Question: What are the lessons today’s believers should draw from the following Divine message: “Believers should not go forth to war all together. But why should not a party from every community of them mobilize to acquire profound, correct knowledge and understanding of the Religion, and warn their people when they return to them so that they may beware (of wrongful attitudes)” (at-Tawbah 9:122). 

Answer: In this verse, God Almighty first reveals that it is not correct for all believers to simultaneously go on a military campaign and take part in war. Then He states that a party should stay behind to gain insight into the spirit of religion and that when their people come back from different fronts, these learned ones should guide them with fair exhortation, feed them with religious knowledge, and teach them what they should know; this is because those people who engaged with the enemy during warfare may have failed to receive the religious education they need.

Why did they have to fight?

In the early period of Islam, since believers told people the truth, and represented and expressed justice, they faced attacks by the antagonists of religion. In such a situation, believers could not say to the enemies coming to exterminate them, “Come on, let us sit in the mosque and discuss first.” Even if they did, those enemies, who were fixed on grudge and destruction, would have tried to demolish that mosque and bury the believers therein. In order to stand against such demolition, they fought to protect their chastity, honor, religion, home, and flag.

After the demise of the noble Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and during the time of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, may God be pleased with them, similar problems emerged and Muslims had to engage with enemies in different places. During the time of Caliph Abu Bakr they had to fight on eight different fronts in order to repress the cases of apostasy in different tribes. Besides, the Sassanid and Roman empires, which were the super powers of the time, also had their eyes on Muslims. Since they accosted Muslims at every opportunity, Muslims had to fight defensive wars against them in different parts of the world.

In such a situation, had everyone attended war without any exception, there would have been a serious gap in terms of religious education. In the verse mentioned above, God Almighty commands that a group of people should stay behind for scholarly purposes in order to compensate for the lack of knowledge in those who return from war. Thus He pointed out that Muslims must definitely retain their learned state and attain the horizons necessitated by the conditions of their era. If believers fail to attain such a state and horizons, it is not possible to stand against attacks on different fronts anyway.

Cultural envoys

As for the conditions of our era, when knowledge and power of discourse came to the fore, continuing to exist as ourselves will be possible by means of the power of knowledge, pen, and discourse. With the approach of Bediuzzaman, victory over the civilized can be through persuasion. Therefore, the devoted souls who are the cultural envoys in our time should take their values to different parts of the world—not with weapons and brutal force, but with knowledge, wisdom, love, tolerance, and goodness. The way of peace and love opens the way that leads to hearts, whereas brutal force causes grudge and hatred to rise from the dead. For this reason, unless you remain under invasion and have no any other way but to fight, no solution should be sought through force. As for the issue of using force, it should be evaluated within a perspective of defense or eliminating an inescapable danger.

It is for this reason that the most important duty to be fulfilled with respect to Islam and humanity is going to the four corners of the world, to exchange cultural values there. It is also important in the meantime to benefit from different patterns and colors wherever we are, as far as they do not contradict one’s essential teachings. By coming into contact with different people in the places they go, the devoted souls will both serve as honorary representatives of their cultural values, and they will receive the beautiful sides of those cultures and present them to their own people. However, as they will be predominantly busy with their pursuits of peaceful action, they may not be sufficiently nourished in terms of knowledge and spirituality. Then, it is necessary to edify individuals well-versed in the values of spiritual heritage, who know essential sources better, and thus who will help those in the field of peaceful action be nourished as is necessary. Those who undertake the responsibility to deepen in correct and profound knowledge and comprehension of Islam should constantly flow like a pure freshwater spring, nourishing the altruistic souls running in the field, who should in return take what they will from that source and complete their scholarly equipment.

Scholarly Ones Open to Both Physical and Spiritual Disciplines

By referring to acquiring “profound, correct knowledge and understanding of the Religion,” the verse points to the fact that those who stay behind need to be equipped with knowledge pertaining to faith, Islam, and to ihsan, or perfect goodness. Together with that, the sound functioning of these values, their easily being welcome by a society (perhaps of a very different cultural background), and their being liked and valued, depends on correct discernment of non-religious realities and rules as well. Therefore, besides religion, it bears much importance to master the natural sciences, which constitute the basis for most modern sciences. It is important to carry out research in this respect, and behold appreciatively the creation displayed in nature.

As Bediüzzaman put it, while learning religious disciplines on the one hand, modern sciences should not be neglected either. He pointed out that a student’s endeavor would soar only when these two are found together. Excluding one of these two will mean leaving the other devoid of wings. One should neither make concessions from learning religious disciplines, which are the light of the heart, nor ignore modern sciences, which are the light of the mind, reason, and judgment.

In addition, this verse emphasizes the importance of love of knowledge and research. Therefore, one must make very serious efforts in order to master both the religious and modern sciences, and remain like a “student” until the end of their life. The Arabic word for student (talib) means “seeker” of knowledge. No matter whether a person studies religious disciplines or modern sciences, if that person is utilizing the essences distilled from those studies for the sake of knowing God and maintaining a sound balance, then that person will be treated as a true student or seeker of knowledge. So what does such a treatment mean? As the Messenger of God stated, God Almighty makes the way to Paradise easier to one who sets forth demanding to acquire knowledge. [1]

Seeking knowledge is very important and the benefits a scholar can bring to society are great. Thus, one’s society is responsible for supporting seekers of knowledge and doing what they can for them. It is very difficult for someone dedicated to knowledge to devote time for anything else. Accordingly, some Islamic scholars stated that even if they wear expensive clothes and the threshold of their door is made of gold, it is still possible to give alms to seekers of knowledge, because the vitality of a nation depends on such mastering of knowledge. If this cannot be done, the nation will collapse and disintegrate. Due to this stagnancy, some cracks emerged in the Islamic world in the fifth century after the holy migration (11th century CE). With the recession in the 13th and 14th centuries, a complete breakdown and disintegration happened. Muslim societies have not been able to straighten up since.

Dignified Contentment and Remaining Under Obligation

In response to people’s support and care, seekers of knowledge must do their best in terms of being worthy of such kindness and must not waste a second of their time. Through very serious planning, division of labor, and a discipline of mutual helping, these seekers must be completely focused on this task. They must devote all of their energy to the task so as to be deserving of the people’s regard for them—even if that means sleeping only four hours if necessary and devoting twenty hours of the day to studying. Who knows? When they study with such seriousness, maybe God Almighty will grant them in two years what another person can attain in ten years.

Incidentally, let me share how I feel about one issue: I feel heartbroken for those who pursue PhD degrees, but cannot finish that in even ten years. Time is the greatest capital for a human. If a person has taken such a path once, they should persevere, exert their brains, make use of all arguments they can make use of, benefit from all sources they can, and if possible, they should even finish their PhD before the time determined for them.

