Isn’t it strange, but also vividly true, that sunk in the deepest agony, some people lose their faith in God, the absolute sustainer? And yet others do exactly the same at the height of utmost pleasure. They forget that God is the sole provider. Either way, this entrenches the “in medio stat virtus” universal rule, which means virtue stands in the middle. This is what constitutes the dividing line between man’s meaningful living module (modus vivendi) for the Hereafter and the mistaken lifestyle “causing people to claim absolute independence and ownership of their self … leading one to imagine a realm of personal dominion,” as observed by Said Nursi in The Fourth Treatise in The Seedbed of the Light (pg 87).

Linking the initial paradox and Said Nursi’s soul searching words, brings to light one of the most interesting and captivating stories to appear in both the Bible and the Quran. This is none other than the story of Joseph – blessings and peace be upon him—and his brothers. Their riveting story cuts across humanity as it paints an almost unimaginable life of someone who never parted ways with His Creator – come rain when he was a slave and come shine when he was leading a palace life.

While the Quran devotes a whole chapter (Surah 12 Joseph) and 111 verses to Joseph’s story with his brothers, the Bible tells it in 13 Chapters (37-50) and a total of 395 verses in Section Four of the Book of Genesis.

The story begins with Joseph, as the last child in the family of Jacob, born of Isaac, the son of Abraham, living in Moses’ promised land of Canaan (blessings and peace be upon them). Joseph draws envy from his brothers because of the special treatment he receives from his father, exemplified by a special dress.

His brothers also disprove of his chain of dreams, which they believe is Joseph assuming leadership; one particular dream sends chills even down his father’s spine. He talks of seeing, “the sun, moon and eleven stars bowing before him.” His brothers’ envy rages, but his father keeps this to his heart.

Lesson One: Did Jacob discriminate against his children? Very unlikely. As a prophet, he must have noticed something special in Joseph’s destiny and thus exercised extra caution to ensure the delivery of a sound and wise judgment. In the world of journalism, it is said “when in doubt, leave out.” In matters of faith in God, we ought to do what is expected of us while exercising enduring patience. No complaints. We must have pure sincerity and clean intentions.   

Lesson Two: What is in a dream? In dreams, all our five senses are virtually non-functioning. The dream drive – borrowing from the IT language – is external. That is why we travel distances above the speed of light from our bed pillows, as a friend told me.

At the same time, we cannot rule out cases of Divine warning about what is coming or ought to be done. Examples abound in the scriptures. In parts of Africa, dreams were originally taken for communication between gods and human beings, whereby the former made their wishes known. But an interpreter had to be there.

Lesson Three: Joseph’s brothers’ envy derives from prejudice, which is a vice to be fought against; it led them to treat their young brother unfairly. First they plot to kill him. Then they settle for dipping him into a waterless well and finally sell him to a caravan of Egyptian merchants, who resell him to Pharaoh’s Chief Steward Potiphar. He starts a slave’s life.

The brothers take his garment and soak it in goat blood. They send it to their father claiming to have bumped into it. Jacob laments. He goes into mourning. His children come to express their empathy. He takes no heed and keeps on mourning.

Through God’s providence, Joseph wins the trust of his “master” and is made steward of his household. He resists the temptation of his master’s wife. He chooses jail to breaking God’s and his master’s trust.

Again, he builds trust: the warden places him in charge of prisoners. There, he meets Pharaoh’s chief baker and cup-bearer. He interprets their dreams: the baker was going to hanged and the latter would be reinstated to his job as the Pharaoh’s cup-bearer.

Pharaoh himself is troubled by dreams. Egyptian interpreters fail to deliver. The cup-bearer remembers Joseph, who is called and manages to decipher Pharaoh’s dreams into seven years of good harvest and seven of famine on its heels. Joseph is made Pharaoh’s Chancellor. He helps the country store its food. When famine strikes, many people, including his brothers, come to Egypt for food supplies. He notices them. He sells food to them and orders their money stuffed back into their bags. He asks them to come back with their young brother as a condition for getting further supplies and orders one of them to remain behind as a surety.

