Author’s note: Many of the books and authors mentioned here are well-known. There are dozens more from writers of various nationalities, and only a lack of space precludes complete inclusion. It is my hope, however, that any bookish reader with an interest in Orientalism may find something to enhance their interest with some works still to be discovered. The prevalence of British authors here does not indicate prejudice, but does reflect the books that are actually on my shelves.

There has been much debate about the authenticity, or otherwise, of Orientalism and its influence on socio-political thought. The books and authors figuring in this essay had, with the exception of Kipling, Lawrence and Gertrude Bell, no political axe to grind. Most of them were travelers who found the East, indeed, “other” than what they experienced at home. Their quest was a personal enthusiasm for the Orient. I would contend that their writings and translations had no relevance to a debate about socio-political attitudes based on worldly devices. The world of the spirit is likely to be more enduring and, as for this world, socio-evolutionary investigation would be more apt.   

The British may currently be retreating to their island home, but in earlier times they were inclined to leave their homes at the drop of a hat. Those with the wherewithal journeyed away to sometimes sunnier and definitely more exotic regions. One of the noticeably inherent vanities of the British, however, was founded upon the notion that they were never actually foreigners in whatever region they found themselves beyond their own coastline.

Sir Richard F. Burton must have had a horror of doing a proper job because he went to extraordinary lengths to avoid a nine-to-five existence. Even when being extremely erudite, he was also eloquently funny in a sardonic sort of way and his dealings with the Oriental mind were tempered by a perfect understanding of the conditio humana, which means the state we are all perpetually in. For his two-volume Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Madinah and Meccah, Sir Richard elected to travel by choosing a travel box to contain his necessities that was sturdy enough to withstand falling off a camel’s back twice each day. With a command of Farsi, Hindi, and Arabic, together with the dialects thereof, which he learned among tons of other languages and picked them up the way lesser mortals collect butterflies, he disguised himself as a wandering Dervish. He explored bazaars, frankly searching out the bizarre (which must surely be a derivative), and drinking countless cups of chai in his attempt to find rare manuscripts about Al-Islam.

The point of Sir Richard’s drop-out endeavor is that he certainly spent more hours daily than he would be required to submit to in a mundane job. There must have been the endless waits, the errant camel or donkey that refused to be moved, the aggravation of monetary negotiation. In 1856, Burton made clear his reasons for exotic travel. Notwithstanding his erudition, he was heard to maintain: “The gladdest moments in human life, methinks, is the departure upon a distant shore into unknown lands. Shaking off with one mighty effort the fetters of Habit, the leaden weight of Routine, the cloak of many Cares and the slavery of Home, man feels once more happy. The blood flows with the fast circulation of childhood…the glorious face of nature gladdens the soul”.

Many Orientalists went, quite obviously, in search of something ethereal, the atmospheric interludes in life that may offer a hint of the divine. If any reader has heard the hypnotic call to prayer from a muezzin, floating at dawn over palms at the edge of a jungle, they will know what I mean. The point is that although there may be a sudden crashing rise of birds, the voice itself does not shatter the silence. It really does float hauntingly as an isolated sound. The call to prayer heard in a city is often more strident but no less enchanting. One is struck by something stealthily all-encompassing, something impossible to ignore. Something that lingers in a suddenly pervasive brittle silence.

It was the likes of Wilfred Thesiger, whose Arabian Sands and The Marsh Arabs became must reads for devotees of the Arab experience. His memoir The Life of My Choice would seem to echo the sentiments of Burton. The intrepid Freya Stark gave us, among many other works, The Southern Gates of Arabia and Valleys of the Assassins. Her book Ionia is about the history of Asia Minor, Turkey today. She was heard to maintain, “I do like people who have not yet made up their minds about everything, who in fact are still receiving.” These resolute travelers fashioned the romantic notion of eccentric Brits plodding resolutely across an impossible desert on an understandably belligerent camel. Despite the political implications – which your correspondent suspects were sometimes a handy excuse – Gertrude Bell, who also translated Hafiz, and, of course, T. E. Lawrence, both seemed to be seeking the sort of satisfaction that only the delights of foreignness could offer.

Looming as one of those literary mountains that remains to overshadow all others is Charles William Doughty’s Arabia Deserta. Setting off from Damascus in 1876, the author endured the deserts of what were regions previously unexplored by travelers from the West. He found a way to become attached to the Hajj of his day and his account was couched in a somewhat archaic English. Initial publication was denied due to his inaccessible language but – and this is a personal view – if the first step in meditation is concentration then Arabia Deserta deserves to be approached with the sort of perseverance that can flower into the magic of immersion that great literature can offer. In this case one will feel the sand in one’s shoes and savor the odor of a camel train in all of its pungency. T. E. Lawrence defended and fostered further publication of Doughty’s recordings and also wrote a forward to an edition of the book. Charles Doughty, who was born in 1843, wrote his monumental work in 1888. Arabia Deserta eventually came to be known among discerning readers as being the finest travel book in the English language.

E. Lawrence’s The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, which became his magnum opus, was published in 1926. Lawrence was at first an archeologist who became enchanted with the Arab mind while passing through the Holy Land on foot. He felt a great affinity for the peoples he met in his travels, which can be sensed pervasively in his great work. The Seven Pillars of Wisdom tells of the political side to his nature but also relates of his unswerving affection for his Arab friends and his appreciation of Islam. By all accounts Lawrence was a man of some complexity. One senses a somewhat philosophical passion in his thinking. He adhered to what he would have likely maintained was “the rightness” of things – although capable of indulging in war. Well, many will have read the book, many more will have seen the movie. Whatever the outcome, we will be aware that this was Lawrence’s Arabia, a place in which he probably felt most at home.

We come, quite unavoidably, to Arthur John Arberry, a British orientalist who was born on May 12, 1905. His work was rooted in a profoundly scholarly endeavor and he cannot be counted among those who were simply fascinated by the exotic East as a travel destination. In his slim volume of biographies, British Orientalists, Arberry relates of the sustained passion for the Islamic world pursued by British academics, translators, travelers, and linguists of all stripes. This passion was inflamed at an early date and we read of a 12^th century philosopher, one Adelard of Bath, who preceded, according to Arberry, nigh on 100 others sharing similar enthusiasms. There were even more, of course, but Arberry names only the most prominent who made a solid contribution to Islamic studies. With more than 70 works to his own name, which includes his own translation of the Qur’an in which he attempted to retain the poetics of the Arabic original, Arberry was probably the most seriously academic of all Orientalists. One of Arberry’s most useful books is The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam – and other Persian Poets. Together with the Rubaiyat, in Fitzgerald’s first edition of 1859, and the fourth edition of 1879, the book offers samples of the works of twenty-five Persian poets – including Rumi, Saadi, Hafiz, and all of the others your correspondent has still to fully discover. Arberry’s The Islamic Art of Persia, is a wonderfully edited volume containing the writings of many Orientalists, which includes an essay by Vita Sackville-West who writes charmingly about Persia gardens.

R. A. Nicholson was a colleague of Arberry but his works are largely unknown to myself. In his Mystics of Islam Nicholson brings to light an expert appraisal of Sufism. Without demeaning his subject, the book is fashioned in a concise and easily understood way. A fascinating passage begins, “…seventy thousand veils separate Allah, the One Reality, from the world of matter and sense. And every soul passes before birth through these seventy thousand.” At the time of submission I can only offer Nicholson’s translation, from a different source, of a succinct burst of beauty by Hafiz of Shiraz, a poet Goethe proclaimed to be unsurpassed:

STRIFE

The calm circumference of life
When I would fain have kept,
Time caught me in the tide of strife
And to the centre swept.

Of this fierce glow which Love and You
Within my breast inspire,
The Sun is but a spark that flew
And set the heavens afire!

Edward William Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon, a 3,064-page work from the 19th century, would appear to be something that could be a starting point for budding   Arabists. Lane is also credited with an acclaimed translation of A Thousand and One Nights. His most accessible work, however, and one often quoted by Burton, is his Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, which was first published in 1836 and was to have several editions. The work is an astounding coverage of life in Muslim Egypt. Despite the obvious conclusion that what was modern in the 1800s is no longer pertinent today, Lane’s book covers what is indeed the very life of Egypt. His essays, chapter for chapter, are on characteristics and dress, infancy and early education, religion and laws, language and literature, ad infinitum. Lane addresses just about every conceivable aspect in his subjective social research. The work is further enhanced by the author’s own magnificently detailed engravings.

Rudyard Kipling’s works can be difficult to find in India today. His was an imperialist stance and he was a stout defender of the British army. Nevertheless, he came to write the famous… OH, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet, Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God’s great Judgment Seat;

But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, tho’ they come from the ends of the earth!