I wish to underline one more point concerning scholarly ones: Dignified contentment is a very important principle for those dedicated to scholarly pursuits, with respect to the honor of both knowledge and learned ones. Actually, the path of the Prophets is also based on this essential. In many verses of the Qur’an, it is stated that they said, “I ask of you no wage for that (for conveying God’s Message); my wage is only due from the Lord of the worlds” (ash-Shuara 26:127). In this respect, scholarly ones should not be obliged to anyone if possible, in any phase of their lives—neither while they are students, nor when they become teachers, or teacher of teachers…

May God forbid, if one does not have this feeling of dignified contentment, and if that person carries out certain tasks for the sake of some returns, such as becoming a manager, director general, MP, minister, or prime minister, then such a person cannot be saved from being obliged to other people. Unfortunately, the concessions they make on account of being obliged will not only cost them dearly, but cost their nation as well. In this respect, those who engage in scholarly pursuits must arrange their lives in accordance with the principle of dignified contentment. They must use the means of their fathers if they can, or they must make a modest living with their own means, if they can. They should live frugally, never becoming obliged to anyone and never having to make concessions.

Note

1. Sahih, Muslim, Dhikr, 38.

Abu Hanifa (d. 767 CE) is considered a leading scholar of Islamic law and his thoughts led to the formation of the Hanafi school of Islam, which has the greatest following among schools. Abu Hanifa’s time was an era of intense political and social mobility. While new conquests brought in new cultural and religious components, the political authority aspired to disseminate an official form of Islam; at the same time, new groups and formations emerged to respond to changing conditions. Unfortunately, these conditions led to some groups being radicalized. Abu Hanifa’s stance against radicalism was exemplary and his arguments are still worthwhile today.

His political attitude

Abu Hanifa represents the prototype of an independent scholar. He was wary of state power, believing that it corrupted intellectual honesty in the interest of preserving power; thus, he did not hold an official political position. This was a brave stance, as he was seriously persecuted for it. Yet his independence allowed him to see radicalism – on both sides of the political spectrum – for the danger that it was.

Understanding of Islamic jurisprudence

Abu Hanifa is considered the pioneer of the school of sound opinion (ray), which advocates seeking solutions to social-judicial problems by using reason together with religious essentials and scholarly comparison (qiyas). Deductive reasoning (ijtihad), juristic preference for the better (istihsan), and acceptable custom (urf) have an important place in his understanding of Islamic jurisprudence. We can infer that he also believed in the necessity of taking social and psychological realities into account when making religious judgments; this was what he did in practice.

Abu Hanifa did not choose a reductionist approach by restricting himself to the frame of religious essentials, but produced solutions to the questions he faced—or could possibly face—by benefiting from the sources mentioned along with the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is possible to define his approach to jurisprudence as an understanding that places humanity in the center; his views expanded the domain of legitimacy and accepted components of historical and cultural heritage that do not contradict the spirit of religion and belief of Divine oneness, such as local customs and practices. This broad perspective ran contrary to radical beliefs. Because the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence does not disregard real problems in life, it is more capable of solving them.

Abu Hanifa viewed education and debate as essential to his jurisprudence. He would bring a certain problem – some of them contemporary, and some hypothetical – to the attention of his students, each of whom was an expert on an Islamic discipline such as tafsir, hadith, and fiqh; he would let them discuss that matter in detail, follow the discussions with patience, and come to a conclusive judgment according to the strength of the arguments. But he would still tolerate the opposing thoughts of his disciples, such as Imam Muhammad and Abu Yusuf, and let those thoughts come to life. All of their opposing thoughts were recorded, and people acted upon most of them.

We can accept Abu Hanifa’s educational method as a pluralist and democratic one, which also teaches how to forbear different opinions with patience. It shows the value of viewing an issue from different points of view. Despite its value, there were some groups that did not support Abu Hanifa’s methods.

His understanding of belief

Some groups had formed prior to Abu Hanifa as extensions of the extremist Kharijites. They not only directly declared believing Muslims who sinned were apostates, but they also attacked them and tried to exterminate them in the name of religion. The Kharijites even declared Caliph Ali – and many other devout believers – apostates. Though the Kharijites were the most violent, other groups – including the Mutazilites – also persecuted certain religious groups when they came to political power. Unfortunately, this act of dividing society into groups inevitably led to more violence.

According to one definition, it is possible for religion to be a dividing or uniting factor within a society. It can be a great force for good when it is kept separate from the political machinations of power. In his work Fiqh al-Akbar, Abu Hanifa defined the concept of religion (din) in terms of its contents by saying, “Religion is the title given to the entirety of religion, faith, submission, and religious judgments.” Abu’l Muntaha, the scholar who annotated this definition, states that the word religion has different uses, sometimes meaning belief, sometimes submission, and sometimes as the Divine judgments conveyed by a certain Prophet. However, at his answer to the question directed to him about the difference between religion and religious law, Abu Hanifa he expressed that he saw a difference between them. He did not only acknowledge this difference, but also gave a religious and rational explanation for it.

According to Abu Hanifa, religion (din) and religious law (shariah) are separate concepts. He accepted religion as the principles to be believed in – namely, the belief of Divine unity, and faith in the existence and unity of God. Religious law, however, is a body of judgments related to different aspects of human life such as worship, interpersonal relations, and the like. Abu Hanifa interpreted the Qur’anic verse meaning, “I have not created the jinn and humankind but to worship Me (exclusively)” (Dhariyat 56), in the sense of, “So that they know Me and acknowledge my Oneness.”

He believed the origin of religion is the belief in the unity of God. Obviously, this definition is based on the distinction between the essence of religion and what it necessitates. Here, belief is the absolute condition of religion, because a person belonging to a certain religion is a matter of accepting the essential teachings of that religion, rather than observing the acts of worship commanded by that religion.

Abu Hanifa came to this conclusion about religion by considering the fact that the essentials of belief brought by the Prophets are the same, but there are certain differences on other issues, such as worship. The Prophets of God did not belong to different religions. None of them commanded their people to forsake the religion of the previous Prophets, since their faith is the same. On the other hand, every Prophet invited their people to follow the law they conveyed, as decreed by God Almighty for that specific people, not necessarily following the exact law conveyed by the previous Prophets. There were many different codes for different peoples. It is for this reason that God Almighty states, “(For each community) …We have appointed a clear way of life and a comprehensive system (containing the principles of that way and how to follow it). And if God had so willed, He would surely have made you a single community (following the same way of life and system surrounded by the same conditions throughout all history)” (Maedah 48).

The faith of Divine oneness is always the same and religion does not change from one Prophet to another in this sense; it is the systems and their rules that change. If “religion” were fulfilling everything God commands and avoiding everything He forbids, then a person who fails to observe only one command or commits one forbidden act would be an apostate. As such, the legal judgments between fellow believers such as marriage, receiving an inheritance, attending a funeral, and the like would be invalid. However, it is having belief that makes them lawful between fellow believers. Other commands come after having accepted religion. If the commanded acts were faith itself, then God would not call His servants believers until they fulfilled the acts He commanded.

In order to support the point stated above, Abu Hanifa asserted the fact that when believers are excused from certain acts at certain times, they are still considered to have faith: a menstruating woman who abandons the daily prayers, a man who has a valid excuse abandons the Ramadan fasting, or a poor man who cannot give the alms of zakat are still considered believers. If such observances were identical to having faith, failing to observe them for some excuse would have the same meaning. However, it is impossible to make such a claim. According to Abu Hanifa, there is no complete relation between faith and deeds, since they are separate things.