Lesson Four: The Roman’s “natura humana ad mala inclinatur” observation – meaning human nature is inclined to do bad things, becomes evident. The Chief Steward’s wife shows lust and anger. The chief-baker and cup-bearer display the fact that power corrupts. Man is forgetful. Men were busy looking for power and riches while women indulged in gossip, banquets, arranging amusements, and competing for worldly things.

Lesson Five: God never guides unbecoming behavior (Quran 12:52). For every holder of knowledge, there is (always) One more knowledgeable: the All-Knowing (Quran 12:76).

From all that has taken place in the fate of Joseph, it becomes evident that Destiny wills good for the believer. Although he was a slave at the palace, Joseph (blessings and peace be upon him) rejects the invitation of the noble, rich, and beautiful woman. He willingly prefers prison to committing sin.

Lesson Six: After introducing himself to them, his brothers start to feel guilty, which is the start of the process of reconciliation.

Lesson Seven: When hunger strikes again, Jacob releases Benjamin and orders the collection of an assortment of gifts and the return of the money which was stuffed back into their bags. He prays for God’s protection. Upon arrival in Egypt, they are received but have to undergo another session of questioning.

After Joseph ascertains the presence of Benjamin, he is overwhelmed and takes a short leave. He sheds tears, washes his face, and returns. A grand reception is held.

Joseph orders bags stuffed to everybody’s carrying capacity. He orders to secretly place his special cup in the bag of the youngest, Benjamin. After they left, Joseph summons the supervisor and orders him: “Stop those people and ask them why they have returned bad for good?”

They deny any knowledge, let alone involvement in such unbecoming behavior. They pledge their innocence and that whoever would be found with the cup should face death, while they are ready to remain slaves forever. The supervisor differs with them. The one on whom the cup is be found will remain behind while the rest will be allowed to leave.

Benjamin turns out to be the culprit. In disbelief they tear their clothes and mount their donkeys back to town. Down on their knees, the entire entourage goes to Joseph’s residence.

He asks them: “What is this you have done? Don’t you think a person like me can prophesy?

“The one to whom the cup was traced becomes my slave. The rest can return to your father in peace.”

“My Lord”, says Yuda, “may your anger not befall on your servant because indeed you are like the Pharaoh!” He goes on to narrate conditions under which Jacob may release Benjamin, listing the fatal family consequences of detaining him in Egypt.

Joseph is touched by the plea of Yuda. He loses control of himself. He orders the removal of all people. He tells his brothers: “I am Joseph. Is my father still alive?” They fail to answer. They are astonished.

He goes on to tell them: “Come near me.” They move closer. He adds: “I am Joseph, your brother whom you sold to be taken to Egypt. But don’t grieve now. Nor feel bad because you sold me to be brought here, because God placed me ahead of you to save your lives. Quickly go up to my father and tell him. Your son Joseph says: ‘God has made me the Lord of the entirety of Egypt. Come down without delay. You will settle in the land of Goshen near me; you and your children, grandchildren, sheep, cows and whatever you possess.’”

Lesson Eight: The entire story is one of affection and portrays the qualities of being keen, pure, and having sincere feeling with no ulterior motives and without seeking any return. Said Nursi puts it better in the 23^rd Letter (2:86-87), where he points out that the story encourages us to strive for the other side of the grave where we will find real happiness and pleasure. It also shows Joseph’s exalted truthfulness and announces that even the most joyful and brightest conditions of the worldly life could not captivate him; rather it led him to ask for death and the other life.

Lesson Nine: Via Jacob’s life, we learn that for believers who follow God’s ways without deviation and with pure intention, when things start to worsen, this means the happy end is approaching. The dawn of light is the end of darkness.

Note: The story of Prophet Joseph, peace be upon him, is narrated with some differences in both the Bible and the Qur’an. The author quotes from both sources in this essay.