The last line mitigates much that Kipling was accused of. Whether or not the British had good cause to be India will be debated until doomsday, and when Kipling published his poem, The White Man’s Burden, in 1899, he was accused of promoting the cause of imperialism. But Kipling did spread before us the magnificent panoply of the Indian subcontinent, and he was also recorded to have said, “Asia is not going to be civilized after the methods of the West. There is too much Asia and she is too old.” The Kipling Society in London maintains that he believed in British rule over India, but he did not hesitate to criticize the government savagely. It may be well to consider that Kipling was a man of his time and place. He was born in Bombay in 1865 of Anglo-Indian parents and he obviously knew and understood, and was largely sympathetic, to the colorful life around him. Only such experience could have made possible the publication of Kim, in 1901. Kipling produced an astonishingly varied wealth of works. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1907.

It has long been my personal love of good writing, despite having no special interest in the subjects at hand, which led me to R. H. Blyth’s inestimable Zen in English Literature and Oriental Classics, which was first published by the Hokuseido Press in Tokyo in 1942. Here is a survey to the finest detail of literature displaying the quality of the words transcending the confines of conventional literary usage. In this sense Blyth did not merely travel to the East but also sought echoes of the East in works of the West. Zen may be described variously as a fragrance, hint, nudge, or breeze that cannot be clutched though its effect can be observed, but with no sly wink seeking collusion, for therein is to be found the headache we call “mind.” Blyth’s works also include his investigations into Haiku poetry and Japanese culture. The writer’s approach to that indefinable essence of life that makes life itself agreeable, perhaps even acceptable, in its endless display of what could be called, to borrow and amend a phrase, the good, the bad, and the sometimes lovely.

Francis Edward Younghusband’s The Heart of a Continent is a book in which the author elaborates on the difficulties of travel in regions comprising almost inaccessible terrain. He took himself off from India to China, the hard way, and then found an even more difficult way to come back via the Gobi Desert, Turkestan, the Himalayas, with a great deal in between, then the Pamirs, Kashgar and eventually back home (but hardly in time for tea). Younghusband was indeed a nice man, a stalwart Christian but one who allowed much scope in his thinking for other religions. Younghusband apparently suffered greatly from mosquitoes on the way out. I would suggest that there could be an interesting discourse about why God created mosquitoes. I was put straight by a restaurant waiter in Kerala who maintained that, “God chose the mosquito to be India’s heraldic beast.”

The Canadian Colin McPhee is possibly less known, but should be wider read. His A House in Bali was first published in 1944. It is a transcendent book, one that makes reading a deeply satisfying experience. The author was a highly talented composer and ethnomusicologist who studied with Edgar Varèse and became a jazz critic of note. There were collaborations with Benjamin Britten to make their recording of Balinese Ceremonial Music for Two Pianos. He was also a friend of Margaret Meade’s family and figures often in Meade’s memoir of her life and work. It is McPhee’s obvious sensitivity that charms the reader. These were the days before Bali became a tourist destination, and the author captures the lingering, slow-motion lapse of time, and the throb of the gamelan gongs which reverberate with an insistency across the hills of that lush island that he knew so well and so lovingly described.

H. V. Morton was a British writer of note. In 1934 he published In the Steps of the Master which ran to four editions. Although the book related his efforts to trace the passages of Jesus through the Holy Land, Morton was a man of fine sensibility and he records much of the life in Palestine with inclusion of his encounters with the Arab fellahin, the common folk within the population. What was Morton’s greatest talent, which he showed in all of his works, was his equal degree of quality of content and refinement of literary style. The author opens with the following passage as he approaches the Holy Land from Egypt. “As the sun goes down, a stillness falls over Egypt. Water channels that cross the fields turn to the color of blood, then to bright yellow that fades into silver. The palm trees could be cut from black paper and pasted against the incandescence of the sky. Brown hawks that hang all day above the sugar-cane and the growing wheat are seen no more and, one by one, the stars burn over the sandhills and lie caught in the stiff fronds of the date palms”. The book also contains nearly forty of the author’s own fine photographs, mostly black and white, but beautiful and exemplary images of the Holy Land.

The world may not have ended on December 21, 2012, but that does not mean it won’t end at all. So what will be the force that will disperse this robust system of ours, rendering all forces including gravity obsolete, and forcing the sun and planets out of their orbits?

The universe contains billions of heavenly systems that travel interdependently in a perfect and harmonious fashion. What could be the obvious cause or force that could disrupt this great arrangement, deorbit the stars and planets, and make every other force ineffective including gravity? If we ponder upon the verses of the Holy Qur’an, “When the sun is folded up (and darkened). And when the stars fall (losing their luster)” (At-Takwir, 81:1−2), “And when the heaven is torn away (with all the truths becoming manifest)” (At-Takwir, 81:11) with our current cosmological advances, will Black holes be the cause that will likely destroy the Sun and even devour the light of stars so that they are unable to function?

Black holes are considered to have the potential to cause a universal apocalypse. It seems plausible that with such gravitational power of Black holes, mountains would be casted away, and magma displacement via volcanic eruptions could lead to major earthquakes. There are a couple of recent geologic studies pointing out the possibility that the gravity of the sun and moon play a role in development of earthquakes. The 7-8 meter rise in seas and 35-40 cm rise in land caused by lunar and solar eclipses are considered to be a possible factor among many factors that triggers an earthquake. Earthquakes of 12-15 Richter scale magnitude can occur because of the gravitational force of Black holes. The biggest earthquake ever recorded was of 9.2 magnitude; such that if it happens again, it can lead to a major catastrophe in a very short time.

Let’s not forget that we are residing on a globe filled with fire in its center. Gases that make up the atmosphere are held only with help of planetary gravity. One of the forces that will boil all the waters away and let all the gases escape the planet could be Black hole gravitation. The air in our atmosphere and resulting “air pressure” can be destroyed by Black hole gravity. Oceans would start boiling violently and then might evaporate off the planet. In this case, living things would suffer severe structural damages since all life forms are composed mostly of water (~70%). That is why astronauts wear a special space suit filled with air made up of normal atmospheric pressure when they leave the atmosphere. We should also keep in mind that trillions of heavenly bodies (asteroids, meteors, and comets) located in the two asteroid belts (Orion and Kuiper) may be freed from their gravitational control by the vacuum impact of the Black hole, causing colossal cosmic collisions.

The disruption of gravitational balance

There is a sensitive relationship between the elements of the universe, such as electromagnetic, nuclear forces and an apocalypse may result from a disruption of these.

According to the general relativity theory, the time-space plane can be rolled or wrinkled up like a paper. The gravitational force of black holes can cause the displacement of stars which are interconnected through weak web of attractions. As if a piece of net takes a specific shape when loaded with heavy objects, the web of space-time, also known as the cosmos, could be distorted and even torn apart by black holes with their infinite mass “sitting” in it. This is a characteristic of black holes. A possible explanation for this might be that via elimination of common physical laws, the black hole region could become the gateway to metaphysical dimensions. Cosmos of space and time is described as strong-built, fracture-free in the Qur’an; “You do not see any fault or incongruity in the creation of the all Merciful. Look yet again: can you see any rifts?” (Al-Mulk, 67:3). However, in verses about the apocalypse, cosmic fractures that will occur is constantly repeated; “Day will come, land to be transformed into another, skies to be converted into others” (Ibrahim, 14:48)”On the day when the earth is changed into another earth, and the heavens (also)” (Abraham, 14:48), ”And the sky split asunder, and so, on that day it will be most frail” (Al-Haqqah, 69:16), and “The sky will cleft open thereby” (Al-Muzzammil, 73:18). We can conclude from these verses that new heavens would be created from these “fractures.”

The way that doomsday will actually take place is in the knowledge and control of Our Creator who executes these acts and maintains the order of the universe. Approaches and conclusions made with current physical and cosmic sciences will enable a better understanding of the verses related to doomsday.

The Sun rising in the West and the apocalypse

Can a comet or a planet change the direction of the earth’s rotation by colliding with it? Can the earth change direction and start to rotate from East to West instead of West to East? A catastrophic event like this may cause colossal destruction and end the lives of many organisms. As a matter of fact, a comet impact in recent years was detected to slow down the rotational speed of planet Jupiter.

Venus is a mysterious planet on many levels. For example it rotates in the opposite direction compared to other planets. Sun rises in the West on Jupiter. Dense rock and dust layers of Venusian atmosphere is theorized to be formed as a result of a collision, and because of this collision, it is thought to have started spinning in the opposite direction. A day in Venus is longer than a year. In other words Venus revolves around the Sun faster than it rotates around itself.

