When crime happens, it usually involves two kinds of stakeholders: primary and secondary (McCold 2000). The categorization is based on who is affected the most, ranging from the victims and offenders as the most affected, to the community and the state as the least affected. Currently, conventional criminal justice systems around the world are still heavily punitive, resulting in the state, instead, becoming the primary stakeholders. This is because in most parts of criminal processes, the state acts as the main decisionmaker, often making the victims and offenders feel unheard.

To address this, various scholars argue for an alternative justice process that re-centers victims and offenders as primary stakeholders. Restorative justice, as one kind of alternative justice process, redirects the assumption that crime is a transgression against the state—which is the secondary stakeholder as it is indirectly affected by crime—to the view that crime is a transgression against the primary stakeholders, or the ones directly affected by the crime: the victims, the offenders, and their respective families (Fritz 2005, Wolhuter, Olley and Denham 2009). Programs of restorative justice include mediations between the victims and offenders, family group conferences, and community service.

Restorative justice is beneficial to both parties as it allows the criminal processes to be less punitive and more rehabilitative and nurturing. The benefits of restorative justice are extensive. For the victims, their satisfaction increases thanks to the platform allowing them to express their feelings related to their victimization (Latimer, Dowden and Muise 2005), and their fear of crime decreases (Umbreit, Coates and Kalanj 1994). For offenders, it has been documented that restorative justice reduces the likelihood of reoffending (Bradshaw, Roseborough and Umbreit 2006) and increases compliance with the outcome of criminal processes (Latimer, Dowden and Muise 2005).

These benefits are said to result from the nurturing components of restorative justice (Azman and Mohammad 2012). These components emphasize human interactions such as face-to-face meetups between the victims and the offenders, having an open dialogue, focusing on restoration rather than punishment, and underscoring community-based processes. Furthermore, rather than sidelining the victims, restorative justice encourages their participation, which also directly benefits the offenders due to increased empathy from the interactions.

Restorative justice and spirituality

Restorative justice is a form of social justice. Social justice has been the cause of many renowned spiritual individuals, such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. (Bazemore and Schiff 2001). Although not usually mentioned by many restorative justice advocates and scholars, restorative justice has inherently spiritual elements.

It would be helpful to understand what I mean by spirituality. Spirituality is defined as a person’s relationship to the unknown (Senreich 2013). A bit differently, Zehr (1990)—considered a father of restorative justice—saw spirituality as universal principles and natural laws which cannot be ignored, such as the human need of connectedness. Another scholar defines spirituality with an emphasis on the process of a person’s development of a sense of meaning and purpose (Zastrow 2013).

Regardless of the many definitions, spirituality is agreed upon by various scholars to be different from religiosity (Koenig 2008). This is due to the existence of individuals who do not hold any relationship with God. These people can still be spiritual in ways, such as seeking the meaning and purpose of life with connectedness through other transcendental elements such as nature and the universe. Commonly, regardless of the existence of a belief system, seeking a high level of spirituality is often associated with fostering positive relationships with oneself, others, and the environment (Senreich 2013).

Human relationships are highly valued in restorative justice. In a typical restorative justice encounter, participants—often comprising victims, offenders, and, optionally, their family members—are encouraged to talk and listen to each other (Bender and Armour 2007). This process seeks to encourage empathy. Victims can understand why offenders committed the crime, and offenders understand what victims truly experience after being a victim of their crime. Criminal processes that lack this element of dialogue lack empathy—and often produce frustrated victims, and offenders who are ignorant about the true nature of their crime. This has negative impacts on the well-being of both the victims and the offenders.

Therefore, one of the ultimate goals of restorative justice is healing relationships. Literature points to the common characteristics of offenders who recidivate: their relationships with other people, such as their family members, community members, and others, are often broken (Cochran 2012, Wright and Wright 1993). Although their victim may not be an individual connected to the offender’s life before crime, a healed relationship between an offender with their victims may also be therapeutic for both. As a result, rather than having the mentality of “us vs. them,” restorative justice unites these separate individuals into one healing network.

Another concept associated with spirituality that has a parallel with restorative justice is the search for meaning. After their victimization, victims often require answers to many questions (Wemmers 2002) that are often unanswerable through conventional criminal justice systems. In a way, this can be viewed as victims searching for the “meaning” of their victimization. Furthermore, Umbreit (1989) argued that victims do not want revenge and want fairness that may be achieved in the form of direct accountability. One of the definitions of spirituality presented above sees spirituality as one’s search for meaning and purpose in life (Senreich 2013). This definition is in line with a philosophy of restorative justice that practices transparency and accountability among its participants through dialogues and exchanges of insights.

The concept of direct accountability in restorative justice is achieved in many ways. After a crime, victims often seek answers to many questions very personal to the victimization, such as “Why me?” and “How did you do it?” These questions seem simple, but they represent the victim’s deeper need for resolution and well-being. Not getting the answers to these questions brings the victims to dark places, including often demonizing the offenders. Conventional criminal processes are not able to provide the answers to these questions due to their impersonal and punitive approach to justice and their assumption that when a crime is committed, it is a transgression against the state, not the victims.

Forgiveness is another element of spirituality that is integrated into restorative justice (Bender and Armour 2007). Forgiveness is essentially finding values in others due to several reasons such as humanity and altruism, and this has been succinctly captured by Elkins et al. (1988), who stated that spiritual individuals usually have a mission in life that may include the idea of saving humanity. Furthermore, Elkins et al. denoted that a spiritual person is “tragically aware” in that they realize the flaws of human life. This includes other realities such as death, suffering, or even crime.

Victims who forgive in restorative justice encounters are reported to want to maintain their view that offenders are still human (Ezeihuoma 2018). Victims who forgive also experience a higher level of satisfaction, better mental health, and a lower fear of crime. However, to garner all these benefits, victims have to forgive voluntarily (although the platform to give forgiveness has to be provided). This is where restorative justice comes into the picture. Forgiveness is often an outcome of restorative justice encounters, and most victims and offenders want it to happen.

Achieving spiritual wellness through restorative justice

While restorative justice is a philosophy often discussed in the context of crime and criminal justice, restorative justice undoubtedly offers valuable insights for achieving spiritual wellness in everyday life, too. Social workers, as professionals whose ultimate goal is to achieve an optimal quality of life for their clients, often see spirituality as a gateway to tranquility and well-being. According to Elkins et al. (1988), spirituality has to be humanistic not just for its universality, but for its association with subjective human experience.

On an individual level, spiritual wellness may be achieved through a deep reflection towards connectedness with the self, others, and the environment. To achieve this, restorative justice proponents advocate for human interactions that can provide an individual with a multitude of perspectives which can increase understanding and empathy. Psychologists and social workers often integrate human interactions in various parts of their interventions such as family therapy and community service. Only through these human interactions can individuals be provided with resources for meaning and purpose via the perspectives of others. Therefore, an individual who finds meaning and purpose is an individual who is spiritually well.

Furthermore, restorative justice emphasizes the unconditional view that humanity is flawed. In this regard, the simplest phrase that can be used is “everyone makes mistakes.” This transcendental view of humanity accepts that flaws and mistakes do not demonize a person but humanize them. Appreciating this perspective is a difficult task as it is easy for humans to be struck by the realities of tragedies and is why forgiveness is valuable and can help individuals seeking spiritual enlightenment turn over a new leaf.