In the language of Sufism, sakr (intoxication) means that an initiate is enraptured by the rays of the manifestations of God’s “Facial” Light. His or her returning to his or her former, normal state is sahw (sobriety). These two terms are usually used together as sahw u sakr.

There is a relation between intoxication and absence. If the inner world of seekers after the Ultimate Truth who feel intoxication is not satisfied with the Divine gifts, then they lack something in intoxication, and suffer irregular tides with respect to the state of absence. It is coloring, rather than self-possession, which is witnessed in their actions. For this reason, such seekers should be regarded as those who have perhaps feigned intoxication rather than being actually intoxicated. However, it sometimes occurs that the gifts come in showers and invade the whole being, with the result that then they do become fully intoxicated.

Intoxication sometimes arises from a strong belief, a considerable knowledge of God, and feeling fear and awe in a balanced way, making itself felt in a broader sense. As for the degree of intoxication which is felt by those who have advanced further on the way and who have approached nearer to God, whenever such travelers are honored with the manifestation of the Divine “Facial” Light or with the vision of the “Face” beyond all concepts of modality, they immediately become intoxicated. The spirit overflows with zeal and joy and the heart feels excessive excitement. This is particular to people of ecstasy.

Sobriety means that the intoxicated ones return to their former, normal state. Like intoxication, sobriety is also an undeniable part of the journeying toward the Almighty. Whenever the eternal King of truth invades the very being of the intoxicated lovers of the Ultimate Truth, who spend their lives immersed in spiritual pleasures in the valleys of absence, they feel as if they have immediately fallen into an ocean and have vanished like a drop into the world of feelings, or that they have been burnt away like a dried, flammable object and that their nature has changed. Furthermore, their ways and bridges of sensing are demolished one after another and He alone can be felt everywhere and in everything. There are many who see a relation between such a state and what is meant in the verse (7:143): The moment His Lord manifested His glorious majesty to the mountain, He made it crumble to dust, and Moses fell down in a faint. Just as the mountain was rendered dust, despite its immensity, and just as Prophet Moses, upon him be peace, fell down in a swoon, despite his being one of the five greatest Messengers of God, people of ecstasy feel as if they have changed their nature, they take up different attitudes, act as if intoxicated and utter words that suggest intoxication:

O cup-bearer, pour wine into the cup, it is time to break the fast;
Restore this ruin; it is time to display the favor we receive.
(M. Lutfi)

This day Nasimi is intoxicated with the grace of the cup-bearer;
I have always seen Mustafa in the wine which intoxicates me.
(Nasimi[1])

There are many other words uttered concerning intoxication, but it is beyond the scope of this book to cite them all. Only consider that the famous Hafiz ash-Shirazi begins his Diwan with the verse, Beware, O cup-bearer, bring a cup and pass it around!

Intoxication is a state in which one is enraptured with pleasures; of sobriety the main characteristics are knowledge and self-possession. A traveler is in waves of unintended, unpremeditated joy and pleasures in the state of intoxication, while in sobriety, he or she is conscious, self-possessed, and makes deliberate efforts to feel the All-Holy, Ultimate Truth.

Some consider intoxication to be when a heart boils with extraordinary joy and excitement in the moment when the person feels deeply the All-Beloved. We may interpret this state as the human self being immersed in joy and pleasures in the face of the gifts coming from the Unseen World or as an initiate losing him or herself, being overpowered by love. If the human self gets intoxicated because of immersion in joy and pleasures, this is regarded as a natural state of intoxication which an initiate gets into. If love drives the person into intoxication, this is the state of intoxication into which God Himself draws him or her. However, whatever the reason for intoxication, the traveler to the Ultimate Truth lives wonder-struck and acts in tides of zeal and joy. As seekers deepen in intoxication, they begin to wander in the valleys of wonder and astonishment. Sometimes their will-power may even break down, with the result that they begin to feel as if they were a shadow of the Light of His Existence. Those who have reached this point are called the “willed ones.” Their finite attributes are replaced by the manifestations of the Attributes of the All-Permanent, and they become a polished mirror of the fact that he sees by Me.[2]