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi explains the sun rising in the West rather metaphorically as follows:

“While God knows best, the Qur’an, which is in effect the intellect of the earth, will disappear from its head at the end of time and, as a result, the earth will go mad. With Divine leave, it will collide with another planet and its rotation will be reversed. Through Divine Will, its journey from west to east will be reversed from east to west, and the sun will start to rise in the west. Truly, if the gravity of the Qur’an, which is the firm rope of God that binds the earth to the sun and the ground to the Divine Supreme Throne, is broken, the tether holding the earth will come unfastened. The earth will consequently become dizzy and deranged: on account of the reversal of its usual motion, the sun will rise in the west. Through its collision with another planet, Doomsday will begin at the Divine command.” (The Rays, p. 365)

Whichever way the earth comes to an end, even if the universe is not destroyed by an external destructive event, an apocalypse is foretold as something that will eventually happen with some mind-blowing descriptions in the Qur’an. What science speaks of black holes and other astrophysical possibilities in the universe seems to confirm these descriptions:

When the sun is folded up, and when the stars fall, and when the mountains are set moving. (At-Takwir, 81:1-3)
When heaven is cleft open, and when the stars fall in disorder and are scattered, and when the seas burst forth. (At-Taqwir, 81:1-3)

Middle Eastern men, especially Muslim men, have been depicted in the media as angry, violent, oppressive, and inhumane madmen who terrorize the innocent. Wilson, or Willow as she is referred to in the book, openly discusses her initial fear of Middle Eastern men as she states, “I had been taught to fear [Middle Eastern men]… they always seem like nice guys. It’s only after you’ve gotten involved that you discover the honor-killing wife-imprisoning fundamentalist reality beneath the façade” (43). Wilson, through her interaction and relationships with men in Egypt, depicts a very different side of Muslim men in the Middle East. She portrays men as kind, protective, and respectful. Her interaction and relationship with these men varies greatly, beginning with her husband, Omar, and continuing even to two local shopkeepers. Willow’s husband, whom she met in Egypt and is Muslim, is far from the stereotypical Middle Eastern man depicted in the media. He is kind, gentle, respectful, intelligent, and patient. Though Omar had never shown anything other than these qualities, Willow was often skeptical of him and how he would be once they married. When Omar’s female relatives began to place ideas in Willow’s head that Omar was a “traditional” man who would require her to slave in the home cooking and cleaning, she became alarmed and confronted him. Omar responded, “I am not marrying you to have a servant, I’m marrying you because I love you… You have this idea of a stereotypical Arab man in your head, and you keep confusing him with me” (204). Omar never deviated from being an honorable man through the entire book; he always respected and supported Willow in whatever it was she wanted to do: to visit Iran alone, to visit her family in Colorado alone, and even to move to the U.S. with Willow. Another major reoccurring theme when it came to her interaction with men in Egypt was this concept of them being very protective of their women, “The men began to treat me with the same protective chivalry they extended to other Muslim women” (108). While living in Tura, Willow and her friend Jo regularly shopped at a duken where they formed a friendship with its owners, Mohammad and Namir. There was one particular visit to the duken where a fellow shopper questioned Willow asking her if she was American. Mohammad and Namir immediately turned their attention to the man watching and listening to how he spoke to Willow. Willow described the scenario as following, “I noticed that Namir and Mohammad had stopped stocking the shelves and stood very still, looking at the man with an expression that was not friendly. Without speaking, but very clearly, they were saying Stop, go back, and approach her more suitably” (131). Willow further explains her and Jo’s relationship with the shopkeepers by elucidating, “Mohammad and Namir subtly defended our honor by insisting that within the confines of their shop we should be treated like Arab women… with the proper degree of respect” (130). There was also a fararghi, or poultry seller, Am Mahmoud, who came to Willow’s defense as well. While shopping in the market one afternoon, a group of American tourists stared at Willow trying to decipher if she was American or a Muslim. Willow describes Am Mahmoud’s reaction: “At the same moment, Am Mahmoud himself, cleaning his hands with a cloth, stepped between me and the street, screening me from the view of the tourists… the tourists moved on… Am Mahmoud had protected me from exposure and embarrassment as he would an Egyptian girl” (211-212). Though Willow also acknowledges the presence of some desperate, gawking men in Egypt, she more importantly acknowledges and shares with her audience the truth that men in the Middle East are not as they appear in the media. They are human beings and share the same emotions that everyone else experiences. They are protective of their women and have no intention of abusing or oppressing them. They are kind, gentle, and respectful; quite the opposite of violent, angry, and controlling as seen in the media.

Women have also been utilized as a tool in the American media to depict the Middle East and Islam as oppressive and condescending towards women. The media stresses the human rights violations of women in the Middle East, including honor-killings, abuse, polygamy, and lack of education. The media often portrays women as helpless and forced to cover head-to-toe with drapery. What the media does not discuss are the independent women in the Middle East or the reasons behind gender discrepancies within Islam. Wilson, on the other hand, exposes a different side to women in the Middle East: independent women, who are the head of the family. One very solid example of this type of women is Omar’s mother, Sohair who is also Muslim. Sohair was a single mother who worked hard her entire life to bring herself and her children out of poverty. Wilson also explains that just as in the West, many young women in the Middle East are also becoming more concerned with their careers and their education rather than just being a housewife. In addition to meeting Sohair, Willow realized the role of women through her interaction in the market and as a bride in Egypt. Wilson discusses women’s role as she states, “She is the one who builds relationships with the vendors of the best meat and the freshest fruit, and argues for the lowest price; she knows herbal remedies for dysentery; it is she who cooks for ten people out of three pots when relatives drop by unexpectedly. In Egypt, women create the civilization the men merely live in” (207). She goes on to discuss women’s rights in the Middle East and how they are better off since they have influence rather than rights: “Why push for rights when you have influence? A gusty, intelligent woman in the Middle East can steer fortunes of her entire family with a minimum of exposure and risk; giving her a full complement of western rights would limit the scope of her power by exposing her to the same public scrutiny as men” (270). Wilson further addresses women’s rights in Egypt and how if she were to marry Omar as a Christian, she would have fewer rights than as a Muslim (90). She even briefly discusses how the marriage license “entitled [her] to a slew of things if Omar took a second wife” (94). Lastly, Wilson touches on the believed double standard of men and women in the Middle East and in regards to being a Muslim. Willow explains that neither Islam nor the Qur’an warrants female oppression, “Islam, in its purely textual form, took my side. There is no religious limit on the public spaces that women can inhabit; nothing prevents them from running businesses or driving cars, there is no reason they must walk behind men or cover their faces. A woman’s role is not defined by the kitchen and the nursery” (80). While visiting Colorado and enjoying coffee with a friend, the friend inquired about women not being allowed to be in the company of another man if he is not her husband or of her husband’s family. Willow beaks this idea of an oppressive, double standard as she says, “There are only two genders here. Creating a rule for one necessarily creates the same rule for the other. You could just as easily asked whether Omar could go out with another woman or be alone with her, and I would have given the same answer: no” (228). Women hold much more respect than the media leads on to believe. They present one side of the matter without fully explaining the other. Willow summarizes the truth of women in the Middle East for her audience as follows, “It was such a tantalizing contradiction, being a woman in the Middle East—far less free than a woman in the West, but far more appreciated” (250).

The media has created an image of all Muslims as being extremists. What they fail to mention in their new reports is the simple fact that that extremists make up only a small fraction of the Muslim population and those in the Middle East fear these individuals as well, not just Westerners. Islam is the second largest religion in the world; if all or even a majority of Muslims were extremists and terrorists then there would be a much greater number of attacks around the world and on a much more regular basis. Wilson makes clear this point throughout her work. She briefly describes a fundamentalist mosque near her apartment and how “the screams of the muezzin” woke the entire neighborhood up at 4 am (123). Wilson even attempts to explain the truth behind fundamentalists and their actions, “The fundamentalists we could see from our bathroom window hated us for very religious reasons… It became clear to me… how little the anger of our local extremists had to do with military America. While the situation in Iraq gave them political legitimacy and direction, and a dangerous amount of emotional leverage with average Muslims, it was not the reason they were angry. They hated America that exports culture” (135-136). The media is also guilty of blaming Islam for supporting terrorism; which Wilson makes clear is not the case by any means, “Dozens of fatwas against terrorism have been issued since 9/11, many by high-ranking clerics. The silence of the press to positive gains made by moderate Muslims has enabled damaging misconceptions about the religion and its leaders” (243). Wilson even interviewed a mufti, who stated that Islam “aims to protect human dignity and human rights” and that it forbids “tyranny, prostitution, suicide, drug abuse – anything that treats a human being as an object” (247). Finally, Wilson attempts to also clear up the misconception that all Muslims hate Americans and that the Middle East only has a negative view of America and its people as she explains, “To speak about America in such bitter generalities was not typical in Egypt, except perhaps among hard-line fundamentalists” (278). Once again the author tries to make clear that the false generalizations and fallacies presented by the media. Though terrorism is a real problem, and though the extremists do use Islam as an excuse, it does not represent Islam or the Middle East by any means. Just as Americans do not all want to be stereotyped by what is seen in Hollywood, Muslims do not want to be stereotyped by only what is broadcast in the news.

“There was so much about Islam and the people who lived it that was left unsaid in the media and in public discussion, and I could do something about it” are the very words which explain the purpose of G. Willow Wilson’s The Butterfly Mosque. Wilson’s work was a well-written attempt to bridge the gap between the Middle East, mainly Islam, and the United States. She illustrated the truth: the good and bad of both cultures. While she focused on closing the gap between what is seen in the media in the U.S. in regards to men, women, and fundamentalists, she never presented only one side of the matter. She acknowledged and made reference to the fact that there were truths to the stereotypes, but that the stereotypes did not apply to everyone. These incorrect stereotypes of men being oppressive and violent, women being submissive and abused, and all Muslims being fundamentalists are incorrectly applied to the majority when in reality this applies to a small minority. Readers of this work will finish this book with a new perspective on Islam and that of Middle Eastern culture.