Conclusion

Spirituality is increasingly acknowledged as one of the basic human needs. Ignoring spirituality in human development can threaten comprehensive wellbeing. This article explains restorative justice as an alternative approach to justice and shows how the success of restorative justice may be explained partly through its spiritual elements such as forgiveness and human connectedness. However, there is much to learn from the philosophy and practice of restorative justice which can be useful for everyday life. Integrating restorative justice into everyday life, even in the smallest ways, can help foster wellbeing, especially in the spiritual sense.

References

Azman, Azlinda, and Mohd Taufik Mohammad. 2012. “Crime victims support system and restorative justice: Possible implementation in Malaysia.” Journal of Arts and Humanities 1: 18-26.

Bazemore, Gordon , and Mara Schiff. 2001. Restorative community justice: Repairing harm and transforming communities. London: Routledge.

Bender, K, and M Armour. 2007. “The spiritual components of restorative justice.” Victims & Offenders 2: 251-267.

Bradshaw, William, David Roseborough, and Mark S Umbreit. 2006. “The effect of victim offender mediation on juvenile offender recidivism: A meta-analysis.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly 24: 87-98.

Cochran, J C. 2012. “The ties that bind or the ties that break: Examining the relationship between visitation and prisoner misconduct.” Journal of Criminal Justice 40: 433–440.

Elkins, D N, L J Hedstrom, L L Hughes, J A Leaf, and C Saunders. 1988. “Toward a humanistic-phenomenological spirituality: Definition, description, and measurement.” Journal of Humanistic Psychology 28: 5-18.

Ezeihuoma, O P. 2018. “The therapeutic role of forgiveness in restorative justice.” Journal of Law and Criminal Justice 6: 47-54.

Fritz, David. 2005. “A vital Christian presence in social work.” North American Association of Christians in Social Work Convention. Connecticut: North American Association of Christians in Social Work (NACSW).

Koenig, H G. 2008. “Concerns about measuring “spirituality” in research.” The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 196: 349-355.

Latimer, Jeff , Craig Dowden, and Danielle Muise. 2005. “The effectiveness of restorative justice practices: A meta-analysis.” The Prison Journal 85: 127-144.

McCold, Paul. 2000. “Toward a mid-range theory of restorative criminal justice: A reply to the Maximalist model.” Contemporary Justice Review 3: 357-414.

Senreich, E. 2013. “An inclusive definition of spirituality for social work education and practice.” Journal of Social Work Education 49: 548-563.

Umbreit, M S, R B Coates, and B Kalanj. 1994. Victim meets offender: The impact of restorative justice and mediation. Victoria: Australia: Criminal Justice Press.

Umbreit, Mark S. 1989. “Crime victims seeking fairness, not revenge: Toward restorative justice.” Fed. Probation 53: 52.

Wemmers, JoAnne. 2002. “Restorative justice for victims of crime: A victim-oriented approach to restorative justice.” International Review of Victimology 9: 43-59.

Wolhuter, Lorraine, Neil Olley, and David Denham. 2009. Victimology: Victimisation and victims’ rights. Oxon: Routledge-Cavendish.

Wright, K N, and K E Wright. 1993. “Family life and delinquency and crime.” National Criminal Justice Reference Service. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/140517NCJRS.pdf.

Zastrow, C H. 2013. The practice of social work: A comprehensive worktext. Brooks/Cole-Cengage Learning.

Zehr, H. 1990. Changing lenses: Restorative justice for our times. Herald Press.

The Innocence Project, founded in 1992, at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University assists prisoners who could be proven innocent through DNA testing. To date, 280 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA testing, including 17 who served time on death row. These people served an average of 13 years in prison for different reasons like false eyewitness identification, coercing false confessions, withholding evidence from defense, or bad lawyering, before exoneration and release. (From www.dna.gov; www.ornl.gov; www.innocenceproject.org)

I find myself handing my cell phone to the officer at the entrance of the courtroom shortly after getting a speeding ticket after a call from my principal to get to school urgently. My kids are at school, my husband at work; I am all by myself at the court house. I sit at one of the back rows and start waiting. The announcement fills my ears : “People for traffic charges will be called by last name after a few trials.” Wait a minute… My heart normally does not beat this fast. Is it the woman they brought from the back of the room in the orange outfit with handcuffs? Is it her story that makes me so nervous? Or do I finally realize that I would soon get up in front of everybody and answer the frightening question: “Are you pleading guilty?” What am I going to say? I feel as though if I blinked twice, I would find myself in a movie. Is there a way out of this? I remember the radar in the police officer’s hand. He showed me the number on it. My heart starts to beat faster. I remember my friend’s husband going to jail for 3 days after a situation similar to this. A chill passes through my spine. Then there it is, my name. I get up. All eyes are on me. Here is the question. What am I going to say? The radar was wrong?

Suddenly, it feels like a thousand veils in front of me are being lifted one by one. I am dead. All the guardians, officers, and the judge are angels. The people sitting alongside me are other people died with me. The “big angel” is asking me if I did it. It is as if I am watching myself from up above. I hear myself saying, “Yes.” He wants me to come over to the podium and explain myself. I start walking. Everybody is looking at me .You can almost hear a pin drop. What a long distance to cover. It seems like I have been walking forever.

I stand at the podium. I start telling honestly and exactly what happened. On the other side is the police officer, the other “angel” who caught me and brought me here in the first place. The big angel turns his attention to him and asks about my records. The officer tells him I am a “plus one”.

What on earth does that mean?

Never mind. I guess that’s a good thing. After the big angel hears this, I am forgiven. Free to go… No handcuffs… My poor little kids, I can see them again!

I step outside. The cold weather hits my cheeks. I take a deep breath and tell myself to relax and come back to reality. Then I think to myself, what could be more real than death? Well, first of all, it happens every single day. Every minute actually, millions of times. The reality is that I will also die. I don’t know when and where, with whom and doing what. I just know for sure that some day I will die to be born into a new world, and that first, I have to answer questions. Is there a possibility of there being no questioning? If this beautiful country has rules and regulations, how can this universe being so big, crowded, sophisticated, and wonderful, not have any laws and regulations? Furthermore, how can you not be questioned when you do not obey them?

Maybe more than death itself, I am dreading the questioning part, millions of times more than that moment ten minutes ago when I was worried about that one simple question. My blood pressure peaked for a single traffic ticket. How am I going to handle answering and accounting for my entire life? Will there be an angel telling that I am a plus one? What a relief that would be!

I recall the story of a man who comes to Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and says “Who shall give life to decaying bones?” The Qur’an relates the story and answers: “He shall give them life who first gave them life, and He is All-Knowing concerning all creation,” (Ya Sin, 36: 78-79) drawing attention to the fact that making something the first time, creating something original, is much more difficult than making it after the plans are once complete and the outcome is seen. So, I start thinking, that when I die and I am about to answer for what I did with my life, God Almighty has the power to create the scene, the places that I shed my DNA at, and myself from a stain as small as a salt crystal and even smaller, and ask, “Did you commit that sin” right there and then?

What am I going to say? There is no possibility of God’s radar or cameras being wrong. I will most probably find myself saying “yes” just as I did at court today, confessing everything with utmost honesty. That is if I can speak under all that stress.

It is not only the “what I did” part that makes me nervous about answering questions, but what I “did not do” as well. I think about the past. Have I been using it wisely, or did I just waste it, for it seemed like it was something given to me for free.

I am a shy person by nature. It is not easy for me to get used to a new neighborhood, community, or school. How am I going to manage to go into a new world, see and live with totally new creatures that I have never seen before, like angels, spirits, and jinn. Contrastingly, I am wondering about what the other world is really going to be like. What is it like to not have any responsibilities, not having to pray or fast, wash the dishes, prepare dinner, do the laundry… ever?

