example where a banker swindles a client for thousands of dollars. It’s clear this has to do with fairness/reciprocity, but we could also consider this action as a way of harming somebody else in a non-physical manner.

Research further clarifies a truly moral person as one who leads a disciplined life that builds off of the proscriptive, preventing immorality, and subsequently the prescriptive, acting morally. Such a person must be a role model for everyone else to follow. For this reason, a truly moral person is careful not to commit proscribed acts. A person who performs many good deeds, but also many bad deeds, will appear insincere and hypocritical. In other words, a truly moral person does their best to not mix the good with the bad. Once a person has built a strong moral foundation of avoiding proscribed behaviors, he or she can branch out and help others with ever-increasing frequency. Furthermore, with regards to the study on the effects of being watched, a truly moral person acts in every situation as though he or she is being watched or will be judged later on, even if they know that they are alone. This is because they know that any action they do may have consequences at some point, either immediate or distant.

Work in the area of the psychology of morality sheds some light on how a moral person behaves, however an ideally moral person does what is right with 100% accuracy, and no matter what the circumstances. This is an ideal, and very few people can be considered to be ideal moral examples. Prophets are the only people who could be considered to be morally infallible. Prophets like Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, peace be upon them, serve as examples of perfect moral conduct. Even though none of us can hope to attain the rank of a Prophet, every person ought to strive for this ideal and be the best person they can be. If we hope to have any positive impact on the world we must first start by changing ourselves for the better. Only then can we attempt to sincerely help other people around us, starting with our close family and friends, and later on, the larger world.

M. Tarik Ozgur is a graduate of Lehigh University Physiology Department in 2013.

References

• Bateson, M., Nettle, D., & Roberts, G. (2006). Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biology letters, 2(3), 412-414.
• Ginges, J., Atran, S., Medin, D., & Shikaki, K. (2007). Sacred bounds on rational resolution of violent political conflict. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(18), 7357-7360.
• Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B.A. Liberals and Conservatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 96 (5), 1029.
• Greene, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron, 44(2), 389-400.
• Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Hepp, S. (2009). Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: Two faces of moral regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 521-537.
• Olivola, C. Y. (2011). When noble means hinder noble ends: The benefits and costs of a preference for martyrdom in altruism. The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to Study of Charity, 49-62. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Shariff, A. F., & Norenzayan, A. (2007). God Is Watching You Priming God Concepts Increases Prosocial Behavior in an Anonymous Economic Game. Psychological Science, 18(9), 803-809.
• Skitka, L. J., Aramovich, N. P., Lytle, B. L., & Sargis, E. G. (2009). Knitting together an elephant: An integrative approach to understanding the psychology of justice reasoning. In The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 11, pp. 1-26).
• Thomson, J.J. (1986). Rights, Restitution, and Risk Essays, in Moral Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Uhlmann, E. L., Pizarro, D. A., Tannenbaum, D., & Ditto, P. H. (2009). The motivated use of moral principles. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(6), 476-491.

Ethics in Ibn Bajja’s philosophy

In Ibn Bajja’s philosophy, beings are created in order to achieve a goal. This goal, if achieved, will lead them to happiness. One who realizes this goal is, thus, happy.⁴ This goal is to know God and to worship God properly. Continuous pleasure can only be attained by the intellectual knowledge of the Eternal One.5 In Ibn Bajja’s own words:

“The one, who knows God (the only one God, with no partners) truly, knows that the greatest suffering is in God’s displeasure and being away from Him, and that the greatest happiness is in God’s pleasure and being close to Him. To be close to God can only be achieved through knowing ones own self.” ⁴

According to him, one should be considered a human to the extent that he or she differs from other beings (animals, plants, etc.). Among different kinds of animate beings, only humans can perform actions through free will.⁶ This is possible only through using their intellect, and controlling corporeal pleasures, instead of being controlled by them or banishing them totally.⁴ Actions are human in nature insomuch as they lead to this goal. For example, eating is an animal action if it is done to fulfill desire. On the other hand, it is a human action if it is done to preserve strength to achieve spiritual blessings.² When someone breaks a stone only because they were hurt by it, this is an animal action. If they do the same action in order to prevent somebody else from being hurt, this is a human action.⁶

Ibn Bajja believes that reaching happiness is not obtained by sudden leaps but through gradual steps.4 One should give priority to spiritual forms over corporeal forms, and if possible, should not socialize with pure materialists or those who mix their spiritual form with the corporeal one, except in some indispensable situations. Otherwise, as in the case of today’s materialistic world, one can easily be distracted from thinking about critical questions that would normally come to each and every individual’s mind, such as who we are, where we come from, where we are going , why we exist, and how to know about God. Secondly, one should go beyond the spiritual forms to reach the intellectual level, and socialize with those who also seek intellectual forms.³

Rule of the “solitary individual”

The “solitary individual” (tadbeer al-mutawahhed) holds an important place in Ibn Bajja’s thought. The term “tadbeer” or governance in Ibn Bajja’s philosophy means the actions done towards an end. On the other hand, al-Mutawahhed means a solitary individual who lives in a society, but who is different, intellectually, from his or her peers.1 They are, thus, alone in their thoughts within the society.⁴ Al-Mutawahhed is free and active when exposed to various influences, and they achieve the highest moral virtues: a balance between spiritual and material aspects of life.⁴ Unvirtuous people, on the other hand, are passive under various influences, and make decisions under the influence of their corporeal pleasures or animal desires, but not through using their intellect, which is what makes them human beings.