Jessica Danielle Phillips is a senior in International Relations at Rollins College in Winter Park, FL.

Book review
Wilson, G. Willow. The Butterfly Mosque. New York: Grove Press, 2010.

My most recent visits were to Pakistan and Finland, two countries that on the surface have very few in common, if any, in terms of continent, climate, people, culture, population, economy, politics, stability… you name it. And my conviction was once again confirmed that it is absolutely a necessity to see a country with your own eyes and get firsthand knowledge to be able to see beyond what you have through other means.

The Fountain presentation on media and values was conducted in four universities with great interest and participation. Students and faculties actively joined the discussion with invigorating questions on the universal themes and values The Fountain cherishes. Despite what the Western mind would expect of Pakistan, interestingly, the female ratio in the academia is visibly very high and their voice is no less strong than their counterparts in the West.

Finland has its own texture and character by all means. Although it was mid-April, there were still pockets of muddy snow especially in the northern-facing shades of the landscape and buildings. Hardly anyone in the streets was around, even at the airport terminal, with the exception of those enjoying the spring sun during their lunch break.

However different any given country might be from another, culture of coexistence is inevitably a common theme in both regardless of continent or culture. The Minister of Culture and Sports, Paavo Arhinmäki, who opened the conference organized by Finland Dialog Association and The Fountain in Helsinki on April 24, said “Encountering ethnic and cultural diversity is no longer the experience of just a few. It has become an everyday reality for many more people worldwide. Interactive skills and conflict resolution must become part of everyone’s civil preparedness. The desire to participate and act only becomes greater through personal involvement.”

This quote summarizes the universality of our need for greater awareness of peaceful coexistence and proves that our differences are a richness of diversity. Hence, this is one of the many reasons why The Fountain is actively engaged in different continents and societies and what we try to reflect in the contents. In the same vein, this issue covers themes that are universally relevant, like What It Means to Be Human, food safety, environment, bad memory, and senior citizens. This issue also offers thought-provoking articles on natural sciences, appreciating the compatibility of the type of food animals consume with their digestion system, the perfect physical make-up of birds, and the very interesting balance in the world that is bound with its rotation. Challenges in the gifted education are also separately discussed.

For those of you in the northern hemisphere, we wish you a good summer, and a reasonable winter for those of you in the south.

The group consisted of two priests, a nun, a publisher, and a director. For me as a Muslim, it was the first time I had seen Franciscan monks in their habits, a long, hooded, brown robe, tied at the waist with a white cord, and with large concealed pockets in the arms. I thought they were wearing them simply because they wanted to make everything in the documentary appear as if it were in the Middle Ages, but, no, it was their everyday attire, and they wore their habits all the time we were together.

It was a noteworthy mission that merged from different parts of the US (Texas, California, Ohio) in order to set out on a tiring journey passing through Istanbul, Urfa, Damascus, Cairo, and Damietta, meet lots of people, and visit a great number of places. The project was named the Damietta Project, Damietta being the city where St. Francis of Assisi (d. 1226), the founder of the Franciscan order, met the Muslim sultan in the heat of war in 1219. I learned that it was a very cordial encounter between St. Francis and Sultan Al-Kamil, and the monks hoped that their documentary would serve to build a peaceful world by presenting a model from eight hundred years ago.

John, the publisher in the group, presented to me as a gift a copy of this book by George Dardess. This is why I am referring to this group and their project, for their philosophy resonates in the core message of the book.

Due to the limited space available, I will not give a comprehensive review of the book, for almost every argument carries baggage, and a fair review would entail a lengthy analysis. I will briefly touch on some aspects of the first part of this book, which I believe is an effort by the Franciscan order to help remove interfaith misunderstandings. In this respect, the author, who is a member of both the Muslim-Catholic Alliance and the Commission on Muslim-Christian Relations in Rochester, is the right author, and this makes the book worth reading. The opening prayer given in the introduction indicates the sincere efforts of the author, and thus of the group, to be revealed in the later pages:

God, creator of us all, master of the universe,

we ask you to be present with us

as we search to know you

not only in our own sacred scripture

but also in that of our Muslim sisters and brothers.

help us forget past quarrels

as well as present fears and suspicions.

Help us instead to keep our minds open,

our spirits free,

and our hearts joyful

as we ponder:

whether the god we both worship

is you.

amen.

Praising the Nostra Aetate (Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions) of the Second Vatican Council, Dardess points to a great achievement on the side of the Christian world, as they managed to move away from Dante’s inauspicious depiction of the Prophet in The Divine Comedy, to acceptance of Muslims as worshipping the same God as Christians. Although this step toward dialogue received relatively little elaboration in the Council documents, it was still a positive effort. Nevertheless, this fragile step was threatened after 9/11, which makes books such as this one invaluable contributions to eliminating misconceptions about Islam.

The author’s intention in writing this book is summarized in his willingness to worship together with all humanity, as one family: “If we . . . come to the understanding that we do indeed worship . . . the same God, we can find ways of praying to that God together without violating our significant differences” (p. 6). The author does not deny the fact that it is not easy pass the stumbling block of the Christian attribution of divinity to Jesus versus the Muslim belief that he was not divine, but he argues that the purpose of this book is “to open up the possibility of [such] enrichment, even at the point when dialogue seems impossible” (p. 26).

The author does not skip over details such as the word “Allah,” which is perceived by some non-Muslims as some kind of god for Muslims, like an idol. Dardess carefully notes that “Allah” is not a special name peculiar to Islam but simply the Arabic word for God. Many Christians in the West are not aware that their co-religionists in the Middle East use the word Allah for God, as well. Dardess underlines the fact that God of Islam is not a God of wrath: “… the Muslim approaches God, not in abject fear, but in the profoundest gratitude” (p. 18).

The author lays down a very objective historical background to Islam for novice readers who have a superficial knowledge of its history, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and the Holy Qur’an. In this section, Dardess carefully notes that “honest dialogue depends upon having enough confidence in our own religious identity to be able to explore the religious identity of others without tension or defensiveness” (p. 30). In the comparison he makes between the Christian Eucharist and Islam’s holy book, the Qur’an, he states a principle, which is essential in true dialogue: “only lovers understand other lovers” (p. 30).

Analyzing further Qur’anic language, the author rightfully underlines that “words like Jihad, Allah, Muslim and Islam have so lost connection [in English] with their original context that they have become more truly English words than Arabic ones. The words convey our own understanding of Islam, not the understanding of Muslims themselves” (p. 31). Dardess points out that it is more of a linguistic challenge than a doctrinal one for Christians to understand the Qur’an. Language differences are no doubt a barrier in any human context, but in the case of the Qur’an, a specific branch of scholarship, tafsir, has been developed since the advent of Islam, as a result of which a number of interpretations have been produced to help readers understand the universal message of the Qur’an, not only for non-Arabs but also for Arabic-speaking believers. Surface reading of the divine text-actually any text-is never a profound reading of it, and it might even be misleading at times. Besides, the emphasis on the preservation of the original text should never be underestimated, for not only in the case of the Qur’an but in all translation works, it is of the utmost significance to be able to refer to the true original text in its original language.

In the Middle Ages, when Muslims were the pioneers in science, their works were translated from Arabic into Latin for many centuries, and this resulted in the European Enlightenment, which, according to the author, is “humankind’s greatest achievement, the one against which [we] must measure all other civilizations” (p.31). This last statement is problematic in itself and needs to be addressed. Western perceptions of the East have been shaped largely within the framework Western social sciences have drawn. The dress sewn for the Western context does not fit the Muslim world and social movements therein; however, social analysts work on the same model in their efforts to understand the East. So, the author’s argument to “measure all civilizations against European Enlightenment” contradicts his overall positive approach to understanding Islam.

Nevertheless, the book is a significant contribution to the literature on interfaith dialogue despite some of the shortcomings pointed out above. However, as the author mentions in the introduction, “the discussion itself is more important than the answer.” Those non-Muslims who are curious about Islam will certainly benefit a lot from this book: What exactly do Muslims believe? How do those beliefs differ from their own? What do Muslims believe about Jesus? Mary? Satan? Creation? The Holy Spirit? Do we worship the same God? Guided discussion questions in each chapter encourage readers towards further reflection and dialogue.

Roughly speaking, the bulk of Central Eurasia consists of Central Asia and the Caucasus but also stretches to such regions as Turkey, the Turkic/Muslim regions of southern Russia, northern Afghanistan, southern Siberia, Tibet and Mongolia.[1] Largely due to Turkic influence, shaped historically by a tolerant understanding of co-existence as enjoined in Islam, this region has won prestige internationally for its peaceful efforts in this diverse geographical area.