Indicating this highest point, it is said in Thamaratu’l-Fuad (“The Fruits of the Heart”):

My voice, which sings like a nightingale,
has been made to speak by Him;
My eyes, which see, see by Him,
and I have heard speech from Him.
He has favored me with speech, with which
He has brought mysteries to light.
By the all-brilliant Light of God, my heart
has been made extremely bright,
And by the light of Muhammad,
I have become one with a pleasant heart.

Some have disapproved the use of the word intoxication for a spiritual state as it celebrates a concept that is scorned by both reason and the Shari‘a. But intoxication, which we can describe as the state of losing oneself due to the depth of love and ecstasy, is a metaphor used to express being exposed to or being favored with the rays or gifts of the Almighty which enrapture. Initiates enraptured by these gifts or rays cannot distinguish anything because of the depth of the waves of joy and pleasure in which they are drowning. In a hadith concerning repentance, God’s Messenger, who is the most advanced in reasoning and sensibility, tells us that a man of the desert expresses the excessive joy he feels with the words coming from his mouth unintentionally: “O God! You are my servant and I am Your Lord.”[3] This may be a good example of what may happen within the ecstasies that one experiences due to being favored by the Almighty’s stream of gifts.

There have been numerous people overpowered by this state, who burn with love and yearning. With his words, “O singer, play the instrument, for tonight I am intoxicated!”, Muhammed Lutfi Efendi, taking advantage of the permissibility of metaphors, declares nothing more than the joy and zeal of a lover.

As it has been to date, many travelers to the Ultimate Truth will from now on murmur the same things each in their own style in the face of the Divine lights, colors and forms that they observe everywhere. In fact, when a heart falls in love with the Eternally Beloved One and is invaded by ecstasies, and in its conscience feels His company, only those who have Prophetic insight and resolution can save themselves from confusion. Other faithful lovers, who dive deep into the cataracts of love, (or who flow abundantly like a river swelling with rains,) will sometimes overflow their limits; they will let themselves into the huge waves of love due to the rejoicing originating in feeling in His company, and always live in wonder, uttering “He!”

The feeling of absence that a traveler to the Ultimate Truth has during intoxication is expressed by “He!” Although some suggest confusion, the following verses are beautiful in expressing this:

The lights of my eyes are He, and the direction for my reason is He;
my tongue always utters He, and I sigh and groan with He.
My heart goes on an excursion in He, the love of my soul is He.
Those who are lovers and intoxicated are always with He.
My soul has sacrificed itself in the way of its Beloved,
its union is with He, its parting is with He;
and its cure, as well as its afflictions, is He.

Sobriety is the condition when one favored with knowledge of God comes to after having gone into an absence of feelings and consciousness, or, as with the Prophets, when one spends a lifetime in wakefulness and consciousness. It is the opposite of intoxication. The following couplet of Tokadizade Şekip[4] is worth quoting in this respect:

The people of peace intoxicated with intimacy in Your Presence,
do not want to exchange their rapture with sobriety.

Intoxication is a state, while sobriety is a station and is more objective, secure, and straightforward when compared to intoxication. While intoxication comes from a subjective consideration of the Ultimate Truth, sobriety is based on the consideration of the All-Exalted, Majestic Being known by His Names and outlined by His Attributes and Whose Essence cannot be perceived. From another perspective, an initiate is out of his or her senses when in a state of intoxication, but is sensible in sobriety. Intoxication suggests “self-annihilation in God,” but sobriety implies “subsistence by God,” which is subsistence by His Subsistence and is defined as “subsistence by God and being in His company.”