Ibn Bajja classifies cities before he gives a recipe to the solitary individual on how to achieve happiness. The cities are classified as stressing the moral values of the society. The perfect or ideal city is based on love. The citizens of this city do not quarrel at all. All views are true and all actions are right. They eat properly. Hence there is no need for doctors or judges. Ibn Bajja supports his claim with the question, “Cannot the healthy body rouse itself to resist diseases whose obscure causes come from outside?”6 On the other hand, if there is any contention in a city, it results in the need for a judge who can establish justice. Similarly, if people get harmful foods, they will need a doctor who has knowledge of treatments. So in an imperfect city, there is need for a doctor and a judge. As Ibn Bajja puts it: “The more a city needs them, the more honorable is the rank of both these classes.” ⁶

The imperfect city, being based on temporary corporeal pleasures, is not suitable for the metaphysical essence of humanity. Still, the imperfect city inherits a way to a virtuous society through solitary individuals.4 If one is in an imperfect city which does not supply any method to obtain knowledge, and is morally corrupted, and if there exists a perfect city, one should migrate to it; thus, they can gain knowledge.¹ If there is no such option, he or she should protect themself from the corruptions of their present society, and simultaneously build a social project which will provide happiness to individuals, and begin converting the society into a virtuous one.¹ The solitary individual is in a state of transition. During this state, they continue their personal education, and at the same time help convert an imperfect city into a perfect one.⁴

Contemplative seclusions

The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, provides a great example of a “solitary individual.” Before he started receiving revelations, he would retreat to the mountain cave of Hira. He continued these retreats later on, especially during Ramadan, the month of fasting, when he went into seclusion for ten days, and spent time in prayer. This tradition, or itiqaf, is still being observed throughout the Muslim world. We can argue that these seclusions and contemplative retreats paved the way for him to transform a an “imperfect city” (Mecca), that was mired in ignorance, paganism, violence, and immorality, to a community of believers who exceled in ethics, learning, and peace; this was the perfect city of Medina. Yet, the Prophet was not just a solitary individual. He engaged with society in all possible ways during and before his prophethood, as a tradesman in caravans, as a social activist in a league dedicated to protect and support the distressed (Hilf al-Fudul), as a peacemaker among tribes, and as a husband and father.

Conclusion

Ibn Bajja’s philosophy on the governance of a solitary individual finds perfect embodiment in Prophetic practice. Personal education and social life are two processes that co-exist, whether in a perfect or an imperfect city, and the Prophetic practice of seclusion is a perfect way of linking the two. The construction of a perfect city joins these two processes after a period of personal education which leads to personal perfection. The solitary individual is always on the way: he or she is reading, contemplating, observing and acting constantly, and he or she does this independently of the status of the society within which they live.

References

1. Köroğlu, Burhan. 1996. “Ibn-i Bacce’nin Ahlâk ve Siyaset Düşüncesi,” (The Ethical and Political Thought of Avempace), Divan, 1, 45-46.
2. Sharif, M. M. 2004. “A History of Muslim Philosophy,” Pakistan Philosophical Congress, 3, 508-526,. http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/index.html
3. Al-Allaf, M. 2003. “The Solitary Being (al-Mutawahhed): Definitions and Dimensions of Ibn Bajja (Avempace) Philosophy,” The Essence of Islamic Philosophy, ILC-Classic.
4. Aydınlı, Y. 1997. Ibn Bacce’nin Insan Görüşü, (The Human in the Thought of Ibn Bajja), Marmara Üniversitesi Ilahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları.
5. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Ibn Bajja, http://plato.stanford.edu/
6. Dunlop, D. M. 1999. Ibn Bajjah’s Tadbiru’l-Mutawahhid (Rule of Solitary), Ibn Bajja Texts and Studies II, Islamic Philosophy (77), Strauss Offsetdruck.
7. Sahih Bukhari, 3, 33(260).
8. http://www.lastprophet.info/en/chronology/index.php

According to truth-seeking scholars, ihsan (perfect goodness) is an action of the heart that involves thinking according to the standards of truth; forming the intention to do good, useful things and then doing them; and performing acts of worship as best as possible and in the consciousness that God sees them. To attain perfect goodness, an initiate must establish his or her thoughts, feelings, and concepts on a firm belief, and then deepen that belief by practicing the essentials of the religion and training his or her heart to receive Divine gifts and be illuminated by the light of His manifestations. Only one who has attained such a degree of perfect goodness can really do good to others just for the sake of God, without expecting anything in return.

According to a Prophetic saying, perfect goodness is that you worship God as if you were seeing Him; for even if you do not see Him, He certainly sees you. The most comprehensive and precise meaning of perfect goodness is that there is no fault in an initiate’s action, and that he or she is always conscious that God is always watching. An initiate must concentrate on his or her actions with all of his or her will, feelings, awareness, and outer and inner senses. An initiate who is aware of God’s supervision to this degree, and who therefore strives to act in the best way possible, cannot help but do good to others. Doing good to others then becomes an essential attribute of his or her nature, and radiates as light radiates from the sun.

Ihsan, in the sense of doing good to others, is summed up in the Prophet’s principle of desiring for one’s fellow believer whatever one desires for oneself. Its universal dimension is defined in the following Prophetic Tradition:

Surely, God has decreed that you excel in whatever you do. When you lawfully punish someone by killing, do it kindly; when you slaughter an animal, slaughter it kindly. Let him who will slaughter it sharpen his knife and avoid giving the animal much pain.