At least I believe, the new world where we will all die to be born into, there will be no wrong guilty sentences. Everything promised from the beautiful paradise to the scary hell will be there. No wrongful convictions, no unfair treatment. But still, am I ready? Or is there going to be a time that I would totally feel ready? On the other hand, I feel like an ignorant person living in a humble home in a small village—a person who is invited to the palace by the King, to this festive occasion, with the most important people; a person who has a chance to receive precious gifts and drink the potion for eternity, but is still hesitating to go; a person wants to give a present to the King but is unsure whether she has anything to offer that would please him. Besides, wasn’t whatever this person took with her to the King given by the very King himself? When I prayed five times a day, didn’t I do it with the healthy body He gave me? If I made donations, wasn’t it with the belongings He handed over to me in the first place. It is as if for every good I did, I was paid beforehand. Then, even if I do whatever He asks me to do, I can’t be hopeful because of what I do. Rather, I would build my hopes on how generous, compassionate and loving He is, setting my intentions right with utmost sincerity.

There is one other reason that would make me eager to leave this world and go to the other side. It’s because of all those emotions, talents, intellect, and love—faculties of our body and soul which we are not and won’t be using in this world because of reasons like not knowing, not being trained, being too young, too old, sick, or just missing out on the windows of opportunities. Do they not need to get out? Aren’t they like the baby in the womb, squashed in there and wanting a greater place to grow? Seriously, what percent of my brain and heart am I really using? If God gave me more potential in them, it seems impossible to me that he won’t create a place that they will grow and flourish. And I can’t think of a better place to be when that happens.

…

Finally, I found where I had parked my car and the keys that always fall into the black hole of my bottomless purse. I head back to work. I missed first period, but I need to make at least the third to fulfill my plans. It is the time of the day when everybody is already at work. I’m lucky; there is no traffic at all. The roads are so empty. In fact, there are no cars in front of me on the spacious road. Suddenly, it becomes so appealing to me to go a little faster. Just a little bit… My right foot starts itching… Who would know at this time of the day, in the middle of nowhere anyways? Maybe just one more time…

Nihal Zeren Dila is M.S. in Microbiology and Molecular Biology, GMU, Science Teacher at Pinnacle Academy, VA.

they set out for eternity

And wherever the journey led, they carried their gift of radiance.

Gleams of Beauty unfading so entranced their souls,

they heard at night in their dreams angels

singing of bliss and the music of other worlds.

More enchanted, more earnestly they searched in every place, and

yearned for their homeland

the dream of a beloved of matchless excellence, hero or saint or both.

Without pause, they strove on in high, passionate hope;

some mysteries of life they unraveled

as they journeyed apace, and at last obtained the promised happiness.

Lovers of the Light are pledged to a long journey, its end Unseen:

the very roads are proud upon which they journey:

the rhythm of their surging on is Certainty,

and their rank as slaves of the King.

Whoever disdains that rank, disdains his own good fortune,

Exchanging hope for a regret everlasting:

he shall not attain, not ever,

the further horizon of all that is.

Only passionate lovers of the Ideal,

may behold that far horizon,

eternity itself impressed upon their faces,

their names rehearsed in hymns of praise.

They desire life reborn only to be martyred again,

hearts forever surrendered to the Light,

forever remembered in our hearts.

They raise now light-filled eyes,

in their hands translucent beakers held aloft, at ease,

filled to their brim from rivers of Paradise.

This story has been related in all the major monotheistic faiths, indicating a deeper allegorical meaning of a universal example transcending all times and cultures.

It is well worth analyzing the psychological, social and moral aspects of such stories to shed light on events in our lives and times.

In this story, Joseph represents the human conscience that enables us to be sincere, responsible and accountable, as well as altruistic and generous. The brothers of Joseph represent the carnal self which deafens, blinds, and silences the human soul in the face of spiritual and material oppression. The carnal self suppresses the sensitivity to overcome oppression and injustice as well as appreciating beauty and benefaction.

Joseph’s brothers threw him into a well in their jealousy towards him. This is allegorical to an ineffective human conscience that has been made to fall prey to passing whims and desires. It is like falling down into a pit that has only one way for escape, as opposed to rising up to overcome the challenges of humanity. In a similar perspective, Joseph represents the characteristics of the noblest men in history. These include dedication, devotion, love, responsibility, and generosity.

Joseph is then rescued from the well by people from a passing-by caravan, coming from a long distance, where otherwise there is no one that stops at this well. This brings to mind the thought that, at a certain point in history, human conscience and good-will will be lost and forgotten to such a degree that it will be ignored and left on its own. It will be like a piece of jewel deep in the earth or a small amount of water in the vast dessert, extremely precious yet inaccessible and undiscovered by the masses.

The entrapment of Joseph in the well represents the downturns of human history, where darkness and a kind of hopelessness rule over societies, in a similar vein as it is manifested in our own personal lives. There are points in our lives when we seem lost in the dark and most often in some sort of depression and despair. However, these dark points in our lives are constantly followed by some sort of guidance and enlightenment. The wisdom behind this dark-light principle clarifies to us that we are under constant trial in our lives. They call for us to learn who we are and where we are heading to in life.

The rescue of Joseph from the well represents the bright and enlightened times of human history, as well as in our personal lives. In these times there is a relief from hardship, suffering or depression for some. A sense of expansion, understanding and enlightenment surrounds us and increases our appreciation for the endless numbers of provisions we are given. In our lives and in the lives of societies, this principle points to a time of justice, peace, understanding and great spiritual development.

The crying Jacob, soft-hearted, compassionate yet dominant, and enduring in the face of adversity, represents the great spiritual and material mentors of humanity. For years they persevered patiently and consistently, while sipping the anguish of separation until humanity re-unites with the long-lost Joseph. People who represent Jacob will learn to live under conditions where they will not be understood or appreciated, possibly even by their own children. Hence, the greatest prayer of Jacob is “I only disclose my anguish and sorrow to God” (Qur’an 12:86).

After being rescued by the caravan and taken to Egypt, Joseph was sold as a slave, where he later became a King. Although a ruler with great power in his hands, he does not forget his father Jacob or his brothers. Wealth and power does not change him, nor does it make him oblivious of his responsibilities or degrade his character. In fact his prayer “Take my soul to You as one who submitted unto You, and join me with the righteous” (Qur’an 12:101) shows us very clearly how concerned he was about the state in which he would die, since the one who does not fear the consequences of his/her actions is someone who cannot be trusted.

This story also brings to mind the recurring presence of certain principles in our lives.

Joseph was thrown into a well, then later was given the opportunity (as a King) to call to account the oppression of his brothers towards him, who ultimately asked him to forgive them. This indicates that events revolve in a circular manner; while it is daylight for some it is nighttime for others. Likewise, today many suffer in agony and their identities are smeared and blotched, while others live in oblivion and recklessness. A time will come when those who are oppressed will call to account those who thought they are not accountable to anyone.

It is not known how long Joseph remained in the well and how he survived there; however, from this story we can see that the Creator, closer to all more than they are to themselves, enabled the caravan to be a means to rescue Joseph from a situation in which there was no hope for escape. This is a poignant reminder that we are never alone, or constantly at a loss, and although we are in essence fragile and powerless, the Most Gracious Creator creates a way of exit from the harshest of situations.