Such leading U.S. universities as Harvard University, the University of Wisconsin at Madison, the University of California in Los Angeles, and the University of Indiana in Bloomington offer graduate courses on Central Eurasian studies and languages. The notion of a “clash of civilizations” promoted by Huntington[2] in the era of globalization has never been accepted by many people throughout Central Eurasia in their rich historical experiences of living in “mosaic societies.”

Pluralistic Islam at the heart of Eurasia

Unfortunately, for last couple of decades the experience of the diverse pluralistic Islam of Central Eurasia has been obscured by the political trends of Islam in the Middle East. The latter, rather than the former, has become the focus of most academic scholars of social sciences and humanities and media. Historically, while Turkey formed the western boundary of the Muslim world, Central Eurasia has largely represented the northern and north-eastern boundaries of the classical Islamic world. Islam in Central Eurasia emerged mainly through remarkable Sufi masters like Ahmet Yassavi, Korkyt Ata, Mevlana Rumi, and Baba Tukes. The merchant caravanserais of the Silk Road that traversed vast areas between the Middle East and China came into existence through peaceful means, and new Muslims in this area were very tolerant toward the many religions and cultures of their neighbors. Although the revelation of the Qur’an started in Arabia, most of its scholarly interpretations and the hadith compilations were compiled in Central Asia.[3] The greatest contributions to almost all areas of religious and positive sciences, engineering, art and culture were witnessed in this part of the world between the ninth and fourteenth centuries ce. The works of such outstanding intellectual figures as Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Al-Farabi (Alfarabius), Al-Khwarizmi still benefit

people all over the world. The largest library in the world in the thirteenth century ce was in Otrar (a city in present-day southern Kazakhstan), which was later totally demolished by Genghis Khan during Mongol invasion.

In the period between the seventh and thirteenth centuriesce, the Muslim world was ruled predominantly by Arab caliphs of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties. However, starting from the twelfth century up until the beginning of the twentieth century, Muslims of Central Eurasia of predominantly Turkic origin became the foremost rulers of the Muslim nations. Among them were the famous states administered by the Seljuks in Central Asia, the Golden Horde in Russia, the Baburides on the Indian subcontinent, the Mamluks in Egypt, and the Ottomans in Eastern Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

The Golden Horde’s legacy of tolerance toward Christian, Jewish and Buddhist communities laid the foundation for the flourishing of Moscow and the Russian

Empire, which became heir to the Golden Horde’s legacy.[4] Saray, which was the capital of the Golden Horde from thirteen to fifteen centuries, and which was located very close to the border of modern-day southern Russia and western Kazakhstan, became a center of intercontinental diplomacy as envoys and ambassadors representing princes and popes sought audiences with the Muslim khans of the Golden Horde.[5]

Dialogue between world religions in Central Eurasia in the modern secular context

After more than two hundred years of Czarist rule, the ex-Soviet Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan, being one of the most diverse countries in the world, the home of 120 ethnic groups and many world religious communities for the last seventeen years became the active initiator of peace, dialogue, integration and reconciliation initiatives across not just the Eurasian states of the former Soviet Union, but also the larger international community. After independence, to ease tension among superpowers Kazakhstan’s government decided unilaterally to dismantle the huge nuclear arsenal left as the Soviet legacy of the cold war. Following the breakup of the USSR, Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbaev’s proposal to form a “Eurasian Union” was praised by many leaders across Russia and the ex-Soviet republics. The late pope John Paul II met Nazarbaev in Astana on September 11, 2001.

Muslim–Jewish dialogue in Central Eurasia

In 2002 Kazakhstan served as the facilitator of Islamic– Jewish dialogue in Eurasia, an event which took place in the new capital, Astana. At the conference, thirty rabbis from various countries noted that the only way forward in the relationship between Muslims and Jews is through constructive dialogue. They also expressed their wish to see Kazakhstan as a center of Muslim–Jewish dialogue.[6] The fact that the headquarters of the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress (EAJC) was placed in Almaty, the largest city in Muslim Kazakhstan, at a time when there is growing instability in the Middle East, is a sign of the huge potential of the mutual trust between Muslim and Jewish communities in Eurasia.[7] Alexander Mashkevich, the head of the EAJC, considers Kazakhstan a unique example of cooperation and peaceful coexistence between various peoples and religions. He also noted that the largest synagogue in Central Asia, which was opened in Astana, best characterizes Muslim Kazakhstan as the land of inter-ethnic peace and inter-confessional harmony.The latest phase of this dialogue at the First International Conference of Peace and Accord was held in Almaty the previous year. Presidents of the leading Jewish organizations of the United States, leaders and plenipotentiaries of the states of Central Asia, Azerbaijan and Turkey, and members of the leadership and the Council of Rabbis and Central Asian Muslim leaders condemned terrorism and declared that there are no antagonistic contradictions between Judaism and Islam.

Dialogue between world and traditional religions at the heart of Eurasia

At a time when some dark forces are trying to bring about a clash of world religions and civilizations, Central Eurasia offered an unprecedented challenge to these dangerous trends by initiating a series of high profile civic activities bringing together members of the clergy of world and traditional religions in the heartof Eurasia in Kazakhstan’s capital Astana in 2003 and 2006.[8] A unique role model for intercultural communication and dialogue, Kazakhstan, with a number of other countries of Central Eurasia, showed the whole world that traditional values can be reconciled with liberal norms in the formation of a successful, peace-loving, civil, mosaic society. Leading Turkish Islamic scholar Fethullah Gulen, active promoter of interfaith and intercultural dialogue, valued this significant interfaith event in Eurasia highly and said, “The only way for humankind to solve its problems is by way of dialogue: meeting, learning and talking to each other…With all my heart I state that all these initiatives done out of pure intentions will serve to establish peace and stability in the region, to improve relationships among nations and also to build lasting peace on the whole planet.”[9]

Dialogue Eurasia: “DA”

A number of Turkish people are working to pave the way for dialogue in the Eurasia region.[10], [11] Diyalog Avrasya (Dialogue Eurasia), a publication of the Dialogue Eurasia Platform, has been the voice of common sense in seventeen countries, from Moldavia to Mongolia, since its founding in 2000. A bilingual quarterly published in Turkish and Russian, DA adopts an approach to conflict with reconciliation, using the slogan, “Dialogue starts with ‘DA’” (“Da” in Russian means “yes” in English). DA representatives recently gathered in Istanbul and discussed the latest developments in the Eurasia region. DA stressed that its ideology is knowledge and love, and that convergence, compromise and understanding constitute the backbone of their policy. Renowned Kyrgyz writer Chingiz Aytmatov, who passed away recently, also served on the journal’s advisory board; he described DA as “the business card of Eurasia.” Garnering great interest in the countries where it is published, DA also brings together Eurasia’s famous writers, intellectuals and civil society volunteers. In addition, opinions and essays of leading politicians frequently appear in the journal.

Interestingly, present and past dialogue efforts in Central Eurasia go hand in hand with positive trends in education, which for the last decade or so, has experienced quite a renaissance.[12] Hopefully, dialogue efforts combined with excellence in education will yield great fruits in the future in this important region of the world, which will benefit the whole of humanity again as during the region’s golden ages between the ninth and fourteenth centuries. There is hope that the dynamism of inter-cultural diversity which has prevailed for centuries on the Eurasian continent with its multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic and multi-religious characteristics will gain momentum in future again.

Dr. Zhandos Utegulov is researcher at University of Nebraska–Lincoln.

Notes

1. http://cesww.fas.harvard.edu/

2. Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72(3): 22-49.

3. Ali Unal, Alphonse Williams eds. Advocate of Dialogue: Fethullah Gulen, 2000, The Fountain Publications.

4. http://www.accd.edu/sac/history/keller/Mongols/states3.html

5. Janet Martin. Medieval Russia, 980-1584, CUP, 2008.

6. http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/19476/edition_id/395/format/html/displaystory.html

7. http://www.eajc.org/publish_gen_e.php?rowid=40

8. http://www.religionscongress.org

9. Interview with Fethullah Gulen in Kazahstanskaya Pravda, Sept 15, 2006.

10. http://www.zaman.com/?bl=culture&alt=&trh=20061206&hn=38940

11. http://www.interfaithathens.org/article/art/10081.asp

12. Ismail Demirkan, Aksar Beketov. “Islam, Science, and Free and Open Inquiry,” Physics Today, January 2008, p. 11.

As cultural differences continue to be an important part of life, we need to examine how different cultures make sense of the world in terms of the meanings that represent the mind, and within which the concept of intelligence is defined. First, I will explore some basic philosophical views about the conception of intelligence which I believe constitute the root of cultural constructions of the notion.