Consciousness of goodness is like a mysterious key that opens the door of a virtuous circle. An initiate who opens that door and steps into that illuminated corridor enters the “spiral” of a mysterious ascension, as if stepping onto an escalator. In addition to being endowed with this virtue, the correct use of one’s free will to do good and refrain from evil will result in an advance of two steps for each step taken: Is the reward of excellence other than excellence? (55:60). As we read in commentaries on the Qur’an or books of the Prophetic Traditions:

Once God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, he who was truthful and confirmed, asked his Companions about the verse: Do you know what Your Lord means by this verse? The Companions answered: God and His Messenger know better. He explained: The reward of the one upon whom I conferred belief in Divine Unity is nothing but Paradise.

When the consciousness of goodness invades one’s heart like clouds of rain, Divine favors begin to pour down. The possessor of such a heart, addressed by the verse: For those who do good is the greatest good, and even more (10:26), feels the profound pleasure of having been created as a human being.

In addition to the blessings of Divine grace in return for good actions, Divine gifts issue from God’s Graciousness and Kindness in return for a heart’s sincere intention. We are unable to conceive of or describe such gifts.

A sound heart leads one straight to God without any deviation, and goodness is the heart’s greatest and most rewarding action. Goodness is the safest way to ascend the slopes of sincerity, the most secure means to reach the peaks of being approved by God, and the consciousness of self-possession before the Eternal Witness. Of the many people equipped with belief, as well as deep fear and reverence for Him, who have taken the wings of good action and set out toward Him, only a few succeed in reaching the peak. May those who have not yet reached it try their utmost to do so. Those who have reached the peak feel deeply the ugliness of whatever God dislikes and are immune to it, while they are ready to do whatever He likes and to adopt such as their second nature.

O God! Favor us with a good, happy end in all our affairs, and save us from humiliation in the world and punishment in the Hereafter. Assign for us from awe of You such amount that it may intervene between us and any disobedience to You. And bestow blessings and peace on Muhammad, our master and the master of those distinguished with perfect goodness, and on his Family and Companions, all of them.

Let us imagine two people of similar economic status, one of whom donates a considerable amount of money to a charity organization willingly, while the other hesitates but eventually donates the same amount of money with relative difficulty. Which action deserves the real moral praise? Intuitively, the willing donor seems to get our praise and sympathy more than the other; yet, it might require more virtue to choose the right action in the face of adverse inclinations. Acknowledging that this question is more difficult than it first appears lets us go back several millennia to hear what Aristotle, the great philosopher and ethicist, has to say on this issue.

Aristotle use the terms virtue, continence, incontinence, and vice in order to account for diverse attitudes present in individuals when confronted with ethical dilemmas. “Virtue” is an excellence of the soul that helps one to achieve complete harmony between one’s reasoning and desires. Whenever the virtuous person chooses an action as the rationally best option, he performs this action pleasurably. Yet this is a pleasure of a higher status, a noble joy, one that stems from appreciating the intrinsic value of the virtuous action and thus coming to love it. In other words, the virtuous person’s emotions and reason point at the same direction and there is no inner conflict that haunts his soul. This results in a noble and complete joy; a cultivated ability to see the intrinsic value embedded in the virtuous act through gaining a second nature. This second nature begins with having joy in doing the right thing rather than primarily being after the satisfaction of the bodily desires.

Unlike the state of virtue, the cases of continence, incontinence, and vice all include conflict to some degree between one’s reason and desires. Within this spectrum, some people better resist these counter-rational desires than others, and they are able to act in the same manner as a virtuous person, as in our example above. Aristotle calls such individuals “continent” (enkrates) and he distinguishes them from the fully virtuous. Their distinctive characteristic is that they struggle inside, but they end up doing the morally right thing. Yet, unlike the continent, some people are less successful in resisting their inner desires, and they end up doing the wrong action even though they are rationally aware of its wrongness. These individuals are called “incontinent” (akratês). Their reason and appetites drift them in opposite directions, and they find themselves in a miserable position. In the very last category, vice, are the individuals who refuse to do what an ethically virtuous person would do because they have become convinced that justice, temperance, generosity, and the like are of little or no value; Aristotle calls such people evil (kakos). This last category is demarcated from other categories sharply by the lack of any struggle against the dark side of the soul. These people both begin and end up on the negative side. Despite the fact that vicious people might seem to possess an inner harmony since both their wills and acts are in accord, Aristotle portrays them as deeply divided, because they cannot help but become dissatisfied as a result of the over-dominance of the irrational part of their souls. Aristotle assumes that if someone is in the habit of making bad decisions about how to live his life, his failures are caused by psychological forces that are less than fully rational. It is probable that his desires for pleasure, power, or some other external goal have become so strong that they make him care too little or not at all about acting ethically. It can be claimed that the vicious person lacks internal harmony because he cannot implement his rational side properly in making decisions. This reminds us of the famous chariot allegory of Aristotle’s teacher, Plato, in which he paints the picture of a charioteer driving a chariot pulled by two winged horses: one of them representing the rational and moral impulses and the other irrational appetites. The charioteer is like the human soul that needs to balance and keep the chariot going in the path towards enlightenment. While it is not easy to keep the two fighting horses in check, a human soul is better off whenever it is guided through reason, the charioteer. Yet, the evil person suffers from an imbalance and is perpetually drifted away by the whims of the bad-behaved horse. This, in the long run, results in unhappiness and sickness of the soul.