As a young man, Joseph was not only physically attractive but, more essentially, he had a strong spiritual magnetism and aura. His immense loyalty, sincerity and faith were the pillars of his character and the reason why his father loved him so dearly. Jacob also knew through his gifted foresight that Joseph was a beloved of the Creator; hence, this would mean that the trials and tribulations he would face would be much stronger than those most others faced.

The modesty and chastity of Joseph was equally as great as his captivating aura. This was manifested when he was working as a servant in Egypt after he was sold as a slave there. The wife of the King was powerful, young and attractive and wanted to abuse the good looks of Joseph and seduce him. At this point, we see the great will-power and chastity of Joseph, where he is protected and saved from committing a great mistake, as he says, “God forbid!” (Qur’an 12:23). Thus, the protection and help of the Creator becomes manifest under the direst conditions. The other reason why Jacob cried and was so worried and concerned for Joseph was maybe that he knew he would face great trials in his life and therefore constantly asked the Lord to protect, guide and help him under these conditions.

A final lesson to be learnt from Joseph’s strong personality and unique character is that he did not punish his brothers when they came to request from him some provisions after he became King. If he had wanted to take revenge, he could have easily done so, but he chose not to. On the contrary, he demonstrated how generous and forgiving he was. After the hypocrisy, the deception and the treachery of his brothers towards him, he finally says to them, “No reproach this day shall be on you. May God forgive you; indeed He is the Most Merciful of the Merciful” (Qur’an 12:92). Hence, Joseph teaches a lesson by forgiving his brothers who wanted him to be forgotten, lost and even dead.

Sebnem Unlu, PhD, is a Research Faculty at University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, USA.

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.

The apple

Most people think of an apple as a perfect example of beauty, joy, and health. Indeed, the apple is endowed with a shape that is appealing to the human eye, a beautiful range of colors, a pleasant taste and a long list of health benefits for humans. These , (1) containing two types of fibers that work in tandem to lower blood cholesterol levels, (2) helping to prevent heart disease, (3) cancer-protective activity, (4) helping remove toxic substances, such as lead and mercury from the blood, and (5) helping to reduce the risk of kidney stones. A major survey published in the May 2004 issue of the Nutrition Journal provided a review of 85 studies and identified a number of health benefits of apples, including the ability to reduce the risk of cancer, heart disease, asthma, and type II diabetes when compared to other fruits and vegetables. In addition, eating apples has also been associated with increased lung function and increased weight loss.1

Now consider all these benefits and look at how we get apples. An apple tree knows nothing about humans. An apple knows nothing about the human visual system, tastes, or body functions. How is it then that an apple is so appealing and beneficial for humans?

Honey

Honey is one of the substances produced by honeybees. In addition to being a nutritive sweetener, medical research has also found that the unique composition of honey makes it useful as an antimicrobial agent and antioxidant. These effects are due to a substance called “propolis,” which the honeybees make by combining tree sap with their own secretions. They use propolis as an anti-bacterial, anti-viral, and anti-fungal substance to protect the honeycomb. It has been found that propolis contains well-researched anti-cancer substances, such as caffeic acid methyl caffeate, phenylethyl caffeate, and phenylethyl dimethylcaffeate. Daily consumption of honey raises the levels of protective antioxidant compounds in the blood level in humans, according to research presented at the 227th meeting of the American Chemical Society in Anaheim, CA, March 28, 2004.2 Furthermore, researchers have discovered that these substances in propolis prevent colon cancer in animals.3 New studies are also looking into honey as an agent for increasing athletic performance and as a wound-healing agent. Honey has been a popular traditional remedy for many medical conditions.

Now consider these benefits of honey and how we obtain honey: Honeybees know nothing about humans. In fact, if they are agitated, they may sting humans and sometimes cause their death. The honey they make, however, has so many healing benefits that honey has been used in many foods, herbal supplements and, beauty products. The same question comes to mind: How did this come to be?

Milk

Milk is produced by mammals. In particular, cows, sheep, and goats produce milk that is consumed in many cultures.

Cow’s milk, for example, and the dairy products derived from it, promote strong bones by being a very good source of vitamin D and calcium, and a good source of vitamin K-three nutrients essential to bone health. Calcium has long been recognized for its role in building healthy bones. This is not the only benefit of calcium, however. Recent studies have shown other benefits such as helping protect colon cells from cancer-causing chemicals, helping prevent the bone loss that can occur as a result of menopause or certain conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis, and helping to prevent migraine headaches in those who suffer from them.

Other essential nutrients in milk include iodine, a mineral essential for thyroid function, riboflavin and vitamin B12, which are necessary for cardiovascular health and energy production, vitamin A, a critical nutrient for immune function, and potassium, a nutrient important for cardiovascular health.4 Researchers have found that a beneficial fatty acid called CLA inhibited several types of cancer in mice. Test tube studies also indicated that this compound kills human skin cancer, colorectal cancer and breast-cancer cells. There are other indications of benefits of CLA, such as helping lower cholesterol and prevent atherosclerosis.(5)

The cow, the sheep, and the goat know nothing about humans. They do not know how our body functions or what our sense of taste is. Yet, the milk they produce serves as a tasty and healthy food. The same question arises: How did this come to be?

Humans also produce other nutritious foods from milk, such as cheese and yogurt. Yogurt is particularly interesting because it is made with the help of beneficial bacteria called L. bulgaricus and S. thermophilus. Everyone has bacteria inside their bodies; especially in the stomach and intestines where food is broken up and digested. Eating yogurt encourages the beneficial types of bacteria to multiply in your digestive track, helping protect the system against harmful microorganisms that cause stomach upsets and infection. Some people cannot drink milk due to lactose intolerance, yet they can consume yogurt. The emerging health benefits of yogurt include boosting the immune system, lowering serum cholesterol, and helping in the prevention and management of certain cancers. In addition, yogurt is a good source of protein, calcium, potassium, vitamins B12, and riboflavin.

Now let us turn to the two perspectives that explain, or attempt to explain, how these health-giving substances reach us: The “bounty” perspective and the “chance” perspective. Let us explore these two perspectives in more detail. First, the bounty perspective.

The bounty perspective

The bounty perspective suggests that the delicious and beneficial foods we enjoy in this world are bounties of a God with infinite knowledge and wisdom.(6, 7) God knows us because He has created us. He knows what benefits us and what harms us. He loves us and He wants to show us His love through signs. The bounties, which include foods among others, are designed to benefit us and appeal to us. In return for these bounties, He expects us to recognize Him as our Lord, our Creator, and Sustainer. He expects us to feel thankful to Him and to express our thanks through worship.

The basis for the bounty perspective can be found in the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Christianity, as well as in the Qur’an. The first example is from the Bible: Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if received with thanksgiving (1 Tim. 4). Another example, from David’s Psalms as they appear in the Bible states: Be thankful to Him, and bless His name. (Psalms, 100). A striking example from the works of St. Paul is the following:

And so He gathered together a people for Himself, and fostered them with many liberal distributions of His bounty, and, after so often finding them most ungrateful, ever exhorted them to repentance and sent out the voices of the universal company of the prophets to prophesy.