Some prefer intoxication to sobriety, yet this is the view of the intoxicated when overpowered by the state or induced by traveling through the valleys of coloring. There is absence in intoxication and in sobriety there is peace and rest. Sobriety is a few steps higher than intoxication. Intoxication means being overpowered by state; it is accompanied by coloring, and is the way of some saints, while sobriety depends on consciousness, is accompanied by self-possession, and is the way of the Prophets and the purified scholars. The Qur’an declares (15:99): Worship your Lord until certainty, which is bound to come, comes to you. An approach to this Qur’anic declaration is: “Continue on the way to God until you are fully awakened by death to the truth of the belief’s pillars, for traveling toward the Infinite One is endless.”

In addition, sobriety is closely connected with the consideration of life and requires strong will-power. While in intoxication, the considerations of one’s feeling annihilated in (God’s) Existence and one’s feeling annihilated in the Witnessed or in His manifestations sometimes keep the will-power under pressure, there is in sobriety special assistance and protection that come from the company of God, such as that which is expressed in: He hears through Me, and sees through Me, and holds through Me, and walks through Me.[5]

Our Lord! Grant us from Your Presence a special mercy and arrange for us in our affairs what is right and for our good! And bestow peace and blessings on our master Muhammad and his Family forever.

Footnotes

[1] Imaduddin Nasimi (1369–1417), Azerbaijan’s outstanding poet of the 15th century, wrote in Azerbaijan along with Arabic and Persian. He was very successful in lyric poems. (Tr.)

[2] al-Bukhari, “Riqaq,” 38.

[3] Muslim, “Tawba,” 7.

[4] Tokadizade Şekip was one of the Turkish poets and writers who lived in Izmir in the first half of the 20th century. He wrote in favor of political freedom and was one of the founders of the Association of Defending the Basic Rights in Izmir. (Tr.)

[5] al-Hakim at-Tirmidhi, Nawadiru’l-‘Usul, 3:81; Ibn Kathir, Tafsiru’l-Qur’an, 2:580; Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Fathu’l-Bari, 1:13.

The question of the possibility of absolute justice is vast and needs to be explored from various angles. However, space constraints dictate that we subject this topic to no more than a general overview. Focusing on the absolute nature of justice in Nursian thought may help to sharpen our understanding of existing theories of justice at the very least; it may even force us to rethink our prejudices and give us greater understanding of the concept of justice itself.

Given the limitations of space, I aim to focus on the question of injustice in the creation of different environments for the testing of different people. In other words, is God just when he creates Leo Nikolayevich in Siberia and Rashid in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, in the same age at the same time, and holds them responsible for their actions? Say if one is born from Muslim father and mother into the Islamic environment whereas the other might have never heard of Islam and been in touch with the aforementioned environment? We can do vice-versa and apply the same theory for Christianity and other religions. Can such a God be just in any sense of justice? To this end, I will deal chiefly with the issue of absolute justice as it pertains to the issue of free will. I believe the theories that I put forward could be applicable irrespective of faith and religious differences. Of course, the issue of salvation is an even bigger issue and it is out of the subject at hand here.

Before we continue, I would like to emphasize that our focus is neither meta-ethical, nor epistemic. I am not concerned here with the question of the ontological basis of justice, nor with how we can know what is just.

Justice functions in different spheres. While seemingly obvious, this is an important point because how the absolute nature of justice is perceived may differ according to the particular sphere in which justice functions. This perception differs in accordance with whether we are talking about God’s absolute justice towards His creatures, the absolute justice reflected in human beings, or about the relative justice of man towards his fellow beings and other creatures that he shares the universe with. As Nursi states, the purpose of human existence is to manifest God’s Names and exhibit their marvels before the eyes of creatures. In this paper, we take justice as the reflection of the Divine name of Just (al-Adl) as it appears to us in free-will-related justice and we will try to understand how this is reflected in Nursi’s writings.