Cultivation of dispositions

Now that a brief sketch of Aristotle’s four types of ethical subjects is drawn, there is an inevitable question that awaits us. We have seen that all three of these positions involve some lack of integrity; it is only the life of a virtuous person that possesses internal harmony, and all other lives deviate to some degree from this ideal. Yet, one cannot help but wonder how we could attain this ideal state? According to Aristotle, in order to achieve the state of virtue, we need to develop proper habits and emotional responses starting from early childhood. Although full virtue is a rare achievement for human beings, it is only attainable through employment of continence persistently in life. Aristotle divides the virtues into two categories, the natural and the true virtues, and whereas the former comes by nature, the latter is cultivated through habituation. Aristotle’s truly virtuous man has cultivated (habituated) emotions rather than possessing immediate impulses to do good. Aristotle famously tells us that “action” leads to the corresponding character states; just as to be a good painter, you have to paint, and to be a good shoemaker you need to make shoes, you need to do virtuous actions to become virtuous. In Aristotle’s words, we become “just by doing just actions, and temperate by acting temperately.” (NE II.4.)

Virtue is “made perfect by habit and by practical wisdom,” and this makes the virtuous person’s position superior to that of the merely continent person. This conception of virtue as an ongoing, developmental process implies that individuals cannot typically will to feel certain emotions at a moment’s notice, but they can choose to cultivate certain emotions over time as a significant part of developing moral character.

Although Aristotle advises that virtue be our ultimate aim, he still esteems the continent person to some extent. A lack of complete harmony between reason and desires is often inescapable for human beings. We can only want or choose to do the virtuous thing, but we cannot make ourselves take pleasure from doing it. In fact, continence is often the only state we are capable of achieving, even though we might want to do the right thing cheerfully. To make an analogy, Aristotle encourages the cultivation of virtues just like the flourishing of a flower. Growing flowers require time and great care; likewise, virtuousness does not always come by nature but it is gained through cultivation and care.

Reason as the guide

The Aristotelian virtuous person is the one whose rational part overrides and guides the appetitive part. Accordingly, as long as the person is guided by his rational part, his actions are virtuous; whenever the rational side of the person is weaker than his appetitive side, it leads to moral weakness (incontinence). The idea of acting from the rational part of the soul is pivotal in Aristotle’s ethics; he ties human arête (virtue) to reasoning. For Aristotle, virtuous action must definitely originate from reasoning since it is the human arête (virtue) to be guided by the rational part of the soul. “Like every other creature in the world, man has a particular nature and the best way to live is to live up to his nature, which is to be directed by a rational soul.” Therefore, by “desiring to do the virtuous thing” Aristotle does not claim that this person should have a natural inclination to do the right thing; instead, it requires adoption of rational desires that are in line with virtuous actions.

One-way road to happiness: From continence to virtue

How can we make ourselves enjoy doing the virtuous things according to Aristotle? For instance, how can we “enjoy” giving to charity? As Aristotle proposes, we become just by doing just actions, we become temperate by acting temperately; so, the only way to arrive at true virtue goes from acting in conformity with duty even if we do it with continence. Aristotle assumes every individual begins the journey by continence and tries to arrive at virtuousness, which is a complete harmony of will and reason. In a way, Aristotle’s virtuous person is someone who walked up the ladder from continence to virtue. No one ascends to the state of virtue without first being continent. It is important to note that, for Aristotle, doing the better thing willingly is a better position to which we should aspire, but climbing up the ladder of virtue is already sufficient to make someone a good person. Full virtue and complete harmony could only be the destination we reach after a long journey of cultivation of emotions.

Yet, the question still remains: how can we make our souls come to love and enjoy being virtuous? Aristotle’s answer is that when your will and reason are in complete harmony, you do the desirable thing with pleasure. Otherwise, it is continence, which is a state with a lesser degree of moral worth. Let us assume we have cultivated our emotions and habituated ourselves to do the virtuous thing. Now, I always “want” to do the right thing. Still, one cannot help but wonder how we can make ourselves “enjoy” being virtuous. Aristotle’s reply would be simple: the virtuous person, upon moral deliberation, rationally chooses the virtuous thing to do, and because he is acting in conformity with his rational part and because his rational part has supremacy over the emotional part, he is expected to perform the action pleasurably. However, this is not totally convincing; no matter how many times we “choose” or “want” to do the right thing, we might still not be able to “take pleasure” from doing the right thing. I might be able to acquire the habit of sleeping less after considerable effort, but I cannot get myself to “enjoy” this. If we define a virtuous person as the one who both “wants” and “does” the virtuous thing, then this is understandable. Yet, when it comes to “enjoying” or “taking pleasure from” the virtuous action, we are usually short of actualizing this at will.

Then, is it ever possible to be truly virtuous? Evidently, Aristotle is optimistic on this issue. He believes true virtue is possible as long as proper cultivation is provided. Nonetheless, virtue does not come without effort; it requires time and tender care — being virtuous is not possible without persistently doing the right thing and trying to strengthen our rational part so that it will have supremacy over the appetitive part. Only then can people ascend to true virtue rather than staying at the level of continence. And this journey is not something we could afford to overlook, since it harbors true happiness.