Abu Hanifa stated that the following verses and others of similar meaning also point to the same fact:

“Tell those of My servants who believe that they must establish the Prayer in conformity with its conditions…” (Ibrahim 31); “O you who believe! Prescribed for you is retaliation in cases of (deliberate, unjust) killing…” (Baqarah 178); “O you who believe! Remember and mention God much” (Ahzab 41).

If the commanded acts were identical with belief or faith (iman), then God would not address people as believers until they fulfilled those acts. In addition, God Almighty separates having faith and good deeds in other verses as well:

“Except those who believe and do good righteous deeds…” (Asr 3); “No! Rather, whoever submits his whole being to God (and does so) as one devoted to doing good, aware that God is seeing him, his reward is with his Lord, and all such will have no fear, (for they will always find My help and support with them), nor will they grieve” (Baqarah 112); “But whoever wishes for the Hereafter and strives for it as it should be striven for, being a believer…” (Isra 19).

This distinction proves that faith is not the same as deeds. Believers observe the prayers, fasting, zakat, Hajj, and they make remembrance of God owing to their faith – but they are not considered to have faith for having observed these. This proves that they do good deeds after having faith (iman) already.

In his letter to Uthman al-Batti, a scholar from Basra, Abu Hanifa stated this view with reference to different proofs. He used the following example: an indebted man firstly acknowledges his debt and pays it afterwards, but not vice versa. His acknowledgement of the debt is not for having paid the debt, but his paying is for having acknowledged the debt.

Abu Hanifa did not believe that a person who sins is out of the sphere of faith; nor are they an apostate. He expressed this point, saying, “Those who have acknowledged the direction to turn for worship are believers. I cannot count them as having forsaken faith owing to some command they do not observe. As for one who abandons some obligatory acts in spite of having faith, that person is a believer, but a sinful one (he is not a disbeliever).”

Abu Hanifa argued that what would make one an unbeliever is not committing a forbidden act, but considering it lawful; not abandoning an obligatory command, but considering it unnecessary.

Abu Hanifa also pointed out that real believers commit sins not by considering them lawful, but by giving in to their carnal soul. When asked, “If God is dearer for a believer than everything, why does a believer rebel Him? Is it possible for a person to rebel while having sincere love for God?” the great imam replied, “Yes, a child loves his father, but sometimes disobeys him. The situation of a believer is the same…He commits sins not owing to a lack of love for God, but for giving in to the feeling of lust or something similar.”

Some claimed that this stance aligned Abu Hanifa with the school of Murjia, whose adherents believed that sins would not nullify one’s faith, but Abu Hanifa soundly argued that it is not possible to guarantee anything in matters of faith:

“We cannot say that sins do not harm a believer at all. Similarly, we cannot say that a person who commits sins will not enter Hell. Neither can we say our good deeds are accepted and our evil deeds are forgiven… However, who commits good deeds in conformity with all of the conditions of validity…and dies as a believer without nullifying those deeds, then God does not let those deeds be in vain, but rewards them.” We need to clarify at this point that by this definition Abu Hanifa did not refer to an argument as if religion was a matter of conscience only; religion for him is a comprehensive system of life that concerns all aspects of believers’ existence.

While founding the most developed school of Islamic jurisprudence, Abu Hanifa defined religion with reference to its essence, pinpointing the difference between religion and other factors related to religion. His definition of religion as the faith of Divine oneness is very important in terms of maintaining social unity. Such a definition does not lessen the importance of religion’s other requirements. Moreover, the political and social conditions of his time called for such a definition. For this reason, Abu Hanifa made a definition that referred to the essence of religion and aimed to maintain unity in society by counteracting the tendency to easily condemn those with different opinions.

This is valuable even today, as taking belief in Divine unity as the basis of religion allows followers of different monotheistic religions to meet on common grounds. In the Qur’an, God Almighty addresses Muslims in the person of the Prophet and demands them to call People of the Book to a common word between them: “O People of the Book, come to a word common between us and you, that we worship none but God, and associate none as partner with Him, and that none of us take others for Lords, apart from God” (Al Imran 3: 64).

Conclusion

When Abu Hanifa’s world of thought and understanding of life are studied, it’s clear that his viewpoint valued differences and did not permit persecution. This perspective still bears significance in terms of peaceful coexistence in today’s societies. Such a magnanimous attitude can help to combat radical attitudes and inclinations for violence.

Destruction is easy. Those who want to destroy something should first know how to construct something. Otherwise, the shortcomings that emerge after destruction will be impossible to solve. Some issues are not open to destruction unless a clear alternative has been set forth. I think one of the most significant missions of the prophets was to set the balance pertaining to this issue. They exposed all the fallacies in society, and exclaimed bravely, “this is incorrect.” They did so convincingly, looking people in the eye. They immediately offered alternative “corrections,” and prevented any sort of chaos or shortcomings. That is, they handled every matter on both positive and negative fronts and did not allow any kind of mental or sensual abyss to emerge. Without plans and projects of “construction” that have been built upon a firm foundation, any sort of destruction or demolition will be reckless.

As a matter of fact, simply due to the lack of this approach, sometimes individuals, sometimes families, sometimes states – in a direct proportion to the dimension of the mischief committed – are destined to collapse. The Ottomans primarily come to our minds, if we want to examine the issue from a state or national perspective. Sometimes, sultans were dethroned with thoughts of replacing them with better ones. But these absences created a power gap, they couldn’t find better rulers, and the people yearned for the old sultans. Because of this, the Ottomans were severely weakened, creating a power vacuum in the region.

It’s with deep regret that we must acknowledge this sort of historical mistake is still being committed. Without alternative, precise plans and projects in place, states or governments are being erased. That is, opposition consists only of loaded slogans and criticism. If they were asked how things really should have been, they would not know. A state or government may surely make mistakes. It should be open to criticism. But that criticism should never amount to, “let’s destroy it and then figure out an alternative.” Such a thought would weaken the state and could even cause the total loss of national credibility.

Believers should have no affiliation with those pursuing incorrect actions. To prevent a serious dissolution of national will, and against the dangers presented, they should always do what is expected of them. To those who chase them and torment them, believers should merely utter, “everyone acts according to his own character” (Qur’an 17:84). On this issue, balance is very important.

In conclusion, everything should be done in accordance with the proper rules. And while endeavoring to construct, the utmost care should be taken to avoid total destruction. Shortcomings should be avoided by heeding historical lessons. And the nation and state should not be recklessly sacrificed.

Worship is essentially categorized into two sections: worship through financial/material means and physical/bodily worship. This categorization does not mean they are totally unrelated; in many ways, they are interconnected. For example, the daily prayers that we perform with our bodies certainly have material aspects, like time and place. As a matter of fact, the inner and outer conditions that are required for a proper prayer (like cleanliness, washing, dressing, etc.) are also related to the material world, too.