Historical conceptions of intelligence

Some scholars of the past, such as philosophers, writers and theologians, explored intelligence but did not attempt to define the nature of intelligence. For example, in the Odyssey, Homer distinguished between good looks and good thinking. He remarked that one may have a poor physical appearance but may speak in an articulate way. Another man may be handsome but lack the ability to communicate well with others. Plato made his comments regarding the nature of intelligence in Theaetetus. In the dialogue, Socrates asks Theaetetus to imagine that there exists in the mind of man a block of wax that is of different sizes in different men. The block of wax can also differ in hardness, moistness and purity. Socrates suggests that when the wax is pure and sufficiently deep, the mind will learn easily and will not be subject to confusion. Because impressions in the wax are clear, it only will think things that are true. However, when the wax is impure or very soft or very hard, there will be defects in the intellect. People whose wax is soft will be good at learning but be apt to forget. People whose wax is hard will be slow to learn but will retain what they learn. People whose wax is shaggy or gritty, or whose wax is a mixture of earth and dung will have only indistinct impressions. Those with hard wax will have the same because there will be no depth to their thoughts (Sternberg 1985).

In the Posterior Analytics Book, Aristotle conceived of intelligence in terms of “quick wit.” For example, an intelligent person seeing someone in conversation with a man of wealth might conclude quickly that the person is seeking to borrow money from the wealthy man.

Cultural conceptualization of intelligence

In recent years, researchers have found that people in Eastern and Western cultures often have fundamentally different ideas about intelligence. Richard Nisbett, in The Geography of Thought, argues that these differences are due to the different cognitive styles of both cultures, including how intelligence is understood. He suggests that people in Western countries tend to view intelligence as a means for individuals to devise categories and to engage in rational debate, while people in Eastern cultures see it as a way for members of community to recognize contradiction and complexity and to play their social roles successfully.

I think, as Nisbett says these differences between Eastern and Western views of intelligence are related to differences in the basic cognitive processes of people in those cultures. In most cases, Western notions of intelligence are not shared by other cultures. For example, at the mental level, the Western emphasis on speed of mental processing (Sternberg 1981) is not shared by many cultures. In contrast, people in Eastern countries may even be suspicious of the quality of work done very quickly and emphasize depth rather than speed.

Similarly, Chen (1994) found three factors underlying Chinese conceptualizations of intelligence: nonverbal reasoning ability, verbal reasoning ability and memory. These factors differ substantially from American people’s conceptualizations of intelligence which have mostly mental attributions, such as: practical problem solving, verbal ability and social competence (Sternberg 1981).

About Eastern notions of intelligence, Das (1994) has suggested that in Buddhist and Hindu philosophies, intelligence involves waking up, noticing, recognizing, understanding, and comprehending but also includes such things like determination, mental effort, and even feelings and opinions (Sternberg and Kaufman 1998). In a related study, Yang and Sternberg reviewed Chinese philosophical conceptions of intelligence. The Confucian perspective emphasizes the characteristic of benevolence and of doing what is right. Again, Taoist culture emphasizes the importance of humility, freedom from conventional standards of judgment, and full knowledge of oneself which appears well-correlated with Plato’s “Know yourself” notion.
Differences between cultures in conceptions of intelligence have been recognized for some time. In a study, Gill and Keats (1980) reported that Australian University students value academic skills and the ability to adapt to new situations as critical to intelligence, while Malay students emphasize practical skills, such as speed and creativity, as well as both social and cognitive attributes in their conceptions of intelligence.

Studies done in Africa provide evidence of substantial differences in the notion of intelligence. Serpell (1974, 1977, and 1982) found that people in Zambia emphasize social responsibilities, cooperativeness, and obedience as important to intelligence; intelligent children are expected to be respectful of adults. In Zimbabwe, the word intelligence means to be prudent and cautious, especially in social relationships (Dasen 1984). As in many Eastern countries, service to the family and community, politeness and respect for elders are seen as the key to intelligence.

In his study. The Geography of Thought, researcher Nisbett, compares the Greeks and the Chinese in order toshow the different cognitive styles of East and West, which in turn causes different conceptions of intelligence. The Ancient Greeks were known for their strong sense of agency, the ability to exercise free will, while the Chinese found their belief system in harmony. The Greeks also had a curiosity about the nature of the world. They were not satisfied just to make systematic observations about the world; they were also interested in the underlying principles of their observations. Debate and confrontation were discouraged in Chinese society, whereas they were encouraged in Greece. The Eastern way of life is based on the principle that the life is ever-changing and filled with contradictions. It was interrelationships that defined the Chinese; who they were with would define who they were and what roles they were to fulfill. The sense of identity was defined by social context, by individual attributes while in Greece, objects and people would be analyzed separately. These fundamental differences in thought patterns have implications that extend to all aspects of life.

At this point, the differences seen in the individualistic culture of the West and the collectivistic (Petersen 2004) culture of the East need more attention to provide a better picture of the notion of intelligence in terms of its cultural construction.

Different thinking styles of East and West

There are some assumptions which are thought to be true by most Westerners. That is, they are individuals with characteristics that make them distinctive; moreover, we want to be unique. Westerners are in control of their own behavior and feel better when they believe that they can choose and control the outcomes of their actions. They are goal-oriented and success-driven (Nisbett 2004), and relationships can sometimes interfere with attaining success. Personal success and feeling positive about oneself are important for the sense of well-being.

Conversely, Easterners are less concerned with personal success; they are far more group driven (Nisbett 2004). Their sense of well-being is related to their being in harmony with those around them; moreover, rules that apply to relationships are not universal, instead relationships are dictated by the context and are unique to the roles each holds in that context. This collective sense of the East extends also to language. For example, in the Japanese language, there are many words for “I,” each dependent on the situation. Who “I” am is different when I am with a boss, co-worker, family member, or friend. In my home country, in Turkey which has strong Eastern roots; there is still the tradition of using “We” instead of ‘I’ in an effort to be humble and avoid egocentric ownership of success. In contrast, Americans rarely take context into account when asked for self descriptions. Moreover, Americans are more likely to overestimate their personal attributes (Nisbett 2004). On the other hand, it is the goal of harmony and fulfilling one’s role in social life to achieve collective success that prevails in Eastern culture.

Another notion of Eastern culture that has a substantial effect on its cultural conceptions of true intelligence and progress is self -criticism which is regarded as part of learning. Self-criticism is taught to Japanese children to help them learn how to solve problems and improve relationships with others. Again, in Turkey, the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and some other Islamic scholars affect people’s conceptualizations of progress and success, such as, “Happy are those whose own faults preoccupy them too much to think of the faults of others” and “The strongest among you is the one who controls his anger.”

Differences in culture start early in life and continue throughout life. Western parents encourage their children to be independent. Generally they do this by focusing attention on objects. In Eastern cultures, parents focus attention on social relationships and feelings. When children grow up, the differences can be seen in experiments, for example, that Easterners’ have a superior ability to be aware of the emotions of groups of others (Peterson 2004). One theory that accounts for this difference is communication styles. In the West, it is the communicator who is responsible for making the information clear to the listener. In the East, it is the responsibility of the hearers to understand what they are told. The implication of these two contrasting styles can leave Americans feeling that Easterners are difficult to “read” because of their subtle and indirect communication styles. Conversely, Easterners may feel Americans are so direct that they may even be thought to be rude (Nisbett 2004).

Not surprisingly, the East and West have very different styles of dealing with conflict. As in ancient China, debate is still uncommon in the East. Because argument and debate pose a threat to group harmony, what Westerners consider controversial topics would not be brought up in conversation in the East (Becker 1986). Moreover, while debate is part of the rhetoric of science in the West, a skill Westerners are taught throughout their education, it is new to many Easterners that come to the West to pursue a scientific career.
Easterners and Westerners also differ in their perception of control. In Western culture, feeling in control promotes a feeling of well-being to a much greater extent than it does for Easterners (Nisbett 2004). On the other hand, Westerners have more difficulty tolerating ambiguous situations than Easterners. Westerners tend to believe that if things are going to change, it will be in the same direction and at the same level, whereas Easterners see the world as a complex dynamic system (Peterson 2004).

It is at this point that researchers (Nisbett, Peng, Choi, Norenzayan 2001) comment that Easterners appear to think more holistically, paying greater attention to relationship and context, relying more on experience-based knowledge than abstract logic and showing more tolerance for contradiction. Westerners are more analytic in their thinking, tending to separate objects from their context, to avoid contradictions and to rely more heavily on formal logic.

Conclusion

Taken all together, it is certain that people who grow up in different cultures do not just think about different things but they think differently. Thus, the connotations of the word intelligence do not only include a particular set of mental functions but also some value-based conceptions of appropriateness, such as competence, helpfulness, and so on. So, for example, when someone tells a parent that their child is very intelligent, they may be talking about child’s education, or their good relations with others, and sometimes their being a good listener, or lots of other meanings which all depend on the context of the culture in which people live.