Despite Aristotle’s invaluable contribution to ethics, he falls short of providing satisfactory answers to many intuitive questions regarding how and why the human soul enjoys being virtuous. His ultimate answer revolves around the happiness of the soul and there is no greater gain other than having the best possible life that is characterized as the eudaimon life. This is not a bad ideal, but its significance is quite negligible compared to the greater ideal of gaining an immortal life of happiness and beauty. Yet, since Aristotle does not believe in an immortal soul, his arguments do not include references to eternal happiness. Given this, no matter how convincing the ethicists’ arguments are, there will always remain a question: Why would I care so much about a life that is doomed to end? Why should I take the trouble to fight with my desires and make myself a so-called virtuous person? Moreover, complete happiness is almost impossible to attain in a life that we know to be short. Even though we could lead a happy life through virtue, knowing that it will last merely for this life makes it bittersweet at best. Without immortality, we are like birds that are kept in cages in this finite world, trying to find the best way to lead a good and happy life–a small and finite goal. Instead, finding the real eternal Divine source of why our souls find happiness and peace in virtuous actions and knowing that this joy is to last forever, can grant us true happiness. Whenever we act virtuously, say, giving to the poor without expecting anything in return, we are actually imitating and aspiring to the character of the Divine who is the most Generous. Similarly, whenever a person forgives another, he would be acting in accordance with the Divine mercy that is exemplified in the name of the All-Merciful. Hence, engaging in such virtuous acts gives the person unprecedented joy of the soul because such participation in the Divine goodness is greater than other sorts of pleasure. Furthermore, with immortality such acts do not merely stay in this life; on the contrary, performing these virtuous acts become the key to eternal happiness. Acting virtuously is good because these acts derive from God’s character Who is the source of all goodness, truth, and beauty. As long as a human soul can reflect this beauty as a mirror, his actions gain intrinsic value, and she can reach true happiness, not only in this life but also in the eternal afterlife.

An average English reader is often familiar with the Shakespearean character Hamlet and his inaction—or rather, delay in action—being at variance with his strong aspiration to restore order to the world around him. Despite his beautiful country rotting around him, the young nobleman Hamlet vacillates between listening to the inner voice of “the man of contemplation” and the inner voice of “the man of action.” The desolate quietness and inactivity of many intellectuals and thinkers of our modern age looks very much like the inability of Hamlet’s taking action. And when they finally decide to carry out their ideas, they mostly end up taking the wrong action, as in the Shakespearean tragedy of Hamlet. One may certainly be a man of original thoughts and lofty ideals, but thoughts go in vain unless they are implemented in practical, daily life. Dr. Suat Yildirim rightly puts forward in his foreword to the honorable scholar and author M. Fethullah Gülen’s Reflections on the Qur’an that, “Integrating theoretical knowledge and thought with action is very rare, and indeed according to many is even impossible. Undoubtedly this assessment is true to an extent, but there are always exceptions, like the works of Fethullah Gülen. A renowned scholar and man of action and thought, Gülen adds this new work to his existing collection of more than fifty [now seventy] books.”

Our intellectually productive and spiritually proactive author epitomized long ago the very field of exerting effort and struggle in the two words “action and thought” in his book titled, Statue of Our Souls. Describing “thought” as the contemplative activity or “action in one’s inner world,” this man of action and mission states that deep contemplation and reflection can deepen us in our faith, but contemplation will be of little avail if it is not transformed into action in our practical lives. Having led a life marked by activism and a passion for the service of all humanity, Gülen conceptualized his idea of activism with the term “positive action” which can evidently be seen in the worldwide civil society initiatives he has inspired. His activism based on this positive action lies in his “deep spirituality,” which is best reflected in his recent book, Reflections on the Qur’an: Commentaries on Selected Verses, recently published by the Tughra Books in New Jersey.

What is strikingly noticeable in this work are the proofs showing that the Qur’an is the greatest Divine gift to be understood and conveyed from the Mercy of God to the human mind for a thorough reflection. Indeed, everyone has the right to reflect upon the Qur’an to understand the messages in its verses; more than that, it is a duty upon those equipped with necessary, accurate knowledge. In this work, paying careful attention to the disciplines of tafsir methodology and having frequent references to both the classical and contemporary sources, including Bediüzzaman Said Nursi’s Risale-i Nur Collection, the author approaches many issues from a different, wider perspective and presents new insights and fresh interpretations to the understanding of the modern age.

Activism as the Philosophy of Life

In this work, the author presents readers with an important “philosophy of life” in his exposition of the verse, “Therefore, when you are free (from one task), resume (another task)” (Al-Inshirah 94:7). He expounds on how believers should live their lives without wasting any minute and without leaving any gaps, “hasting from one activity to the other, fulfilling their duties that fall upon them within the framework of services rendered for God’s sake and for the happiness of humanity.” He advises believers to remain active all the time “by changing activities” and further recommends them to “rest by working and work while resting”:

Indeed, a believer should always be active; both their working and resting should be an activity. In other words, believers should arrange their working hours in such a way that there should be no gaps in their lives. In fact, as a requirement of being a human, people should rest as well, yet this kind of resting should be an “active resting.” For instance, when people whose minds are busy with reading and writing become tired, they can rest by lying and sleeping, but they can also rest by changing the work or activity they do. They may read the Qur’an, perform the Prayer, do physical exercise, or engage in a friendly conversation. After a while, they can return to their normal activity.