Alms is a kind of fiscal worship, but it also requires one to labor in a job or be physically present in the marketplace, so as to achieve a certain degree of wealth from which to give charity. The Hajj, the Muslim pilgrimage to the holy lands of Mecca and Medina, is a financial worship, in one aspect, and a physical form of worship, in another: a Muslim has to be financially able to afford the travel to the holy lands, where he or she has to endure physical difficulties, like the long trip and certain rituals, like circumambulation around the Ka’ba, standing vigil all day, etc. Fasting, too, may be considered within this frame. Four of the five essential principles of Islam have a considerable association with the material world as well as the spiritual one.

In today’s world, it is important to contribute to good religious services by alms, charity, and donations. But such financial contributions do not absolve one from other forms of worship and good work that need to be performed physically. For example, Abu Bakr had been among the well-to-do of Mecca when he met the Prophet. Bu he spent all his wealth for the sake of Islam and he had nothing to leave behind when he died. He also physically participated in the emigration to Medina and he also fought in many battles.

Financial worship may be more important at certain times. But, this is not an absolute truth. It varies depending on time, place, and the respective conditions of people.

We can assess the issue from two perspectives: 1) Giving less or more charity depending on wealth; 2) giving within certain parameters. There exists a distorted and incorrect understanding among some believers. They say: “My financial situation is not high enough, I do not own a fortune; so, I am not obliged to observe any financial worship.” No; this thought is absolutely wrong. Every single person is obliged to observe his or her responsibilities within the capacity bestowed upon him or her by God Almighty. However much or little one earns, believers should always seek God’s good pleasure by giving in charity as much as they can, for God considers sincerity, rather than the amount given. In the words of Bediuzzaman, “An ounce of sincere worship may sometimes be superior to the one that weighs pounds but is not practiced in sincerity.” As a consequence, every single person is obliged to mobilize on the divine path to God’s contentment.

It is very difficult for a person to both give away in charity and maintain his or her sincerity. Those who can manage this will surely be rewarded beyond measure. If one can overcome the welfare and comfort that come with wealth, can avoid ostentation, and can keep their sincerity and connection with God strong, their rewards will surely be abundant in proportion to the difficulties they face.

The second aspect of the matter relates to the parameters and guidelines for such donations. There are certain minimum degrees for financial obligations in charity. In the case of Islam, for instance, it is compulsory for wealthy Muslims to give a minimum of 2.5 per cent of their annual wealth in charity. There are other rules for wealth in gold, silver, commercial goods, crops, etc.

But we have to remember that these are minimum figures and many lofty goals and good services cannot be attained through merely giving these minimums. Therefore, every single individual should work hard to donate beyond the minimum amount of obligatory alms. We wholeheartedly believe that whatever is given today in the name of God will be multiplied by the thousands in the next life. Yes, everybody is obliged to serve on the way to God with his or her self and goods. But there are no limiting criteria; everything is relative.

Even if we gave away all we own on the path to God, we should still see it as a very minor sacrifice when compared to the ideal we have been wishing to construct.

Whatever the conditions may be, a believer should not go out of the frame of good manners, civility, and decency, for others ascribe all of their actions to faith. Thus, even in the face of the most grave situations or unyielding cases, believers should not swerve from their direction. Examining the life of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, we see that he never changed his manners, even at times when he was challenged by Abu Jahl, the man who did all possible evil to oppose the Prophet.

There is occasionally a bitter tone in some of the Qur’anic passages as far as unbelief and unbelievers are concerned. However, we should clarify here that this harsh style is for devious thoughts and ideas, not for individuals. The Qur’anic message does not position any individual as an opponent just because of who they are. It is profane thoughts and views of denial – which are not unique to certain individuals but which have always existed and will continue to exist – that the Qur’an deals with rather harshly. This is a lesson believers should learn from the Qur’an in their engagement with others.

This is an attitude to be adopted not among people only, but among states, too. Let us reify the concept by an example from the Qur’an. God’s message to Moses, peace be upon him, concerning his encounter with the Pharaoh was, “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 20:44). Speaking with gentle words and softly, even if it is the Pharaoh you are going to deal with – the Pharaoh who afflicted you and your nation with all possible oppression and violence. Another remarkable point here is that the Qur’an binds reflection and God-consciousness to “gentle words.” By a reverse conceptualization, we could induce the meaning that “in case you advance towards him in virulence, he shall neither reflect nor stand in awe.” So, benignity and tolerance are indispensable articles to communicate a message, whoever the addressee is.

That is, a believer always has to stand in the climate of a gentle attitude, gentle state, gentle heart, gentle conscience, and gentle words, so that they can serve others with true guidance. Otherwise, all the states and attitudes of those who have not been softened, melted, and molded in this Prophetic spirit will be artificial and theatrical. Such insincere people may smile for a while, but they will expose their teeth and present their genuine nature when their tails are stepped upon. Indeed, for how long could a firefly deceive astronomers that it is a star?

In the light of these criteria, it is also possible to read the descent of the Messiah on earth in the latter times with a message of being “without a hand to those who beat you, without a speech to those who curse you, and no hearts for those who break hearts,” even if some may consider this out of balance.

The example of Bediuzzaman, the sufferer of the age, is unique. Even towards those who had been his most merciless, inhumane torturers he managed to communicate the truths of faith and was never offended. Indeed, have believers not exerted every single effort to shine the inspirations of their souls to those who dug ditches and pushed them in?¹

Communicating with someone, or spreading a message, is impossible by raving or clamoring, violence or anger. Maybe violence was once a method or tool; but time has invalidated it. Today, the principle of persuasion is, and will be, dominant ever after. Today’s devotees of love should reach the level framed above, and should make abundant practices about that.

As as pointed out above, in the latter times, the Messiah will surely descend on earth in order to fulfill that significant mission, even, say, if he is in the remotest corner of the Hereafter. But this descent is dependent upon the meaning and spirit within your representative, collective body. Yes, he will descend to be the mold for that meaning. If that spirit is missing, I think, his corporeal descent will not mean anything. To conclude, we should know that a resurrection in the latter times will be realized by the reviving breaths of the heroes of love who represent gentle states, gentle attitudes, gentle hearts, and gentle words.

1- See 85:4 in the Qur’an for the short passage on tyrants who dug ditches of fire and killed believers.

Serenity sometimes comes in the form of perceptible or imperceptible signs; at other times it appears so clearly that even ordinary people can identify it. Whether itself and its signs resemble a spiritual breath blown into the ear of conscience or a Divine breeze that can be perceived only with great care; or it appears miraculously and so clearly that anyone can see them, as in the case of the Children of Israel during the time of Prophet Moses, and in the case of Usayd ibn Khudayr^[1], a Companion of the Prophet, to whom it came like a vapor while he was reading the Qur’an, serenity is a Divine confirmation for those believers aware of their helplessness and destitution before God, and a means of thankfulness and enthusiasm. It is God Who sends it, as declared in the verse: He it is Who sent down serenity into the hearts of the believers so that they may have more faith added to their faith (48:4).