It is important to take into account Nursi’s terminology, in particular his categorization of the Divine names and attributes into the Glorious (Jalali), the Amiable (Jamali), and the Absolute (Kamali). Under the umbrella of the first, there is the name Compassionate (Rahman), which Nursi connects particularly to this world, where it manifests itself in its most perfect form as distributive justice; under the umbrella of the latter, there is the name Merciful (Rahim), which Nursi connects primarily to the hereafter, where it manifests itself in its most perfect form as retributive justice. Under the umbrella of the third category, there is the name Just (Adl), which Nursi connects to both worlds, where it manifests itself in its most perfect form as absolute justice.

First, I shall present an outline of my conclusions regarding free-will-related justice; we shall then see what these conclusions teach us about the unjust appearance of different environments designed for competition (imtihan). Justice is one of the key concepts in Nursi’s discourse. He states that the fundamental aims of the Quran are fourfold: divine unity (tawhid), prophethood (nubuwwa), the resurrection of the dead (hashr), and justice (adala).

Before I go any further, I would once again like to express my gratitude to the Smilansky’s article on which most of the following of this article is based. It has given me great inspiration and ideas. I have simply adapted some of his examples and arguments and applied my arguments and conclusions of the Nursian approach to them.

Mimar Sinan example

Let’s look at an example given by Similansky and adapt it here. Imagine two men who wish to be a great architect like Mimar Sinan (d. 1588), the famous chief architect of the Ottomans. One of them is from a small provincial town While he has had both the time and training to develop his architectural talents, they have never been more than mediocre. The other man is from a well-known rich family. He has, on the other hand, acquired all the great skills and qualities to turn out to be a great architect. In fact with a rich family and great chain of ancestry, he seems to have all the qualities to become famous, if not more.

These men go to Istanbul and are confronted with the wonderful arts of Mimar Sinan and are overcome with envy and a sense of injustice. The classical argument might be that there is a sense in which the differences between these men and Sinan seem unfair and unjust. Neither men are responsible for this difference, nor have they consented to it: it is an arbitrary, brute fact, not following from any ethical decision-making process. Our men feel unfortunate and the state they are in is hardly their fault, so how can we say that it is not unfair and unjust? They have not created beautiful buildings and monuments like Sinan and thus do not deserve the latter’s acclaim; therefore, may one not argue that our man does deserve to be as famous as Sinan?

There seem to be a number of options open to us in our evaluation of this issue in the classical philosophical approaches to justice. Firstly, we can discount the whole matter as not one of justice, since no human agency is responsible for the man’s comparative lack of talent or fame. According to this option, injustice occurs only when one agent has wronged another and – the issue of Divine decree apart – no one has wronged our men. So, this position blames the Divine for this seemingly unjust situation.

Another way of understanding this would be to say that the situation is neither just, nor unjust. It is not just that our men lack the fame of Sinan (they do not deserve not to; it is sheer luck, after all), but neither is it an injustice. There is simply a “limbo.”

Similarly much can happen to people that is not a result of their free choice and, hence, is not within their control and cannot be just in terms of the core conception. People who become severely ill through no fault of their own, are laid off after years of work in a massive company work-force reductions, or lose close relatives in car accidents are only a few among many possible examples.

Bediuzzaman’s cup example

Nursi offers a different solution here: God has designed life and anything related to it with a precise and just measure. As an analogy, let’s think that every individual is given a special cup, and he/she is asked to fill it. That everyone’s cups come in different sizes signifies that everyone’s test is different. It’s possible one has a small Turkish tea cup and the other has a British coffee cup and the other has an American extra large size coke cup. The test is designed with varying components, like coming from different families, in different countries, with different backgrounds and means. However, all these do not make the test or competition for salvation unjust. Since, the sizes of cups are specially designed for every individual, so that one’s effort to fill his cup would not differ from another’s effort to fill his/her different sized cup.