In the book, one can clearly see a holistic approach from thorough contemplation and reflection to belief, from belief to its practice, and from practice to deeper devotion and consciousness of God. One can encounter an example of this all-inclusive approach in the exposition of the verse, “Whoever keeps from disobedience to God in reverence for Him and in piety, He enables a way out for him (of every difficulty)” (At-Talaq 65:2). Here, the author interprets the key concept of “taqwa,” or reverent piety and righteousness, used in the verse in an extraordinarily exquisite way. He states that taqwa means observing the Divine ordinances in every walk of life, which requires, therefore, obeying both the religious commandments and the laws of God’s creation and maintenance of the universe. The author calls the former (i.e., obeying the religious rules and commands) “internal piety and righteousness” and the latter “external piety and righteousness.” He states, however, that it is not easy to attain taqwa, or reverent piety and righteousness in both dimensions. He further elucidates that the verse under discussion makes use of the word taqwa in verbal form to mean “keeping from disobedience to God and doing His commands in reverence for Him and in piety. The mood of the verb chosen expresses submission, admission, and adopting the action ordered with the verb used as an indispensable dimension or depth of one’s nature or character. That is, it denotes thinking, acting, and living a life in obedience to God, fulfilling His commands, refraining from His prohibitions, and following His laws of the creation and maintenance of the universe and the laws He has established for life.”

In the verse under discussion, the author also draws readers’ attention to the necessity of observing Sunnatu’llah, or God’s Practice, as much as the obligation of observing religious commandments. He says, “if we abstain from the unlawful, fulfill the obligatory commands in perfect sensitivity, avoid the dubious as much as possible, and even become cautious with respect to the allowable, and if we observe God’s Practice or way of dealing with His creation—which we also call God’s laws of life and creation and maintenance of the universe—God will then save us from the different degrees of difficulties into which we have fallen.” He further states that a really pious person is one who believes and practices what he believes by fulfilling both his “personal responsibilities in devotion to God” and “social responsibilities within society.” He also emphasizes that social responsibilities extend further beyond one’s personal relationship with God.

Preserving this holistic approach throughout the book, the author focuses his efforts not on pure contemplation or abstract trains of thought, but rather on actively helping people to accomplish their duty of reflecting thoroughly upon the created books of the universe and man, along with the revealed book of the Qur’an—which is the written counterpart of the universe and the human.

Contemplation on the Outer and the Human Inner World for Renewal

On reflecting upon the “created” books of the universe and the human inner world, the author asserts, “Our lacking of such a comprehensive contemplation or reflection is our greatest problem and shortcoming. Truly, we are devoid of reflective thoughts that renew our faith and keep us alive at all times.” While expounding on another verse that says, “We will show them Our manifest signs (proofs) in the horizons of the universe and within their own selves, until it will become manifest to them that it (the Qur’an) is indeed the truth” (Fussilat 41:53), the author first states that, “the signs and proofs of truth are dealt with in two categories,” and then refers to those proofs that are provided by the universe as “external proofs” while he refers to the ones that are available within man himself as “internal proofs.” As for the expression, “We will show,” used in the verse under discussion, he says that it means “humanity will continue to see and discover more and more truths and admit that the Qur’an and the universe describe each other, that the Qur’an translates the universe, and the universe “reads” the Qur’an.” He further elaborates on the issue as follows:

The proofs provided by sciences are not restricted to those that have already been discovered. There are still so many matters to be studied by sciences such as anatomy, physiology, psychology, biology, physics, and astrophysics that will be clarified in the future and provide numerous new proofs for the truth of all Islamic beliefs, including especially God’s existence and Unity, the Qur’an as the Word of God, and our master Muhammad as the Messenger of God.

Should people successfully read the signs and proofs of these three “books”, such people of perception could then advance safely towards walking along the broad, Straight Path, which is illuminated by the Qur’an and best applied in the life of the noble Prophet Muhammad, upon whom be peace and blessings.

Qur’an as the Greatest Miracle

In a hadith, the noble Prophet said, “Every Prophet before me was bestowed miracles because of which people believed, and the (greatest) miracle I have been given is the (matchless, miraculous) Qur’an which God has revealed to me (as guidance for the entire humanity and jinn). Therefore, I hope my followers will outnumber the followers of all the other Prophets on the Day of Resurrection.” In order to help realize this glad tiding of the Prophet, the believers ought to reflect upon and truly understand the Qur’an, put it into practice in their daily lives, and thus benefit from its Messages greatly.

In compliance with the miraculous nature of the Qur’an’s eloquence, the author explains matters in this extensive commentary on selected verses of the Qur’an with consummate succinctness without tiring the reader. In doing so, he analyzes a matter from different perspectives, and if need be, he clarifies the matter in detail without causing any objections or further questions. He presents matters in such a systematic and persuasive manner that the addressee becomes fully satisfied and enlightened.

The author thoroughly explains, for instance, how believers will attain prosperity in both this world and the next through their adherence to the holy Prophet’s greatest miracle and how their honor and happiness will widely be circulated throughout the world by means of the Qur’an in his exposition of the verse, “Now We send down to you a Book which contains what you must heed in life for your honor and happiness. Will you not, then, reason and understand?” (Al-Anbiya’ 21:10). Here, the author expounds first on the fact that the addressee of the Divine Message, “We send down to you a Book,” is “all humanity,” beginning with the Companions of the Prophet and including all of humanity and all times to come until the end of the world. He puts forward that the Almighty God “promised the first addressees of the Qur’an, explicitly, and all those to come later, implicitly, that they would gain reputation and glory through the Book—the Qur’an—sent down to them.” He elucidates that the word “dhikr,” which is used in the verse and given the meaning of honor and happiness as well as reputation and glory, also suggests advice and preaching, “The hadith, ‘Religion is advice,’ which is short in wording but comprehensive in meaning, highlights this reality.” The author presents more insights into what the verse further suggests: “While the states and communities around you complete their lifespan and withdraw from the stage of history one after the other, you will be able to exist eternally owing to this blessed ‘dhikr’—the Qur’an.” He further says that the Qur’an is the “reference source for everyone” who wants to learn more of the true religion of Islam and embrace it.