Serenity usually comes to strengthen the believers’ willpower, to affirm their belief and hearten them. A believer gifted with serenity is not shaken by worldly fear, grief, or anxiety, and finds peace, integrity, harmony between his or her inner world and the outer world. Such a person is dignified, balanced, confident, assured and solemn, and self-possessed and careful in his or her relations with God Almighty. Egoism, vanity, and pride are abandoned; every spiritual gift received is attributed to God; humility and self- discipline are exhibited while thanking Him; and all dissatisfaction and uneasiness is ascribed to personal weakness and examined in the light of self-criticism.

As for itmi’nan (peacefulness), it is defined as full satisfaction and the state of being at complete rest without any serious lapse. It is a spiritual state beyond serenity. If serenity is the beginning of being freed from theoretical knowledge and awakened to the truth, peacefulness is the final point or station.

The ranks or stations of radiya (being pleased with God in resignation) and mardiya (being approved by God) are two dimensions of peacefulness belonging to good and virtuous believers and are the depths of resignation. The ranks of mulhama (being inspired by God) and zakiya (being purified by God) are two other difficult-to-perceive degrees of peacefulness relating to those brought near to God. The gifts coming through them are pure and abundant.

Some thoughts and inclinations displeasing to God may appear in serene souls, while only perfect calmness is found in those that are peaceful and at rest. Peaceful hearts always seek God’s good pleasure or approval, and the “compass needle” of their conscience never swerves. Peacefulness is such an elevated rank of certainty that a soul traveling through it sees in every station the truth of: I wish to set my heart at rest (2:260) and is rewarded with gifts. Wherever the believer is, the breeze of: They will have no fear nor will they grieve (2:62) is felt; the glad tidings of: Fear not, nor grieve, but rejoice in the glad tidings of Paradise that has been promised to you (41:30) is heard; the sweet, life-giving water of: Beware, in the remembrance of God do hearts find peace and tranquility (13:28) is tasted; and corporeality is defeated.

Peacefulness is realized when believers transcend material causes and means. Reason’s transnatural journey ends at this point, and spirits are freed from worldly anxieties. Here, feelings find whatever they seek and become as deep, wide, and peaceful as a calm ocean. Those who have acquired this rank find the greatest peace only in feeling the company of God. They become aware of Divine Beauty and Grace in their hearts, feel attracted toward Him in order to meet with Him, are conscious that existence subsists by God’s Existence, and that the power of speech exists only because He has Speech. Through this opened window they acquire, despite their finitude, the power to see and hear in an extremely broad capacity. In the whirl of the most complicated events, where everyone else is bewildered and falters, such people travel in safety and escape the whirl. In addition to being freed from worldly anxieties, a believer whose heart is at rest or peace welcomes with a smile both death and the obstacles following death, and hears the Divine compliments and congratulations: O soul at rest, return to your Lord, well pleased (with Him), and well-pleasing (to Him). Enter among My servants, and enter My Paradise! (89:27–30). Death is seen as the most agreeable and desired result of life. When his or her life has ended in death, he or she hears, as was heard from the grave of Ibn ‘Abbas, in every station passed through after death, the same Divine congratulations or Decree: Return to your Lord, well pleased (with Him), and well-pleasing (to Him). Enter among My servants, and enter My Paradise!

Such people spend their lives in the grave on the “shores” of Paradise, experience the Supreme Gathering in wonder and admiration, the Supreme Weighing of People’s Deeds in awe and amazement, pass over the Bridge, only because they have to pass over it, and finally reach Paradise—the last, eternal abode of those whose hearts are at rest or have found peace and tranquility. For such a person, the world is an ‘Arafat^[2] prepared on the way leading to God’s eternal forgiveness. The worldly life is the eve of the festival, and the other life is the festival day.

Our Lord! Grant us in the world what is good, and in the Hereafter what is good, and protect us from the punishment of the Fire. And bestow blessings and peace on our master Muhammad, the Prophet, the chosen one, and on his Family and Companions, good and virtuous.

Notes

1. Usayd ibn Khudayr felt surrounded by a vapor-like mass while reading the Qur’an and felt greatly exhilarated. (Tr.)

2. The plain where Muslim pilgrims stay for some time on the eve of the Religious Festival of Sacrifice as a pillar of pilgrimage. (Tr.)

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

Believers have hearts that are rich and spacious—with room and prosperity enough to welcome all, offering bowls of love and embracing others with compassion. They share the blessings of their closeness to God with those with whom their paths cross, and strive to inspire their souls. One can see them at times joyous, even intoxicated with dreams of the day they will encounter the Real; other times, they are anxious in fear of the Divine, shivering in the thrill of such a splendid reunion. They see through the mist and smoke of hatred and revenge; they do not feel the thunder, gusts and waves of jealousy or slander that hit their soul and disperse, nor are they depressed by palpitations from the misery caused by adverse circumstance. They are in a lofty Presence, and all incompatibilities are deleted from their imaginations and thoughts-their hearts, spirits, and feelings are purified and clear. Verily, there can be no other condition for those who cleanse themselves of impurities several times a day. There can be no rips in the canvas of their graceful souls as long as their inner spheres have been filled with bliss that descends from beyond; their behavior corresponds to the affluence and wisdom thereof. Their path is well-set, their destination lofty, and none of these are to be bartered for. With commitment to their faith, they acknowledge the great ones as great, and the smaller ones as a rose to be smelled with compassion. Everything is classified properly in the taxonomy of values.

Believers maintain their distance from plans and projects that are unrelated to their high ideals, confused thoughts that do not ultimately lead to the Supreme One, profane behavior, or empty words and considerations. They are active in thinking when they are silent; their speech is remembrance and all of their outward and inward faculties are locked onto the One. They are complaisant, as deep and pure as an angel ready to soar. Their motivation is head-spinning, but respectful toward the Exalted Station to which they have turned; they are judicious enough not to prioritize their personal plans or projects as highly as an ideal. Their eyes observe the horizons; their endeavors are powerful enough to pierce mountains. Believers are men and women of insight, and while they are stimulated by an intense desire to introduce the beautiful patterns of belief to others, they are also aware of the necessary subtlety their works involve.

Believers make their brief lifetimes long enough to build this world and to invest in the next. They do not waste even the smallest of the many innate blessings bestowed upon them; they do not busy themselves with useless things that promise nothing for this world or the world to come. They can give away all that has been bestowed on them for the pleasure of the One while scrupulously making sure a single penny is not wasted. They pay strict attention to righteousness and to what is lawful and what is forbidden. All that they do, they do within the framework of raising the glory of the One’s name, so that all their actions become heavenly waterfalls and rivers. They live cautiously and thoughtfully, searching for possible means to convert one drop into an ocean or claim the sun with an atom. They strive to eternalize transient things.