The sixth chapter of the Qur’an is entitled “Cattle,” and mentions some benefits of domesticated animals, as well as dispersing some myths and false beliefs about them:

And of cattle (He created) beasts of burden and those which are fit for slaughter only; eat of what God has given you and do not follow the footsteps of the Satan; surely he is your manifest enemy. (An’am 6:142)

The following Qur’anic verses mention cattle and milk explicitly:

And God has sent down water from the cloud and therewith given life to the earth after its death; most surely there is a sign in this for a people who would listen. And most surely there is a lesson for you in the cattle; We give you to drink of what is in their bellies-from between the feces and the blood-pure milk, easy and agreeable to swallow for those who drink. And of the fruits of the palms and the grapes-you obtain from them intoxication and goodly provision; most surely there is a sign in this for a people who ponder. (Nahl 16:65-67)

In the following verse, the honeybee is mentioned by name, as well as the various semi-liquid substances that they produce, including honey:

And your Lord revealed to the bee saying: Make hives in the mountains and in the trees and in what they build: Then eat of all the fruits and walk in the ways of your Lord submissively. There comes forth from within it a beverage of many colors, in which there is healing for men; most surely there is a sign in this for a people who reflect. (Nahl 16:68-69)

The chance perspective

The chance perspective is based on Darwin’s theory of evolution, where there is no place for a merciful God.9, 10 It attributes the phenomenon of these health-giving foods to chance working with natural selection over time. It asserts that early humans or their supposed ancestors have experienced a random mutation (a change in the genetic code), which caused some of them to like apples. Those who liked apples ate them and benefited in turn. These benefits have given them a competitive advantage over others who did not like apples. Those who liked apples were able to survive better under difficult circumstances and produced more offspring than others. Through many generations, those humans who did not like apples have disappeared and today almost all humans enjoy and benefit from apples.

Consequences

The consequences of the two perspectives are completely different. If all health-giving natural products are loved for themselves, if they are thoughtlessly delighted in only for the material pleasures that they yield, that love is merely the love of self. Also, those pleasures are transient and bring pain. People with this perspective are likely to be selfish, stingy, and wasteful. But, if they are loved as favors proceeding from Almighty God’s mercy and as fruits of His munificence, and if pleasure is obtained from them with good judgment by appreciating the degree of kindness in that munificence and favor, then this is both gratitude and is a pain-free pleasure. People with this perspective are likely to be thankful, prudent, and caring for those who are in need.

To better understand the difference in the nature and consequences of these two perspectives let us consider the following parable 11:

If a mighty king were to bestow a gift on you, such as an apple, there would be two joys in that apple for you. The first of these is that the apple would be loved because it is an apple, and there would be a pleasure peculiar to and to the extent of the apple. This love does not concern the king. A person, who puts the apple to his mouth and eats it in the king’s presence, without offering his appreciation to the king, loves the apple itself and his own soul rather than the king. The king is likely not to be pleased with this person’s attitude, despite the fact that he enjoys the apple. Moreover, the pleasure that the apple gives is very limited and passes quickly. After the apple is eaten it is gone, only regret remains.

As for the second kind of joy, it is for the royal favor that is demonstrated by means of the apple. One who holds the apple precious, as if it were the sample and embodiment of a royal favor, shows that he loves his king. Moreover, the pleasure in that fruit, which is a sort of container for the favor, is such that it is far greater than the pleasure obtained from a thousand apples. This pleasure, then, is the essence of thankfulness. This love is a respectful love for the king.

Conclusion

We have presented two explanations for the phenomenon of the presence of health-giving foods in nature and for the abundance of appealing and beneficial food on Earth, such as apples, honey, and milk that are produced by plants and animals that know nothing about humans. The bounty explanation asserts that these are the bounties of a Merciful and Infinitely-Wise Creator who expects us to recognize these as bounties and be thankful to Him. The chance perspective attributes this situation to random mutations and natural selection working over time. Because God works through laws in this world, we cannot see His hand of mercy in action with the eyes in our heads. However, can we see signs of this mercy with the eyes in our heart? This is a challenge for the inquisitive mind.

That is God, your Lord, there is no god but He; the Creator of all things, therefore serve Him, and He has charge of all things. Vision comprehends Him not, and He comprehends (all) vision; and He is the Knower of subtleties, the Aware. Indeed there have come to you clear proofs from your Lord; whoever will therefore see, it is for his own soul and whoever will be blind, it shall be against himself and I am not a keeper over you. (An’am 6:102-104) 

References

1. Mateljan, George, Healthier Eating Guide and Cookbook, Health Valley Foods, 1987.
2. Mateljan, George, “The World’s Healthiest Foods,” on the web at http://www.whfoods.com/.
3. Mateljan, Healthier Eating Guide and Cookbook.
4. Mateljan, “The World’s Healthiest Foods.”
5. ibid.
6. Nursi, S., The Words, Kaynak A.S., Izmir, Turkey, 1997.
7. Abdel Haleem, M.A.S., (trans.), “Chance or Creation,” original attributed to al-Jahiz (AD 776-869), Garnet Publishing, Berkshire, UK, 1995.
8. Pao, D., “Thanksgiving: An Investigation of a Pauline Theme,” New Studies in Biblical Theology 13, Apollos-Intervarsity Press, 2002.
9. Darwin, C., Charles Darwin’s Letters: A Selection 1825-1859, Cambridge University Press, NY, 1996.
10. Boyd, R., How Human Evolved, W.W. Norton & Co., 2002.
11. Nursi, The Words. 

Meeting with the Monk Bahira

The Prophet’s first meeting with a Christian occurred when he, as a young boy aged between nine or twelve, joined his uncle’s merchant caravan for a trip to Syria.¹ The Christian whom the Prophet Muhammad encountered was the monk, Bahira,² who was living in Bostra, a Roman colonial city.³ Monk Bahira was known for his belief that a prophet was soon to appear among the Arabs. Bahira had studied old manuscripts, where he had learned of the coming of a final prophet, and he was convinced that this prophet would appear in his own lifetime. He was particularly interested in the Arab merchants who visited Syria, to see if his conviction would come true.

Bahira’s attention was struck in particular by a caravan from Makka, which to his amazement, was shaded by a cloud that hovered closely above them. The cloud moved as the caravan moved, and did not go any further when they stopped; it was as if it were providing shade for a person or people in the group. When he also noticed that a tree lowered its branches over the caravan to provide further shade, he immediately realized that this caravan must contain an extraordinary person or persons. He invited all of the individuals in the caravan to a meal at his place, but none of their faces revealed the capacity of the expected Prophet. He inquired if there was anyone who had not joined the meal; the answer he received was that Muhammad had been left behind to watch the caravan. He was keen to see Muhammad; and when he actually saw him he realized that he carried all the signs that the awaited Prophet was to have, as describ-ed in his books.⁴ He told Muhammad’s uncle to take him back to Makka as soon as possible in order to guard him against potential enemies.⁵

This incident is used by some Western scholars as a basis to claim that Muhammad learned about the Judeo-Christian tradition from this monk, and that he later converted this knowl-edge into a new religion, i.e. Islam.⁶ However, it would not be logical or reasonable to adopt such an idea; Prophet Muhammad was far too young to acquire such an immense knowledge and the conversation between the monk and Muhammad was not a protracted one.

Waraqa ibn Nawfal

Prophet Muhammad also had some encounters with one of the known Arab Christians in Makka, Waraqa ibn Nawfal. Waraqa was a respected man of his time and a well-known Christian scholar. When the Prophet received his first Qur’anic revelation on Mount Hira, it had a great impact on him. Following this unusual experience, he went home, feeling ill. His wife Khadija took the Prophet to Waraqa and told him about the revelation.⁷ After listening to Prophet Muhammad, Waraqa said that it was Gabriel, the Angel of Revelation, who had come to him, just as he had come to Moses, and he added, “I wish I were young..⁸

Waraqa was an open-minded man; he converted from paganism to Christianity and also understood the features of the revelation that had been given to Muhammad. He sincerely supported Muhammad as a Christian believer when he understood that he was the awaited prophet, after Moses and Jesus, peace be upon them. Waraqa encouraged Muhammad to continue his call, without any doubt that God would protect him. This is a fine example of cooperation between a well known Christian scholar and the would-be Prophet.