Speaking for the Sake of the Reform of the Addressee

The author frequently draws attention to the Qur’anic style of speaking sincerely and for the sake of the reform of the addressees while giving advice to them or warning them because of their wrong. In his exposition of the verses, “Go, both of you, to the Pharaoh, for he has exceedingly rebelled. But speak to him with gentle words, so that he might reflect and be mindful or feel some awe (of Me, and behave with humility)” (Ta-Ha 20:43-44), the author emphasizes that “speaking with gentle words” (even to such people as the relentless enemy of God and despotic tyrant Pharaoh) should be an indispensable attribute of the spiritual guide or conveyor of the Message. He further elaborates on “gentleness” not only in speech but also in behavior and manners as part of the nature of such people. If not, he says, the addressees will move away. If one acts in this way, however, there might appear some who “might reflect and be mindful” of God.

Reminding us of the principles of loving for God’s sake and hating for God’s sake, the author further states that “a person is loved for his virtues and perfections and is disliked because of his vices and evils. So our hate is directed toward attributes and deeds, rather than the persons themselves. The Qur’an describes those who sin and do wrong as those who wrong themselves. Therefore, we pity those who wrong themselves and desire their reformation. In any event, we should be gentle and kindhearted and act gently in conveying Islam to others. Even if our addressees do not accept Islam, we have done our duty.”

Inaccurate Interpretations

While providing further insights on this Qur’anic manner of addressing people for their guidance and reform in his exposition of another verse in Suratu’l-A’la (87:9) which says, “So remind and instruct (them in the truth) in case reminder and instruction may be of use,” the author corrects certain misinterpretations by saying:

If we do not consider the reason why this and similar other verses were revealed, some inaccurate interpretations may arise, such as “Why do I continue reminding and instructing since they are of no use!” or “I have gone to them many times, but they do not pay heed,” or “Those people are not qualified to believe; therefore, it is useless to continue preaching them.” The verse says quite the opposite… Indeed, conveying God’s Message to people and calling them to believe in it is God’s command which must be fulfilled incessantly. While doing this, we should not consider whether people will accept it or not.

He further states that the conditional clause in the verse under discussion, “In case reminder and instruction may be of use,” has the meaning of emphasizing our responsibility of conveying the message rather than limiting it.

An eloquent, powerful speech, the Qur’an, which was revealed for the guidance and benefit of people, absolutely has the potential and capacity to give benefit. Some may not benefit from it while there are many who do benefit from it and are guided! Therefore, we should understand the verse in discussion as, “Remind and instruct, because it is definitely of use.”

Our author refers to the following two mistakes that have usually been made while interpreting another verse that says, “Certainly, she (minister’s wife) was burning with desire for him (Prophet Joseph); and he would have desired her had it not been that he had already seen the argument and proof of his Lord” (Yusuf 12:24). He states that, “Joseph, a sinless, sincere Prophet, is approached like an ordinary man overwhelmed with his emotions and desires,” and, therefore, the verse is interpreted from this wrong perspective: “She desired, and was moved toward him; and he desired, and was moved toward her, but just at that point he saw the evidence of his Lord and stopped.” As for the second misinterpretation of the verse, he says, “There are others who approach the issue contrary to human realities and claim that Prophet Joseph, upon whom be peace, had no sexual desires. This would imply a defect of a Prophet of God and is utterly unrealistic.”

Intrinsic Relations among the Verses

The author effectively raises awareness in the reader that the verses of the Qur’an interpret each other and make references to one another. One can, therefore, see clearly in this work how the individual verses of the Qur’an are intrinsically related with some other verses and with the totality of the Qur’an. For instance, the author shows this intrinsic relation among verses when he elaborates more on the aforementioned subject of the believers’ honor, reputation, and dignity in his exposition of verse 28 of Suratu’l-Kahf as follows:

Islam has always existed and will continue to exist with its own dynamics. It gets its unbeatable power from God. For this reason, whoever holds fast to Islam truly and sincerely is destined to be honorable and dignified, while whoever breaks with it is condemned to be despicable. The history of Islam offers plenty of examples of this.

The author presents further insights on the same subject in his exposition of another verse in Suratu’l-Maedah about the attributes of the chosen people who have taken the responsibility to represent the Religion and convey its message to others. These are the people who are “most humble towards the believers, dignified and commanding in the face of the unbelievers, striving (continuously and in solidarity) in God’s cause, and fearing not the censure of any who censure…” (Al-Maedah 5:54). In his analysis of the verse, the author states that a believer’s honor and dignity lies not in their social status, wealth or profession but in being a believer. He says:

Indeed, all might, dignity, and glory belong to God, to His Messenger, and to the believers as pointed out clearly in Suratu’l-Munafiqun (63:8). Therefore, we should continue serving Islam everywhere-at home and in schools, in the streets and at the markets-feeling in ourselves the honor and glory of Islam without fearing the censure of anyone who will censure and without feeling any inferiority complex in the face of unbelievers. While stating the attributes of the dignified community which God will raise up to exalt Islam, the Qur’an also miraculously points to certain characteristics of our time.