Believers love for the sake of the One; they breathe love and kindle love all around. They rush to stop tears and agony, they apply antidotes to pain, they transform weeping to laughter, moaning to praise, and storms of fire to breezes of pleasure. They scream to stop the screams of the world and their tears flow like rivers. They develop self-esteem only if it means something to others, thus preferring “us” over “me.” They are not selfish but altruistic; they are not drowned in corporeality, but are soulful and absorbed in the truth that lies beyond. They do not allow their hearts to be hidden in their bodies or their spirits trampled under their corpses. They seek a prophetic dignity and protection from sin. Champions of discipline, believers are content with the pleasures and tastes within the lawful domain—they outperform their carnal selves and sensuality, reach the respective horizons of their spirit and overcome each obstacle with one single move, God willing.

Believers are so firmly determined to represent good conduct and prevent mischief and hideousness that they race beside the angels, who say, “All-Glorified You are (in that You are absolutely above having any defect or doing anything meaningless, and Yours are all the attributes of perfection). We have no knowledge save what You have taught us. Surely You are the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.” Such believers never abuse the blessings that are innately bestowed in contradiction to the purpose of their creation; they are loyal and God honors them with His company in turn.

Existence per se is a trust to every individual, and it is to be equipped with noble human values. Aspiring to Heaven, having the capacity, realizing the method to attain the same, and potentially being able to encounter the beauty of the One-these are each a trust bestowed to human beings in order to set them on the path determined by the Almighty Creator. Committing sins, straying from the path, and leading a life of sensuality are treacherous acts that crush such innate blessings; they delight the devils and embarrass the residents of the Divine Abode.

Believers of mature faith use their initial gifts as a means to attain further blessings of servanthood to God, His proximity, and His good pleasure, as an indication of their true identity. Those with weak or nonexistent faith cannot comprehend the gifts or their meaning, and thus cannot benefit from them in the course of belief, divine knowledge, and love; they will be deprived from secondary and eternal favors.

The latter group not only neglects the afterlife, but its constituents are discontent in this life as well. They must endure many additional problems and their lack of faith leads to depression. They destroy their own peace with hysteria and paranoia, and transform this world, which is an aisle to the illuminated realms beyond, into Hell. They cannot truly love others; they hate them and hatred is what they receive in return. They agonize with avarice and lament with longing for what they cannot obtain. They tremble out of fear of death and undergo many tribulations in order to live longer, frequently leading to health problems and mental disorder. White becomes black, good becomes bad, and vice versa. Those who do not think like them are enemies and traitors. Nightmares of betrayal engulf their sleep, causing even more suffering, as the seeds of the Hell in their conscience bring about the experience of the actual Hell in advance.

True believers, on the other hand, ameliorate each favor in abundance, like an ear of grain producing as many as seven, seventy, or seven-hundred more grains. Each of these favors becomes a staircase ascending to the One, a ramp to attain His good pleasure. Then believers march to their destination together with the inheritors of the Heavens.

Like law in the United States, historically Islamic jurisprudence is based on precedence. Each ruling or reform was based on the decisions and interpretations of previous jurists and scholars. But many movements that emerged in the last century disregarded this practice, and invented brand-new interpretations and rulings that were at odds with centuries of accumulated knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence and theology. Moreover, they refute all other interpretations. The most controversial among these questionable views concerns the meaning of jihad. The soundest method of discerning the meaning of this much-debated word is to refer back to the original text that is the source of all Islamic jurisprudence and theology.

What is jihad, according to the Qur’an? What does the Qur’an say about war? According to the consensus of classical and contemporary exegetes, the following Qur’anic verses indicate that there is no “holy war” but there is only “just war” or “unjust war” in Islam. The verses also clarify that jihad does not mean war or fighting; rather it means “to strive hard in the righteous cause.”

Some Qur’anic principles

The science of hermeneutics requires that the interpretation of any text should take into account the writer, the intent of the writer, the addressee, and the context. This is the method to understand the message of the Qur’an. Taking a single verse out of context, and interpreting it without taking into consideration the entire text, would inevitably distort the meaning of the verse. The following are some general Qur’anic principles that should underlie the interpretation of individual verses.

“There shall be no coercion faith.” (2:256)

“And had your Lord so willed, all those who live on earth would surely have attained to faith, all of them: do you then think that you could compel people to believe…” (10:99)

“And say: ‘The truth [has now come] from your Lord: Then, whoever wills (to believe), let him believe; and whoever wills (to disbelieve), let him disbelieve. …” (18:29)

“Goodness and evil can never be equal. Repel evil with what is better (or best). Then see: the one between whom and you there was enmity has become a bosom friend.” (41:34)

“…and [they who] repel the evil with good. Such are those for whom there is the ultimate (everlasting) abode.” (13:22)

“…for peace is best…” (4:128)

“… He who kills a soul unless it be (in legal punishment) for murder or for causing disorder and corruption on the earth will be as if he had killed all humankind; and he who saves a life will be as if he had saved the lives of all humankind.” (5:32)

“Do not kill any soul, which God has made sacred, except in just cause. If anyone has been killed wrongfully and intentionally, We have given his heir the authority (to claim retaliation or damages or to forgive outright). But let him (the heir) not exceed the legitimate bounds in (retaliatory) killing. Indeed he has been helped (already and sufficiently by the provisions and procedures of the Law).” (17:33)

“Just War” in the Qur’an

Here are some verses dealing with fighting (qital) on the battlefield. All these verses should be read and understood only when there is a Just War already in progress.

“And fight in God’s cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression—for, verily, God does not love aggressors.” (2:190)

This verse makes war permissible only in self-defense and even then, aggression is not permitted during the fight.

“Permission [to fight] is given to those against whom war is being wrongfully waged and, verily, God has indeed the power to succor them.” (22:39)

Again, fighting is declared permissible against a wrongfully waged war.

“God does not forbid you, as regards those who do not make war against you on account of your Religion, nor drive you away from your homes, to be kindly to them, and act towards them with equity. God surely loves the scrupulously equitable.” (60:8)

Believers are asked here to be kind to any people who do not fight against them regardless of their faith.

“God only forbids you, as regards those who make war against you on account of your Religion and drive you away from your homes, or support others to drive you away, to take them for friends and guardians. Whoever takes them for friends and guardians, those are the wrongdoers.” (60:9)

As clearly listed in the verse, fighting is permitted only when a) a war is waged against the believers because of their faith, b) the believers are driven away from their homelands, c) aid is given to those who drive the believers away from their homelands.

“Fight (therefore, O Messenger) in God’s cause—for (in the same way that every individual is responsible for himself) you are (first of all) responsible for none except yourself. (Even left by yourself alone, fulfill your responsibility)—and urge on the believers (to take their responsibility). It may be that God will (thereby) restrain the force of those who disbelieve. Indeed God is strongest in might, and strongest in repressing and punishing.” (4:84)

Urging on the believers to take their responsibility is valid only during a war already in progress to deter the oppressors, not as an incitement to war.

“When (whether traveling or at home, or in war or at peace) you are greeted with a greeting (of peace and goodwill), answer with one better, or (at least) with the same. Surely God keeps account of all things.” (4:86)

The aim of war must be to prevent the oppression, not to be triumphant. When peace is offered, it is to be accepted with no reserve.