The Abyssinian King (Negus) and The First Immigrants

When the Messenger of God began to declare his message openly, the Makkan pagans started to severely oppose him and the new Muslims, making many problems for them. Several Muslims died, with even more being humiliated and alienated. The Prophet realized that Makka was becoming a difficult place for Muslims to live in. He had his uncle as his protector; but there were many Muslims who had no protection from the aggressions of the Makkan pagans. He decided to send some of them to Abyssinia, especially those who had no effective protection; Abyssinia at the time was ruled by a Christian ruler. The Prophet told the group that King (Negus) of Abyssinia was a Christian, so they would be safe there.⁹ It is likely that Prophet Muhammad had some knowledge that the King was a peaceful and lenient ruler.

At the outset, eleven Muslims immigrated to Abyssinia. Later, they were joined by about 83 adult Muslims, women and men.¹⁰ Abyssinia was the Prophet’s choice; he felt that Christians were closer to Muslims than the Makkan pagans. When the first Muslim guests arrived there, they met with the King. Ja’far, as leader of the immigrants, gave the Prophet’s letter to the King, which read: “I have sent my cousin Ja’far to you, accompanied by a small number of Muslims; if he comes to you, receive them in hospitality . . .” The King welcomed them and promised to protect them from their enemies. In the royal presence a question was put to them: “What do you say concerning Jesus?” The spokesman for the group replied, “concerning Jesus we can only say what our Prophet has taught us: Jesus is the servant and messenger of God, the spirit and word of God, whom God entrusted to the Virgin Mary.” When the King Negus heard this testimony, he picked up a twig from the ground and said, “I swear, the difference between what we believe about Jesus, the Son of Mary, and what you have said is not greater than the width of this twig.”¹¹

When the Makkans heard that the Muslims had begun to live within the Christian community peacefully, they sent a delegation of learn-ed people to the King to persuade him to deport the Muslims from Abyssinia. There was a debate in front of the King between the Muslims and the Makkan delegation about what and how the Muslims believed. After the end of the debate, the King rejected the requests of the Makkans along with their gifts.¹² This was the first helping hand for the young but frail Muslim community from a Christian ruler.

The Delegation of Najran Christians

No doubt the most important interaction between the Christians and the Prophet was the visit of the Najran delegation to Madina. Makka and Madina had a very small Christian population (Waraqa ibn Nawfal was one of them). The majority of Christian residents lived in Najran. The Prophet’s first important encounter with Christian clergies was in the 9th year of Hijra (AD 631), one or two years before his death.

Prophet Muhammad had been sending official letters to different countries and their rulers, inviting them to Islam. Among these were two different invitations that had been sent to Najran with Khaled ibn al-Walid and Ali ibn Abi Talib.¹³ At that time the Najran Christians had a highly organized religious life. Before Islam, foreign teachers had even visited the town, such as the Italian priest Gregentius, which had deepen-ed their religious knowledge.¹⁴ Few of the Najran Christians converted to Islam; the majority of them did not change their religion after these invitations. Prophet Muhammad sent a representative to them, Mughira ibn Shu’ba, who was sent to explain the invitations and the religion of Islam. After discussions with Mughira, the Christians of Najran decided to send a group of people to visit the Prophet. The delegation was made up of about 60 well-educated Christians: A bishop, his 45 scholars, and 15 men. Their intention was to learn the nature of the revelations Prophet Muhammad was receiving.¹⁵

When the Najran delegation reached Madina, they debated with the Prophet in an investigatory dialogue for two or three days in the mosque (Masjid) of Madina. Prophet Muhammad allow-ed them to pray in the mosque (Masjid al-Nabawi) where the Muslims prayed. The whole incident was the first occurrence of peaceful dialogue between Christians and Muslims; it was the first time that Christians prayed in a mosque.¹⁶

Prophet Muhammad warmly welcomed the Najran delegation and provided them with a place to stay in Madina, in a secure place close to his mosque. He even ordered that their tent be pitched for them by the Muslims. However, the Najran delegation and Prophet Muhammad were not able to reach a solution in theological terms. At the end of these exchanges, the Najran Christians told the Prophet: “O, Abu al-Qasim, we decided to leave you as you are and you leave us as we are. But send with us a man who can adjudicate things on our properties, because we accept you.” The delegation was granted their request and a written assurance was provided by the Prophet that their lives, property, and religion would be protected. He made witnesses sign this undertaking.¹⁷ The Najran Christians were the first Christian community with whom the Prophet had a jizyah 18 agreement. At the beginning of the meeting, they had disagreements with the Prophet about the concept of the Trinity, but later on they were able to make a social pact.¹⁹ This contract was an initial step that would lead to further developments.

Conclusion

As Muhammad Hamidullah states “of all the religions, the Prophet found Christianity the most sympathetic, although with certain serious reservations.”20 Accepting differences to be “as they are” was the first step in establishing peaceful relations between the Christians and Prophet Muhammad some fourteen hundred years ago.

It is apparent that Christians and Muslims believe in and pray to the same God, the Creator of the universe. Both Muslims and Christians ask for help and forgiveness from the same God. Both of them declare the importance of “peace”; so, it is only natural to expect that the followers of the two traditions would be able to establish peace together all around the world.

Local problems do not stay local any longer. Today’s local issue will be tomorrow’s global problem. Struggles, wars, clashes, hunger, ecological crises, the threat of nuclear holocaust, and the colonization of humanity are not just a particular religion’s problem; they are worldwide problems that affect all believers. “There is no local situation that is not impinged upon by the wider cultural-political situation.”21 Understanding each other well, respecting others, and accepting others as they are would be a great step toward solving the global problems of the different religious communities. The more believers share and understand the global crisis the more suitable a habitat for human kind this world will become.

Footnotes 

1. Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources, Allen & Unwin, U.K., 1983, p. 29.
2. In some sources the name of the monk is mentioned “Sergius.” See: Mustafa Fayda, “Bahira” TDV Islam Ansiklopedisi, Istanbul 1991, IV, 486.
3. Under Alexander Severus (222-235) Bostra became a Roman colony. See: S. Vailhé, “Bostra,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume II, Online Edition, 1999 by Kevin Knight.
4. For details P.S: Ibn Hisham, Abd al-Malik, al-Sirat al Nabaviyyah, Egypt 1955, I, 180-183.
5. M. Lings, Muhammad, p. 29-30.
6. Mustafa Fayda, “Bahira” TDV Islam Ansiklopedisi, Istanbul 1991; Daniel, Islam and the West, p.101,105,109.
7. Ibn Hisham, I, 236-238.
8. Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma’il, Sahih al-Bukhari, Dar al-Fikr, (Arabic-English Edition), I, 2-3
9. Ibn Hisham, I, 217-221.
10. Ibn Hisham, I, 221-230
11. R. Marston Speight, God Is One: The Way of Islam (New York: Friendship Press, 1989), pp. 1-2.
12. Ibn Hisham, I, 233-238
13. Name of a valley in North Yemen, where there was a Christian population inhabiting the highest range in the Arabian Peninsula at that time.
14. Hamidullah, Muhammad Rasulullah, p. 103.
15. Ibn Hisham, I, 575.
16. Ibn Hisham, I, 575-577.
17. http://www.dehai.org/archives/dehai_news_archive/ oct02/0640.html, (12/11/2004)
18. Jizyah: A tax paid by non-Muslims living in a Muslim state. Since the non-Muslims are exempt from military service and taxes imposed on Muslims, they must pay this tax in compensation. It guarantees them security and protection. If the state cannot protect those who paid jizyah, then the amount they paid is returned to them.
19. Ahmet Bostanci, Hz Peygamber’in Gayri Muslimlerle Iliskileri, Ragbet Yayinlari, Istanbul 2001, p. 60, 167
20. Hamidullah, Muhammad Rasulullah, p. 76.
21. David Tracy, “Practical Theology in the Situation of Global Pluralism,” in (ed.) L. Mudge -J. Poling, The Promise of Practical Theology, Fortress Press 1983, p. 140.