From the point of view of absolute justice, everyone will be tested according to their particularly designed circumstance, with some fundamental choices being same – like that of submission. Nobody, one way or another, chooses to be born either in an Islamic environment or, say, in an Inuit environment. Therefore, there is no inequality and injustice. When Nursi uses Sadi Taftazani’s definition of “iman” – or belief – he quotes, “belief is a light revealed into someone’s heart after that person’s – be it he or she – use of free will.” Wherever or whatever one was born into, depending on the size of their cups, one has to make a conscious choice of submission and use their free will, like in the story of Hay Bin Yakzan, who was on an island isolated from everything. Questioning starts from the outer world in nature; whereas in the case of a Sufi, let’s say Abd al Qadir Gilani, questioning starts from the inner world. They both need to question and act, contest and challenge, in accordance with their predesigned, mysterious competition, but eventually they will be held responsible in accordance with their cup sizes and use of free will.

Nursi believes that that all virtues and perfections are products of coming into existence and that the basis of all rebellion, calamities, and defects are of non-existence. As a result, existence is pure good, while non-existence is pure evil:

Existence is entirely good, for it generates every beauty and perfection; non-existence [which absorbs every good like black holes] is purely evil, for all sin and misfortune originate in it. Given this, whatever contains a hint of non-existence contains an element of evil. So, life, the most brilliant light of existence, becomes stronger as it is confronted with different circumstances. It is purified and perfected through contradictory events and happenings, and produces the desired results by assuming different qualities. Thus it testifies to the impresses of Names of the Giver of life. It is because of this subtle reality that living creatures pass through many states and experience pains, tribulations and hardship, through which the lights of existence are continuously renewed in their lives, and the darkness of non-existence draws distant and their lives are purified. In quality and as conditions, idleness, inertia, and monotony are aspects of nonexistence. Monotony reduces even the greatest pleasure to nothing.

[S]ince life displays the impresses of God’s All-Beautiful Names, everything occurring in it is beautiful. Consider this: A very rich and infinitely skilled clothes designer uses an ordinary model to display his works of art in return for wages. He requires the model to dress in a jeweled and artistically fashioned garment that illustrates his work’s art and his invaluable wealth. He continues to modify the garment while the model wears it. Does the model have any right to say: “Your orders to bow and stand up are causing me trouble. Your cutting and shortening of this garment, which makes me more beautiful, spoils my beauty.” Can the model accuse the designer of treating him unkindly and unfairly?

Similarly, in order to display the impresses of His All-Beautiful Names, the Maker of Majesty, the peerless All-Originating, alters within numerous circumstances the garment of existence He clothes on living creatures, bejeweled with senses, reason, intellect, and heart. Circumstances that appear to be calamitous and painful are actually rays of Divine Mercy within gleams of Wisdom and contain subtle beauties. They show the acts and impresses of the Divine All-Beautiful Names. (Twenty-Sixth Word, p. 490-1)

It is in this regard he even goes further and Nursi discuses, from the point of view of Divine Justice or adalet-i mahza, that one cannot harm his own self and body; they have been bestowed on you by God. He also goes even further to explain that you cannot abuse or misuse animals, plants, or anything else that maintains life; we neither own, nor control them. We can only use and control as little as is necessary to maintain our lives. Furthermore, we will be held responsible and questioned about the things and animals we use, abuse or misuse.

Conclusion

We see that in classical philosophical terms, things could be both just and unjust. However, in reality, nothing can be both just and unjust. It is simply that things which appear unjust to us are in reality just from the point of view of Divine decree and Justice. Philosophically, it is quite acceptable that something can be both just and unjust. However, the implications of this for our explication of the Nursian perspective are that as a believer, of course, Nursi would deny that some things can be both just and unjust: it is as meaningless as saying that something can be both black and white at the same time. However, working from Nursi’s cup analogy, we can talk about apparent or relative justice/injustice, which can exist at the same time as absolute justice. In actual fact, whatever happens is, ultimately, a manifestation of pure or absolute justice, although — and particularly in the retributive sense — it often appears as the opposite.

References

1. Nursi, Bediuzzaman Said. 2010. The Words, NJ: Tughra Books.