“Except those who seek refuge in a people between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace or alliance), or (those who) come to you with hearts shrinking from fighting against you, as well as fighting against their own people. Had God willed, He would certainly have given them power over you and they would have fought against you. If they withdraw from you and do not fight against you, and offer you peace, then God allows you no way (to war) against them.” (4:90)

Fighting is allowed only when a war is waged against the believers. Otherwise, there is no permission to declare a war unilaterally.

“…You will find others who wish to be secure from you (by signing a treaty with you) and to be secure from their people (by breaking their treaty with you and joining them): every time they are called back to conspiracy and hostility against you, they plunge into it headlong. Hence, if they do not withdraw from you, nor offer you peace, nor restrain their hands (from hurting you), then seize them and kill them wherever you come upon them. It is against such that We have given you a clear sanction.” (4:91)

During a war already in progress, if the aggressors do not stop attacking the believers and do not offer them peace, then the believers are given permission to seize and slay those who insist upon attacking them.

“If you meet them in war, deal with them in such a manner as to deter those behind them (who follow them, and those who will come after them), so that they may reflect and be mindful.” (8:57)

The aim is again not to be triumphant in war, but to prevent the continuation of war.

“(Believers:) make ready against them whatever you can of force and horses assigned (for war), that thereby you may dismay the enemies of God and your enemies and others besides them, of whom (and the nature of whose enmity) you may be unaware. God is aware of them (and of the nature of their enmity). Whatever you spend in God’s cause will be repaid to you in full, and you will not be wronged” (8:60)

The purpose of these preparations is to avoid potential future wars.

“And if they (the enemies) incline to peace, incline to it also, and put your trust in God. Surely He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing. And if they seek (thereby only) to deceive you (O Messenger), surely God is sufficient for you. He it is Who has strengthened you with His help and with the believers” (8:61–62)

According to the well-known Qur’anic exegete Fahruddin Razi (1149–1209), this means that even if they offer you peace to deceive you, this offer of peace must be accepted, because all judgment of their intentions must be based on outward evidence alone. In other words, mere suspicion cannot be an excuse for rejecting an offer of peace.

(While at war) kill them wherever you come upon them, and drive them out from where they drove you out (thus recovering your lands from their usurpation). (Though killing is something you feel aversion to,) disorder (rooted in rebellion against God and recognizing no laws) is worse than killing. Do not fight against them in the vicinities of the Sacred Mosque unless they fight against you there; but if they fight against you (there), kill them—such is the recompense of the (rebellious) unbelievers. (2:191)

The prerequisite for the permission to slay the oppressors is their persistence to fight against the believers and not incline toward peace. Fahruddin Razi states that the injunction in this verse is valid only within the context of hostilities already in progress, not when there is no physical hostility between the believers and the non-believers. A more recent commentator, Said Nursi (1877–1960), interprets such verses that give permission to “drive them away from wherever they drove you away” as crushing the idea of the denial of God or materialism in the field where it originated by bringing the evidences for the existence of its Creator from the matter itself.

“But if they desist—behold, God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.” (Qur’an 2:192)

“Hence, fight against them until there is no more oppression and all worship is devoted to God alone; but if they desist, then all hostility shall cease, save against those who [willfully] do wrong.” (2:193)

Fighting is allowed again until God can be worshipped without fear of persecution and no one is compelled to bow down in awe before another human being. If persecution stops then all hostility shall cease.

“…Those who have been driven from their homeland against all right, for no other reason than that they say, “Our Lord is God. ” Were it not for God’s repelling some people by means of others, monasteries and churches and synagogues and mosques, where God is regularly worshipped and His Name is much mentioned, would surely have been pulled down (with the result that God is no longer worshipped and the earth becomes uninhabitable). God most certainly helps whoever helps His cause. Surely, God is All-Strong, All-Glorious with irresistible might.” (22:40)

Fighting against oppression is not confined to defending the mosques only, all the places where God’s name is extolled—monasteries, churches, synagogues—are to be protected.

“And if any of those who associate partners with God seeks asylum of you (O Messenger), grant him asylum, so that he may hear the Word of God, and then convey him to his place of security. That (is how you should act) because they are a people who have no knowledge. (9:6)

This verse emphasizes granting protection to mushrikun (those associating partners with God)—not only the People of Book—when they seek protection from the believers. They can be accepted as “neighbors” of the believing community. Should they want to leave the community of the believers, it is the responsibility of the believers to convey them to a place where they can feel secure.

In conclusion

The contextual analysis of the above Qur’anic verses elucidates that the utmost priority in all circumstances is achieving permanent peace. Believers are enjoined to accept peace, even when doing so would harm their interests, and must consent to all peace offers. It is not permissible to wage war against any people unilaterally. Fighting is not desirable and should be avoided whenever possible. Permission to fight is given only in self-defense. When a believer has been attacked and is fighting in self-defense, his aim must be to stop the oppression, not to be triumphant. Fighting is permitted only against people who have:

a) waged war against the community of believers because of their faith,

b) driven the community of believers out of their homelands,

c) aided others in driving the community of believers out of their homelands,

d) threatened the security of the community of believers. This judgment about the “threat” must be based on outward evidence alone, not on suspicion, which is subjective.

Fighting is permitted in the Qur’an only for the sake of defending the truth and its followers (including defending the monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques where God’s name is extolled). The believers can only engage in war against oppressors who are clearly marked and designated as a military force. This military force must not be mixed in with a civilian population. A prohibited method of fighting is the use of weapons of mass destruction which indiscriminately kill civilians along with the intended target. Even then, fighting can only be declared by a leader (caliph), who is elected by the community of believers from among themselves, not self-appointed kings, rulers, or authorities. Individuals cannot declare war or try to bring about justice by their own means. This is vigilantism, which is prohibited by Islamic law. Only the state has the authority in such issues.

We encountered Judaism at the local synagogue, Hinduism at a Vishnu temple in a nearby city, and Islam at a mosque in the suburbs. We could also have studied Buddhism, Sikhism, and two other branches of Hinduism since there was a meditation society, a Gurdwara, and Shirdi and Jain temples in the city, as well as five additional mosques. Religious pluralism surrounded us, but we knew nothing about it because religious dialogue was not an ordinary activity.

Since taking students on such interfaith field visits was not common practice at the time, it stirred a mix of reactions. Many students approached the project with eager curiosity; they were rainbow optimists, following an arc of hope and expecting good at its end. Other students were reluctant, apprehensive, and afraid of the unknown; they armed themselves with intellectual rocks of protection for their worldview. Some parents even called my office to express their concern about the nature and purpose of such study for their children. Could curiosity weaken their child’s faith, the parents wondered. Even though religious pluralism has been a reality throughout human history, and is certainly an element of our societies today, for many people, then as now, it has remained a distant reality, remote from the routines of daily life. When the opportunity for an interreligious encounter is offered, it can evoke both curiosity and fear. As human beings we are equipped to wonder about and seek the new or unknown, but we are also endowed with a certain caution about, even fear, of what is different. Both of these reactions have characterized the debate about religious dialogue today, often to the irritation of one another, as students have encountered in classes. But both of these approaches have something important to share and should be heard.