References

• Becker, C. B., (1986). Reasons for the lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 75–92
• Chen, M. J. (1994). Chinese and Ausralian concepts of intelligence. Psychology and Developing Societies, 6, 101–117
• Choi, Nisbett, Norenzayan, Peng (2001). Culture of Thought. Psychological Review: 108, 291–310
• Curtis Mary E.; Glaser Robert. Changing conceptions of intelligence. Review of Research in Education, Vol. 9 (1981), 111–148
• Das, J.P. (1994). Eastern views of intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Intelligence (Vol.1, pp.387–391).New York: Macmillan
• Dasen, P. (1984). The cross- cultural study of intelligence: Piaget and Baoule. International Journal of Psychology, 19,407–434
• Gill R, Keats DM. 1980. Elements of intellectual competence: judgments by Australian and Malay university students. Journal of Cross – Cult. Psychology. 11:233–43
• Nisbett, Richard E. (2004). The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently…and Why. New York: Free Press
• Norenzayan, A., CHOI, i., & Nisbett, R. E (1994). Eastern and Western perceptions of causality for social behavior: Lay theories about personalities and social situations. In D. Prentice & D. Miller ( Ed.s), Cultural divides: Understanding and overcoming group conflict (pp.239–272). New York: Sage.
• Serpell, R. (1974). Aspects of intelligence in a developing country. African Social Research, No.17, 576–596
• Serpell, R. (1994). The cultural construction of intelligence. In W. J. Lonner & R. M. Malpass ( Eds.), Psychology and culture. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of the intelligence. New York: Cambridge U. Press
• Sternberg, R. J., Conway, B. E., Ketron, J. L., & Bernstein, M. (1981). People’s conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 37–55
• Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (1998). Human abilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 49,479–502
• Sternberg, R. J. (1985c). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627
• Yang, S. R. & Sternberg, R. J. (1997a). Conceptions of intelligence in ancient Chinese philosophy. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 17, 101–119

Where oaks once grew.

Power plants displace our cornfields

On that lovely land.

The breeze roughly sidles and bends

Over the purling brooks,

And all the mockingbirds hush

As the day droops.

Wailing moans heard everywhere

By countless orphans of the east,

Longing for a lofty peace,

Never knowing what fate conceives.

Neither chilly blizzards

Nor scorching sun,

Can lay a trap under its debris.

For those who learned too late, perhaps,

How to defy the pull of the sand.

Jacques Derrida¹

For over two thousand years despotism has been used by the West as a concept for slandering systems that differ from it. What this means is that the term itself is European. It was used against the French king as a means of opposition. It was also used by Montesquieu and Engels as a strategy of accusation against Oriental regimes. Karl Wittfogel attempted to adopt it for the case of Soviet Russia, but he did not succeed, because the term has been indexed to the East since the time of ancient Greece. The East for the Greeks was Persia, then, it became Seljuk-Ottoman Empire and the Mongols for a while.

“Enlightened despotism” was used in positive terms for Frederic the Great and Catherine II; however, even this positive attempt did not conceal this myth or alleviate the burden of this prejudice. To sum up, the term despotism has cast a silhouette over the Eurasian map since the time of Aristotle’s Politics. What is more, the notions developed in the West still dominate today, even in the mindset of some “intellectuals” in the East.

There have been many books written on this subject. Edward Said struggled greatly at the beginning with his Orientalism, published in 1978, and in subsequent studies. There has been much research conducted on the problems and contradictions of Eurocentrism. In 1748 Montesquieu presents us with a discussion of despotism in his The Spirit of Laws. However, his outmoded theory was found to be ridiculous by Voltaire at the time and by Anquetil-Duperron thirty years later in 1778.

In fact, the aim of the “Eastern Orientalists” is clear: they are trying to find an explanation for the lack of development in the East. Montesquieu-who invented the term despotism while criticizing the French king-would be pleased if he could hear the repercussions of his theory still haunting Eastern history after 250 years. The philosophers of the Enlightenment were very clever men, they used special terms for special aims, and the myth of “Oriental despotism” is one of the terms used for multiple aims.

The French thinker Louis Althusser analyzes and criticizes Montesquieu in his book Politics and History.2 Althusser first of all tries to “understand” the thinker he is examining. He evaluates works by Montesquieu in general terms and he divides the thoughts into themes. Despotism is one of these themes.

Althusser thinks that Montesquieu’s main aim was not to defend a republic or a democracy against despotism, but rather to support monarchy and make it something that the King would opt for. Therefore, he continually tries to frighten the King with the specter of despotism, a degenerated form of monarchy. He wanted to show the King that if you abuse the monarchy you will become a despot, like that of the Turkish and Chinese states. His warning was, “Be careful not to abuse the monarchy!”

Montesquieu was not an innocent philosopher merely giving advice to his ruler. Philosophers are at least as far removed from innocence as politicians are. However, Althusser does not see things so simple. He thinks that Montesquieu uttered these “great ideas” in order to consolidate the importance of the feudal lords, of whom he was one, in the eyes of the King.

According to Althusser, Montesquieu was trying to bring back the interests of his class that would be lost by centralizing the monarchy.3 Montesquieu was in the camp of the feudal rightist party and he was constantly criticizing Louis XIV-a monarch who represents French monarchy at its peak; he was advising him not to be a despot. If the French king became drawn into the sphere of despotism, then the privileges and rights of the upper classes would be abolished, and they would have to hand over not only their power, but also their wealth to the control of the central authority. Montesquieu lists all the problems inherent in despotism; Louis XIV would continue to distribute offices that had formerly belonged to the aristocrats-a practice started by Cardinal Richelieu-to the newly emerging bourgeoisie, and the logical consequence of this is that Louis XIV would come close to establishing a tyranny.4

Here is what Montesquieu said clearly: Despotism is a regime of fear. There is only one ruler. There are no intermediaries between the King and the people. The despot who rules arbitrarily does stand much of a chance if the people, living like a herd of animals, were to rebel against him en masse. Despotism can not oppose rebellions because the King will be the only target of a huge upsurge, and therefore the life of the king and the continuity of the regime can easily be threatened. However, if there are intermediary classes-of which Montesquieu was a member-who stand between the king and the people, they would be the target of the masses. The king would be free from blame and he would not be a direct target. Finally, Montesquieu concludes: “O Kings! Distance yourself from despotism if you want to protect your reign from the violence of the people.”5

Montesquieu denigrates despotism, particularly in his Letters from Persia, by giving examples from the administration of the Ottoman sultan and the Iranian shah (the Ottomans and the Safavids became the devils in this despotism context and were the parties accused of despotism).6 Yet, as Althusser cleverly recognized, Montesquieu’s problem was not with the Ottoman Empire or Iran. They were just distorted mirrors, fake images, or boogeyman chosen to serve the aim of the feudal rightist opposition that was trying to stand against the king. In short, Althusser wanted the Turks and the Ottomans to be left alone and he was calling for European thought to confess their faults.

Concepts should be perceived as an umbrella rather than as a shopping bag into which we can cram everything. If we use them in the latter fashion then, as implied by Braudel, they tell us nothing, while trying to tell everything. Likewise, Karl Popper-a philosopher of science-was right when he said if we do not limit a concept, a theory, or a scheme and if we try to use it to explain everything, then it is difficult to call it scientific. This is also true for the concept of despotism. If this term is used in an unrestricted sense and is universalized, there will be a superficiality that eliminates all minor differences within the concept. This leads to an evaporation of the deep meanings that are hidden in the nuances, an atrophy of complex thinking and an establishment of thinking based on limits and ease. Because of this we need to talk about multiple despotisms rather than unique despotism.

In The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought, 7 there are four meanings for the term despotism:

1. In political terms, despotism emerged for the first time in the war between the Persians and Greeks in 5th century B.C. However, the term was formulated by Aristotle. According to him, despotism was an administration confined to Asian barbaric people. Therefore, the first conceptual iron door between Asia and Europe was constructed by Aristotle, who is known as “the first teacher” in Islamic philosophy. According to him, Asian peoples are natural born slaves and are accustomed to living under the authority of a single leader. He thought that their power was derived from despotism. However, since Greek (Europeans) people were superior to Asians in terms of rational capability and spirit, they should be the rulers. Thus, despotism was commonly used in a pejorative sense.

2. In the 16th century, the colonial powers that went to discover new lands to plunder frequently remembered Aristotle’s legitimizing despotism concept. The slave trade was inspired by this ancient obsession with despotism. The people who divided the world into two camps, the free and the barbaric, like Machiavelli, Bodin, Hobbes, and Grotius, believed that the soldiers of European republics were more virtuous than those of the barbarians. According to this belief, it was therefore acceptable for the virtuous to convert the slavish barbarians into slaves.

3. In the 17th and 18th centuries two opposing groups in France, the French aristocrats and the Huguenots (French Protestants, some of who took refugee in the Ottoman Empire after the Edict of Nantes) used the term despotism as a tool of criticism for a European state. Therefore, the content of the term despotism expanded to European rulers who were ruling over free people. In conclusion, the term became two-sided; one for “Western despotism” and the other for “Eastern.” The despotism concept of Montesquieu emerged in the context of this century.

4. There is one other thesis which originated from the Swedish-born French liberal Benjamin Constant and was developed by Tocqueville. This thesis argues that the term of despotism had lost its ancient and original meaning after the French Revolution. These discussions allowed despotism to enter European politics and led to many interesting discussions, like “democratic despotism” or “the tyranny of the majority.”