“Welcome travelers! You may enter the king’s palace, and you may benefit from everything for free. When your time is due the king is going to take you to a better palace where you can stay forever. Respect the rules of the palace, and each other. Thank the king who provides everything to you, who built this palace just for you. The beauties of the palace are just samples, not the real bounties. Do not let them make you forget the owner of the palace, and the short time you have.” The King.

Then we entered the palace. There were servants, who welcomed us. We were all amazed by the palace, and its beauties. The servants took us to the bath. They cleaned us with rose-scented soaps, and jasmine oil. They brought us clean white cashmere clothes.

After we were all clean, the servants took us to a feast. They showed us our seats. The table was full of different kinds of food and fruits. We were starving; had not eaten for days. We started to eat. They were all delicious. After dinner, they took us to small houses. Inside the house every thing was made of silk, even the curtains. Outside, there were all kinds of trees, waterfalls, birds, fountains; even the sun was shining differently. I forgot that we were in the middle of a desert.

Days were passing very fast. Actually, it was a palace designed to serve us. When we were altogether, one of us stood up and said, “There cannot be a better place than this. I think this is the place where we should stay.” Most of us agreed with him, but I stood up, and said; “ But my friend, do not forget what we read on the gate, there is a king who owns the palace, and we all have a short time to stay here, and he offers us a better place if we act according to his will.” He replied, “I don’t think there is a king. Maybe there was, but he is not here any more. They wrote it when he was here, but he left the palace, so we are its owners.” Most of the people agreed with him, and said; “Yeah, we are the owners!” By this time, we were divided into basically three groups. One who claimed that they were the owners of the palace, and believed that they would stay forever in it. Second, the biggest group, who believed that there was a king, but they did not care about him. They were just so into the beauties of the palace, and they were drunk most of the time. Third, me, and some of my friends, the smallest of the groups, believed that there was a king, and we had a short time in the palace. Everything we had was a sample of the real bounties of the king in the better place where he was going to take us.

The first group, who claimed that they were the owners of the palace, started to treat the servants badly and violate all the rules. The second group also let them do whatever they wanted; they did not care about what was going on. The travelers in the caravan turned the palace into a hell.

With these thoughts on my mind I was looking at the books of old times. They were mostly history books, which were about the people who lived in this palace before us. I took a book, written three centuries ago; its name was Age of Rose. I turned the pages slowly; it was talking about an unbelievable period of time which lasted almost a thousand years in this same palace. There were people who lived a wonderful life in peace and joy. They were also righteous and thankful to the king. So, not all times have been like mine in this palace. Unfortunately, I came here in a wrong time, but as they say; there is for sure a reason for everything happening. The book was also mentioning about the outside of the palace, where people lived happily forever. Reading this chronicle I was comforted with an expectation promising an eternal glorious life.

I have not lost my hope for the future of this palace. I am striving hard with my friends to remind others of the King’s message, so that they become conscious about the purposes and wisdom behind their transient presence here. I am praying that the All-Merciful King will guide us to His Path and we all enter His Abode happily. 

Prophetic Attributes

We will examine Daniel in terms of possessing the required attributes for a messenger. We can understand the process of choosing someone to be a messenger for humanity if we compare it to how we choose someone to do an important job; this person must possess certain qualities. Our requirements become much more stringent in accordance with the importance of the duty. After the candidate has been found we support this person.

…to God belongs the highest comparison. (Qur’an 16:60)

There are some requirements for representing God and guiding people. These are called the attributes of messengers.

The first characteristic of a messenger is truthfulness; this is the pivot of Prophethood. It could not be otherwise, for if a prophet were to lie, everything connected with the divine religion would be upset. The truthfulness of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, is paramount. He was completely truthful toward all of God’s creatures. The second attribute of Prophethood is trustworthiness. Being a believer implies being trustworthy. All prophets were the best of believers and therefore were perfect exemplars of trustworthiness. They were loyal and never cheated anyone. The third attribute of Prophethood is the communication of truths, otherwise known as “enjoining good and forbidding evil.” Prophets came with the same divine religion based on submission to God, and all had as their sole mission the communication of this Message. Intellect is another important attribute of Prophethood. In this context, intellect has a specific meaning: a composite of reasoning power, sagacity, intelligence, sound judgment, and wisdom that far surpasses the ability of ordinary people through a sublime power of understanding. It encompasses and coordinates all human abilities, whether of the heart and soul or of the mind. The infallibility of prophets is an established fact based on reason. This quality is required for several reasons. First, the prophets came to convey the Message of God. This is their function as guides and good examples to be followed. If we liken this Message to pure water or light, then any impurities would have polluted the Message. Every stumble is an impurity, a dark spot in the heart and causes doubts in the minds of listeners. The last attribute is that the messages of the prophets were concerned about unseen worlds and that they made prophecies. These were among the miracles of the prophets.

Before we start to analyze BD we need to stress some important points. First of all, except for the final attribute, all these attributes should be the target for all humans who want to achieve decency, if not excellence. Secondly, even if a person does not possess these qualities, God can still use this person. Thirdly, we have to honor people who possess these qualities as they are people who possess prophetic morals.

Daniel of the Book

BD starts with a scene where a king is choosing people from different nations as servants for his kingdom. Obviously, due to his intelligence, trustworthiness, physical perfection and many other qualities, Daniel was one of the four chosen from among the Jews. When the king appointed them daily provision, Daniel requested that he should not be given food that is forbidden by God. However, at the same time he stated and proved that lawful food is healthier.

The king had a dream that troubled his spirit. However, he forgot what he had seen in that dream. He called the astrologers, magicians, and soothsayers and asked for an interpretation of his dream. Nobody could satisfy him, which made the King furious. He finally understood the deception of the so-called wise men and he ordered them all to be killed. Apparently God had prepared this scene for the Daniel’s grand entrance. After hearing the order, Daniel prayed to God and God revealed to him the vision and its meaning:

“Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise [men], the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, shew unto the king. But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days.”

Daniel’s job was not to interpret the dream, but rather to tell people about God. Thus, he used this dream as an opportunity. The dream was a statue-like image, which symbolizes the kingdom where each part of the body corresponds to the present and future kings. Later on we witness the faith of Daniel’s friends and how they stood up for their beliefs. Chapter Four starts with the statements of a transformed king who respects and probably believes in Daniel’s God. However, after certain events followed, events that happened in exactly the way Daniel had predicted, the king praised, extolled and honored the King of Heaven and became a believer. In Chapter Five, Daniel showed his truthfulness to the King. Chapter Six shows that people trusted Daniel (6.3) and that his enemies could find nothing to accuse him of at all (6.4;6-5). They therefore tricked the king into signing a law that prohibited Daniel from worshipping God. However, man-made laws could not come between him and God, so he kept praying and making supplications. The king ordered Daniel to be executed, however God saved him. When he returned to the king, just as before, he used this as an opportunity to communicate with the people and he gave full credit to God.