In relation to these believers who are “dignified and commanding in the face of the unbelievers” and who would come in the distant future after the Companions, the author further states that these chosen people “are not stern as the Companions were against the uncivilized disbelievers of the desert. Since at the present the victory over hostile ideas is through persuasion rather than force, it will be enough for us to stand firm and dignified with the honor of Islam in the face of the unbelievers.” Of course, this part of the respectable author’s analysis alludes to another verse in Suratu’l-Fath where he makes this comparison of the chosen people with the Companions, who were “firm and unyielding against the unbelievers, and compassionate among themselves” (48:29). While the first praiseworthy quality of the Companions is given in the verse as their being “firm and unyielding against the unbelievers,” their second quality is given as being “compassionate among themselves.” In the verse under discussion, however, the author asserts that those chosen people that would come centuries after the Companions are described first as “most humble towards the believers” and then as “dignified and commanding in the face of the unbelievers,” thus giving precedence to humility and the persuasion of the civilized people of modern times. In this way, it is made aware that Qur’anic verses, just like the one under discussion, extend ropes of relations to all times after their revelations no matter when and in what circumstances they were revealed.

Reasons of Revelation and Universal Messages

Indeed, this issue is one of the striking characteristics that is immediately noticeable in the book! Drawing the reader’s attention to the universality of the Qur’an, the author says, “Since the Qur’an is a universal Book, its messages are also universal.” Therefore, interpreting a verse “only according to the reason it was revealed would limit the scope of the verse,” he says in his exposition of the verse, “Who is more in the wrong than he bars God’s places of worship, so that His Name be not mentioned and invoked in them” (Al-Baqarah 2:114).

Even if this was revealed to denounce the Assyrian and Babylon kings and Romans who banned the Jews or Christians from worshipping in Baytu’l-Maqdis in Jerusalem and the Makkan polytheists who prevented the Muslims in Makkah from worshipping in the Masjidu’l-Haram, further interpretation is appropriate…This verse relates to anybody who bars God’s places of worship, so that His Name cannot be mentioned and invoked in them. The use of the “places of worship” in the plural also corroborates this interpretation of the verse. Therefore, those who wanted and attempted to crucify Jesus are greater in wrongdoing than others no matter when they live. Similarly, those who have banned people from worshipping in Baytu’l-Maqdis are greater in wrongdoing than others; those who prevented God’s Messenger and his Companions, from entering the Ka’bah and worshipping in the Masjidu’l-Haram as well as those who follow them in barring people from mosques in all ages are greater in wrongdoing than others. Likewise, the ones who leave the mosques and masjids abandoned and those who prevent believers from their religious practices do the greatest wrong.

Our author here includes all those who bar people from places of worship and who are thus denounced by the verse, starting from such ancient tyrants as Nebuchadnezzar, Shapur, Titus, and Adrianus to all the wicked people who attack the places of worship in any period of history, including the brutal forces that will demolish the Ka’bah and the Masjidu’n-Nabawi at the End of Time.

Psychological Exegesis in the Stories of Prophets

Oftentimes, the author turns the reader’s attention to the need for the psychological exegesis of the Qur’an, saying that the exegetes have as yet devoted very little attention to the psychological aspects of the Qur’an. He does this especially when he expounds on the stories of the Prophets and the bygone nations mentioned in the Qur’an. The respected author asserts that the stories of the Prophets and their peoples are neither figurative nor symbolic; all the Qur’anic characters are the real flesh-and-blood figures that present us with the never-fading embodiments of certain truths. Through the eye of the modern man, he reads like a book all the words, actions, manners, and mindset of, for instance, the tyrant Pharaoh, relentless Capitalist Korah, and such hypocrites as the wives of Prophets Noah and Lot who betrayed them, siding with unbelievers against the Prophets. While he clearly portrays their psychology and character traits and presents us with clear hints to be able to recognize such hypocrite people, Pharaoh-like despots or Korah-like ultra materialists and thus see their projections in our own times, he extends ropes of relations to the modern age and raises in us the awareness for the need to take necessary precautions against such evil people.

On the other hand, through the narratives of the lives of the Prophets, he raises in the reader the awareness towards achieving the aim of becoming the living embodiments of the Qur’an. Often, the author strongly recommends the readers of the Qur’an to “try to make the connection between the time, place, conditions, and the figures mentioned in the verses and their own time and place and the very conditions surrounding them” in order to truly benefit from them and see their similar projections in their own times. He further says, “If we view the narratives in the Qur’an as certain stories about certain bygone peoples, our benefit from it will be little.” He asserts, however, that the door to its blessings and benefits will be opened if we approach it with the conviction that the Qur’an addresses us directly.

In conclusion, the core message this essential work gives to its audience is the necessity of understanding and reflecting upon the messages of the Qur’an, committing to them, and then acting upon them in their own practical lives. Throughout the book, readers can certainly see the fasla’l-khitab-clear, effective and decisive communication of ideas towards achieving this end. Being quite exceptional in his decisive and persuasive communication of messages in the book, the author achieves addressing both the scholarly and the general audience of the contemporary age. His minimal use of technical terms of the field of Qur’anic exegesis enables his message to reach a wide and diverse readership. Without lowering the quality, he has penned the book in a grand but simple manner comprehendible to the average English reader. As a final point, following the good example of our respected author who completes his exposition of most of the verses with a heartfelt prayer that is in compliant with the general message of the relevant verse, we pray to our Lord to grant him continued success in his services and to make this book be a means of tremendous reward for the author and beneficial for the wider audience—both Muslims and all interested seekers striving to explore the depths of meanings and purposes of the Divine Speech.

Book review by Huseyin Bingul