After all these definitions those of Hegel, Marx, Weber, J. Stuart Mill, and Wittfogel follow; these are not very different in the main line of thought, also seeing despotism as something reserved for the East. They use terms “petrification, “resistance to change” and “static” as symbols of despotism and see it as the reason why eastern societies did not create democratic tendencies and a civil society.

Edward Said in his Orientalism has already shown that the concept of “the East” is a fiction. To put it more correctly, it is an image constructed by the European imperial subject in his mind and then imposed on the world. Therefore, there is no fixed “reality” of the East; rather there is only the ideologically distorted image of the “East” constructed over the ages in the Western imagination. Yet, our mission seems more difficult, as Said does not present us with any clue that can differentiate the “factual” and “fictional” faces of the East. He only diagnoses the existence of the fiction and analyzes the roles of the most important actors (Orientalists) in creating such a fiction. This critical tradition of Orientalism developed greatly after the pioneering role of Edward Said. According to his perception, the East has been singly constructed in the West. Arif Dirlik in his The Postcolonial Aura elegantly criticizes Said”s thought and says that Said is obsessed with external Orientalists; however, Dirlik puts it that Said seems to be unable to recognize the internal Orientalists among easterners.

According to Dirlik, Edward Said takes Orientalism as something that has finished; however Dirlik suggests that it is a continuing process. Thus, he advises that we closely examine local compradors. He asks the question that if there were not collaborationists in the “Orient” would it be so easy for a perspective like Orientalism to settle there? Finally, departing from the Chinese example, he tries to display how Asian intellectuals supported and adopted the Orientalist discourse at its birth and throughout its evolution, and how they worked hard in order to make their societies adopt this perspective.8 This striking thought of Arif Dirlik may facilitate our task, as it is very interesting to note how eastern intellectuals adopted a pejorative and humiliating term like eastern despotism for defining their own histories without questioning and criticizing it, how they were able to take on the habit of seeing their societies through the eyes of a Western subject and in the name of liberation and modernization. According to this approach, the commoditization of Chinese culture and its presentation as a static and petrified entity and marketing it like a commodity to Western people are one side of the Orientalization of the Orient itself.

The other side is glorifying the superior Western race, its land and its culture after humiliating the Orient. Furthermore, the East believes that if it possesses superior properties to that of the West it will be also superior and have a free-minded society. To sum up, much as Hegel strived to achieve, Easterners have put themselves onto this scale of frozen, static and unchanging societies because that is what the West thinks of them. So we have to admire the success of the Orientalist project. Lucette Valensi, in his encompassing and striking study, The Birth of the Despot: Venice and the Sublime Porte, draws conclusions from reports of Venetian ambassadors and arrives at how the concept of the “despot” was constructed in Europe. He says that the Ottoman sultan had not been called a despot and the Ottoman order had not been conceptualized as despotism before. On the contrary, the power, brilliance, and progressiveness of the Ottoman administration were often discussed.

However, beginning with the 17th century, the discourses of the Venetian ambassadors started to change. It was strange, according to Valensi, how the “grand Turc” was transformed into a “despot” in the 17th century. He rightfully asks why the Venetian ambassadors had glorified the Ottoman sultan until the 16th century and then humiliated him in the 17th century. It is clear that there was a change in the Venetian perspective of the Ottomans during this century. As Valensi himself elegantly points out: In the end, the ambassadors and then Montesquieu dressed an ancient Greek concept in a Turkish robe. To say it more correctly, that time is not very distant from us. The fantasy of pure power follows us and transforms its vision continuously.9 According to Valensi, Oriental despotism is just an image reflected onto non-western societies by the West in order to satisfy its fantasy of power. Yet, this image reflects the passion of power in the West; a passion that desires to be as powerful as the Ottomans. Voltaire declares the concept of despotism as presented by his contemporary Montesquieu as ridiculous; he defends that a mass of people ruled by a regime led by a single leader cannot survive; even though it might be possible for it to remain standing, it will not be for long. There was no despotic rule according to Voltaire because it could not exist. It is nothing less than a lie to talk about the existence of such a regime.

As I mentioned above, the concept of despotism, which Voltaire found absurd and fictive, has been used with the aim of concealing rather than describing, complicating rather than explaining. However, we should direct our energy and attention to understanding the facts rather than thinking within limits and fantasies. Then, our attempt to find the realities will remind us that our past is not “a foreign country,” it will give us sound clues about our present and past. Likewise, Voltaire, addressing Montesquieu, explained the Ottoman reality to those who thought like Montesquieu. Voltaire underlined that not only were the Turks free, but they also did not discriminate according to class. Their only criterion of privilege was merit. The facts Voltaire provides about the Ottomans are in complete contrast with the fiction. In conclusion, when carefully examined, myths like “Oriental despotism” do not amount to anything more than European fantasies about the East. Seeing despotism as an oriental concept is no more realistic than the Western misconception of the harem, where the sultan is depicted with hundreds of women. As long as we adopt orientalist presumptions without thoroughly questioning them, we will be unable to tell where the fictional ends and where the factual starts.

Notes

1. Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, The John Hopkins University Press, 1976, p.80
2. Louis Althusser, Politika ve Tarih: Montesquieu-Rousseau, (Politics and History: Montesquieu-Rousseau) Ankara: Verso, 1987. Translated by Alaattin Azenel and Ömür Sezgin.
3. For this transitional period, the seigneurs or landlords were delivering their rights to central government, that is, the central state was becoming a universal seigneurate, see W. H. Lewis, The Splendid Century: Life in the France of Louis XIV, Anchor Books, 1957, pp. 73-79.
4. Stephan J. Lee, Aspects of European History, 1494-1789, Routledge, 1986, p. 167.
5. Micheal Curtis, “The Oriental Despotic Universe of Montesquieu&”, Princeton Papers in Near Eastern Studies, n. 3, 1994, pp. 1-33.
6. Montesquieu, Ãran Mektuplari (Letters from Persia), Anka, Istanbul, 2001, p. 88-89. Translated by Muhiddin Gaklu.
7. David Miller (ed), The Blackwell Encylopedia of Political Thought, Blackwell, 1998.
8. Arif Dirlik, Postcolonial Aura: Third World Criticism in the Age of Global Capitalism, Westview Press, 1998
9. Lucette Valensi, The Birth of the Despot: Venice and the Sublime Porte (Despotun Dogusu: Venedik ve Bab-i Âli), tr. A. Turgut Arnas, Baslam, Istanbul: 1994.

In Heroes and Hero Worship Thomas Carlyle attempts to draw a picture of the development of the human intellect by using historical figures as coordinates. Some scholars take a perspective of history in terms of “the environment” or “the times” and “causes,” while others, like Carlyle, have the view that human advancement was not continuous, discrete and rather being made up of a series of jumps; these jumps were caused for the most part by specific individuals whom Carlyle calls “Heroes.” This is like the wave/particle duality of the “nature of light.” In some phenomena light behaves like a wave, while in others it behaves like a particle. One can write a history based on the ideas, cultures, and mediums in which people lived; or the same history can be written by focusing on certain individuals and following them and their actions.

The writings of Carlyle and those of many other authors of that time, of course, are very perceptive. Carlyle is not really trying to be objective on the matter. He has an idea, and he wants to tell us about this idea; while telling you what this idea is about he uses whatever his hands and mind can take hold of. Being so passionate about what is being said is probably a good thing. But if one is over-passionate, there cannot help but be wild swings in the appreciation of the historical person in question. If we use an analogy of a drawing, the historical person is no longer a point on the painting, but rather a hair of the brush. But that should not prevent us from benefiting from writing of Thomas Carlyle.

Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, has a special place in the book under the chapter title “Hero as a Prophet.” In the book, Carlyle declares his admiration of God’s Messenger, “… The word of such a man (Muhammad) is a Voice direct from Nature’s own Heart. Men do and must listen to that as to nothing else; all else is wind in comparison.” Carlyle’s answers to pointed questions on Islam and the Prophet show interesting similarities to Said Nursi’s line of answers to similar questions. “…For a wretched Simulacrum, a hungry Imposter without eyes or heart, practicing for a mess of pottage such blasphemous swindlery, forgery of celestial documents, continual high-treason against his Maker and Self, we will not and cannot take him” reads very much like Said Nursi’s “The Addendum to the Fifteenth Word,” where he makes a long imaginary discussion with Satan and shows how people are inclined to unbelief, thinking that they are evaluating divine revelation from a neutral perspective “…O Satan! Objective reasoning means impartial judgment or not taking sides, but the objective reasoning which you and your disciples suggest is, in fact, taking the part of those in opposition to the Qur’an; not impartiality but an attitude of temporary unbelief. This is really so because to suppose the Qur’an the work of a human being and to build an argument on this supposition is to side with unbelief or falsehood…”

Considering the fact that at that time the West and the East were at odds with one another, and that the means of communications were quite inferior to our times, Carlyle having such an open mind to the “other” puts him in a category of his own with thinkers like Swedenborg, Emerson and Thoreau. I think when we are trying to build bridges between the peoples of the West and the East we should not overlook these early historical representatives of dialogue; this is something that Nursi has foreseen in his writings.