“My God hath sent me his angels.”(6.22)

The following chapters (7-10) are important in terms of Daniel’s visions and his messages from the unseen world, although his dreams and their interpretations will be explained in the next section. The following table shows the important verses where the attributes can be clearly seen.

Truthfulness 4-19; 5-28; 5-17; 5-28

Trustworthiness 2-18; 5-28; 6-3

Communication 2-18; 2-28; 3(indirect);

5-18; 6-10; 6-22

Intelligence 1-4; 1-17; 4-19/24

Infallibility 1-4; 1-8; 6-4; 6-24

Conclusion

In Daniel we see a great example to follow. This is a man of conviction, devotion, truth, trust, wisdom and respect for the Most High. He walks to his death, talks to kings, solves problems and uses every opportunity to talk about God. With such devotion he finds God always near him offering protection and blessings. May God’s blessings be upon his messengers, their companions and their faithful followers.

It would be appropriate to finish this article with some of the names of God that are mentioned in BD. Some things are so good, that one can never read them too many times.

… the God of heaven. (2-19)

He changeth the times and the seasons: He removeth kings, and setteth up kings: He giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding. (2-21)

He revealeth the deep and secret things: He knoweth what [is] in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with Him. (2-22)

God in heaven that revealeth secrets. (2-28)

God [is] a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets. (2-47)

… the most high God. (3-26)

There is no other God that can deliver after this sort. (3-29)

How great [are] His signs! and how mighty [are] His wonders! His kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and His dominion [is] from generation to generation. (4-3)

… He that liveth for ever. (4-34)

… the King of heaven, all whose works [are] truth, and His ways judgment: and those that walk in pride He is able to abase. (4-37)

… the God in whose hand thy breath [is], and whose [are] all thy ways. (5-23)

He [is] the living God, and steadfast for ever, and His kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed, and His dominion [shall be even] unto the end. He delivereth and rescueth, and He worketh signs and wonders in heaven and in earth. (6-26/27)

References

• Wilson, Robert Dick, Studies in the Book Of Daniel.

• Baldwin, Joyce, Tyndale Old Testament Commentary

• Thomas, John, An Exposition of Daniel.

• Sir Isaac Newton’s Observations on Daniel.

In a book that deals with questions of logic, when we see numbers written in succession, such as 5, 15, 25; then we are able to discover the relation between these numbers, to predict the next number and to realize that this pattern was made by somebody. However, if we were to be told that these figures indicate the distance covered in equal segments of time by a pebble that has been dropped from a certain height, most of us would not think about the One Who made this general rule.

Or for example, the equation 11.111.111 x 111.111.111 = 12.345.678.987.654.321 may be as amazing to some people as the verses of a beautiful poem, whereas it will leave others cold.

Likewise, the famous mysterious symbols of mathematics, e, i, , are nothing more than some alphabetical signs for most of us, nevertheless they must have meant a lot to the famous physicist, Richard Feyman, since he wrote the following equation in his diary, noting that he admired it: ei+1=0

If we write f (z) = Z2 + c;, this will not be a meaningful sentence for most people. But that will not change the fact that it is an incredibly simple expression of biological and physical reality in an expression which concerns our lives (as in fractal logic). And the picture you see here (Figure 1) is nothing but the analytical projection of this equation on a computer screen.

The spiral form (Figure 2) which can be seen in various things from cone shells to nebulas, has a very simple formula, r2=a2/A which is fascinating for those who spend some time to think about it. All these examples have a point in common. These numbers, which are abstract concepts, are as real as the concrete objects of the physical world. While other sciences make sense, more or less, for a layperson, mathematics can only be appreciated by people who know it well.

The mythological Princess Dido of Phoen-icia fled from the city where her husband (the King;s brother) had been slain by the King. She wanted to settle in Carthage, in North Africa. There the King only allowed her to buy as much land as could be covered by the skin of a cow. Dido decided to interpret the word ;cover; in a wider sense. She had her servants cut the skin in thin strips, connecting them to each other. In the end, she obtained a long cord, estimated to be somewhere from between 1,000 to 2,000 m. long. When it came to placing it on the ground, Dido wanted to find the shape that would cover the largest area. She found the right shape. She made a circle on the ground and she was able to encompass quite a large area of land. As a matter of fact, looking at some ancient castles, we can understand that they were built in this way in order to create the largest structure over the smallest possible area. This explains why the cross-section of a vessel tissue is circular, because it occupies minimal space in the body (Figure 9).

Did you know that mathematical reality applies in our body and in the universe? This fact was realized when scientists developed fractal geometry. The fractal structure we see in the roots and leaves of plants and in the human respiratory and vascular systems are very good examples of this fact. Such excellence indicates the All-Knowing Omnipotent One Who is behind these geometrical designs (Figures 4, 5, 6).

What is the invisible secret of this visible structure? Dido had to enclose the maximum area by using limited material, which she accomplished. Such optimization also exists in the human body and in other living things. The biological systems we have mentioned above have vessel systems designed as fractal networks, delivering the necessary substances to cells. Essentially, these systems are designed in such a way that the vessels occupy minimal space while serving all the cells within the system; this can only be realized through such a fractal structure.

The most striking proof supporting this idea is that if the human veins, which do not take up a great deal of space in the body, were all added together, they would reach a length that is three times the circumference of the world.

How can this be possible? This can be explained quite simply: find an equilateral triangle and carry out the following instructions. First, divide each side of the triangle into three equal sections and place another (smaller) equilateral triangle on the middle section of each side you have divided, facing outwards. If you repeat the same thing for each of these small triangles, you will create the pattern below (Figure 8).

In a fractal structure, as the number of branches near infinity, the shape of the structure resembles a circle more and more. The new area we will find cannot be bigger than the area of the circle, and the points of contact with the circle will approach the maximum value (Figure 9).

We can also explain this fact in the following way: take a circle with a radius of 3 cm. This will serve as the cross-section of a cylindrical object. Then draw seven smaller identical circles inside the first circle. You will see that the proportion between the sum of circumferences and the sum of areas is 5/7. Those who are interested in mathematics will see that as the value of the r (radius) decreases, the difference increases. This clearly indicates that fractal structures are always advantageous. So, what about organs like the brain or the lungs? They do not have a completely fractal structure, yet they really need to have a larger surface area than other objects of equal size. These organs have been enabled to have the largest possible surface area by being convoluted. Otherwise, man would be a strange creature, burdened with a huge mass on his back. Similarly, when we look at a map that shows the coastlines, we see that a coastline that has many capes and bays has a longer coast line than its counterparts, which run straight along the land. All these living things or organs (man, trees, brain etc) have such structures from the very moment they are created. This system or project (Figure 10) cannot have developed on its own, by chance, without there having been a Creator.

Sir James Jean says, ;The Creator must be a perfect Mathematician; in his book The Mysterious Universe. In so saying, he draws attention to mathematics, the mysterious pattern in the universe, and points to the Artist behind the ornamented beauty seen in Creation. The magical science of mathematics whispers its secrets to those who try to perceive it through the eyes of wisdom.