Enthusiasts for religious dialogue bring a desire for mutual enrichment and learning, and a confidence that coming to know one another better will bring benefits for all. The rock-wielding cautious fear that interreligious dialogue is a dangerous and misguided endeavor brings a deep sense of what is treasured and unique in our own traditions that must not be lost or sacrificed to the inevitable encounter. In listening to the concerns and hopes raised by both voices, it can become clearer what interreligious dialogue is not and also what it is intended to be; caution and enthusiasm together can shape encounters among various believers that are fruitful and inspirational.

The mirror of dialogue A frequent concern raised about dialogue is that it will be a disguised effort at proselytizing for conversions to one faith or another. This is certainly not the intention of genuine interreligious dialogue, and this approach should not be brought to the table of dialogue. Faithful and committed believers of a religious tradition are asked to respect the faithful believers of other religious traditions who share a similar devotion and joy in their commitments.

The holy Qur’an states, ‘O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another.’ (49:13) The Roman Catholic Church also exhorts her members that ‘through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions…they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among them.’ (Nostra Aetate, 2)

Of course, believers engaged in dialogue will explain with great enthusiasm the faith that they hold dear, but the primary goal of interreligious dialogue is simply to listen to and come to know others. Far from converting believers away from their faith, interreligious experiences usually deepen original commitments. It has been suggested that ‘those who know only one, know none.’ In comprehending another faith, we come to a far deeper understanding and appreciation of our own belief. In our reflection in the Other, we come to see ourselves anew.

In my own experience over the years, leading dozens of classes on field visits to various houses of worship, I observe similar outcomes each time. Though the fear of parents that their children might be lured into a conversion by a persuasive speaker would seem to have even more ground today, since students often have very little religious knowledge when entering the classroom, the common response of students is not conversion to a new tradition but rather a renewed interest in the faith traditions of their own families. Even when students have been raised by their parents to make their own choice, as if a faith tradition were simply a matter of consumer preference in the marketplace, I have found that they want to ‘come home.’ If home does not provide much religious substance, to find spiritual roots students are more likely to turn to their grandparents than to convert simply because of exposure to a new tradition.

Not the baking method Sometimes the cautious question if interreligious dialogue is aiming to bring religions together in a way that creates a new and improved religion, a combination of the ‘best of all,’ so to speak. The technical term for this is syncretism, but it is also (derisively) known as the ‘baking method’—take a little of this and a little of that and a little more of something else and bake it into a new tasty religion for all to follow. This approach, too, is certainly not an element of genuine interreligious dialogue but rather is an attitude born in the individualism of consumer culture—finding something that suits my taste. True interreligious dialogue takes places among faithful and committed believers of established religious traditions who intend to remain that way. It is not a casual comparison of recipes, but a sincere effort to know one another as we are.

Again, in my own field visit experience with classes, it is precisely when faced with the devotion of a believing community at worship that students are inspired to look at their own tradition to see what they have missed. The prayer practice of Islam has led students to discover the Angelus and the Liturgy of the Hours in the Catholic tradition, or the practice of daily scripture devotion in other Christian traditions. This is not syncretism, but rather interfaith inspiration that strengthens.

But can we disagree? Two other objections I have heard raised about dialogue seem to be from opposite sides of the same coin. First, some fear that participants from other traditions will judge our beliefs or practices and condemn them unfairly because they are based in a different set of values or cultural apprehension. The second worry is that as we listen to others we may hear some things with which we profoundly disagree but, prevented from expressing this by the ‘etiquette’ of dialogue, be reduced to tacitly supporting relativism. I believe the question raised by both objections is essentially the same—where is Truth to be found and how do we act upon it? Can we truly listen to one another without discovering all the places we disagree? And what then do we do with that disagreement?

In response to these foundational questions, two points must be kept in mind. One is that each of us has the human obligation to sincerely seek for Truth, for the objective reality at the heart of the universe. This will necessarily entail that we must make judgments for ourselves in regard to various Truth claims. However, it is important to be clear that the basic purpose of interreligious dialogue is simply coming to know and understand those varied claims made by religious traditions; we are not expecting to reach agreement on them in regard to religious doctrine or practice.

The second point clarifies this further. In coming to know one another we may find real and significant differences in the lived moral consequences of our beliefs and practices. It is very important to remember that we do not grapple with these differences in interreligious dialogue. Rather, the proper sphere for that work is in political debate. In a multicultural democracy we engage one another in political discussion, convincing one another of the value and efficacy of our moral vision and why it should prevail in law. It is at the table of interreligious dialogue that we come to understand one another, but it is at the table of political discourse that we try to persuade one another, not for a religious conversion to our Truth claims, but for a moral consensus regarding lived values. The conversation at each table is better because of the work of the other.

Wisdom of the heart With these cautions and clarifications in mind, we are better able to hear the enthusiasts in explaining the benefits of dialogue. At center is the inspiration that dialogue can renew our own spirituality. I certainly see this result in the classroom. Most parents have encountered a stage in their adolescent children’s development when they listen to advice with greater openness if it comes from someone other than their parents. Interreligious experience is a similar inspiration, and not just to questioning teens, but to developed believers as well. Hearing others share their deepest convictions about the Divine can renew the vigor of our own quest for holiness. Often in dialogue our hearts meet before our heads agree and we find that it is in the wisdom of the heart that God’s presence is made known. Understanding one another and how very much our traditions hold in common can bring mutual enrichment on local and global levels as well. Citizens in society are better equipped to live in peace and work for justice when they have had interreligious encounters to share and learn about one another. Prejudice is exposed and broken. In the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy, I received several email messages from former students who expressed their gratitude for the field visits they had made to mosques in earlier years. Having met Muslims as prayerful, welcoming human beings was helping them, at that difficult national moment, to share with others that Islam is not a religion of terrorism and all Muslims were not responsible for, nor rejoiced in, the events of that tragedy. They were able to be voices of peace in the midst of great national confusion.

Sustained encounters When it is possible for interreligious dialogue to become a sustained encounter among individuals or groups, over time it can begin to reshape those who participate in profound and beautiful ways. Though most of my students are only able to have one or two field experiences during their study, I am privileged to be on every trip, returning year after year and building friendships with the generous believers who host our visits. The encounters have gradually ceased to be between ‘us’ and ‘them,’ learning about their ways and teaching them our ways. Instead, as we have continued to listen and share, we find ourselves becoming a ‘we’ in our common humanity, a commonality that honors, and yet also transcends the differences of culture and faith, of geography and economics. I am deeply grateful to my dialogue partners for the depth and strength they have added to my own faith journey.

Religious pluralism is a reality; it surrounds us and permeates the culture. But interreligious dialogue is a choice. Burying our heads in the sand and throwing rocks when we come up for air will not change anyone’s heart, including our own. Instead we can choose to move toward a mind of greater perception, a heart of greater love, a world of greater peace, by accepting the invitation to know one another, carefully and respectfully crossing the arc of dialogue into mutual understanding.

Frances M. Leap is associate professor of religious studies at Seton Hill University in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.