She stood at the edge of the abyss, the blinding darkness engulfing her, enticing her. It would be easy to let go, to wither away and join him. Her arms felt numb, and her powerful legs were weak. Violent tremors traveled up and down her body. A small compelling hand, wet with tears, tugged on her arm. “What will we do now?” a quavering voice whispered. She opened her eyes. The sky was a cerulean blue, and the blazing sun was beating on her torn straw hat, casting a slender shadow on the spring green rice fields. Her rapid heart was calmed by a wind that caressed her cheek. To her dead husband, to her children, to Vietnam, she dropped the condolence letter, and with her feet firmly planted on the ground, said, “We will live.”

To say it was easy is an understatement. Raising five kids as a single mother, in a country where women are expected to be docile, seemed infeasible. “I was taught at a young age that men were the head of the household, they were the heroes of the family,” Diep Ngo, aged 80, recalls sadly, her eyes distant. “I felt helpless. My brothers were charting new paths, while I was still, unable to move.” With a suppressed sob, Ngo recounts that at the twilight hour, she would drown with dark thoughts, but every morning when the sun rose, they would be vanquished. The roosters were the reveille that awakened her slumber, her empty stomach was the battle cry, and the last words of hope from her departed beloved, the mantra that carried her on. 

The war took its toll on the civilians of Vietnam; it was a disease that plagued families with deaths and injuries. Young girls were jailbirds, kept busy looking after their younger siblings, torn rags their striped attire and restrictions the bars of their prison. Dreams were locked away, replaced by the basic needs crucial to survival. Even so, when asked if she would take part in the war that claimed her husband, Ngo, her mouth in a straight line and her eyes ablaze, adamantly nodded. Raising both arms until her fists were level with her head, she mustered a grimace. Her nose crinkled and teeth bared, but her eyes sparkled with humor. “Do you think anyone would’ve thought twice about taking me on?”

Scraping bits and pieces of broken memories from her childhood, Ngo recalls that the only freedom she truly had was that from the pressures of education. “I never did well in school. Women were not expected to accomplish anything, so it was highly unusual for a women to achieve higher education.” Now, it seems clear that this supposed freedom transformed itself into another burden upon her shoulders, for she had to take on menial tasks when drafted into the position of “man.” For the first time in her life, she left the cage built by the patriarchal society and refused wealthy suitors. “They were bloated with pride… I would never submit to any man like that.” Ngo was ridiculed by her neighbors as a result, but she felt a strange sensation, absent from her life ever since the fateful, disappointed sigh that accompanied the doctor declaring her gender 80 years ago: the jewel of independence.

“As their father was gone, I had to step into the role of the provider. Oh, what a burden it was, but the power and purpose it gave me fueled the sleepless nights.”

Before the age of 30, her long, black hair turned a platinum gray, and impending wrinkles scarred her face as the war robbed her of youth. A moment to weep or reconcile with memories of loved ones was lost in the present.

“Losing my husband was truly hard, but myself, and other women of Vietnam, had to choke back grief and look to the future,” she remarked. Leaving the house militarily before the sun rose and coming back well after the crescent moon silently loomed in the sky, the only thing Ngo regrets is not spending as much time with her children. But, what she had to do was necessary, as every day was a battle. Even so, how could she explain to them the rough calluses on her hands, which toiled tirelessly, tending the infested wounds left after the hungry bullets pierced the heart of Vietnam? How could she explain yet another outline of a large palm on her red cheek, this time from an angry customer, unsatisfied by the knee-length trousers she had spent all night mending?

Through it all, she remained an eternal warrior, whose struggles rivaled those of men fighting raging wars. Diep Ngo battled gender inequality and injustice, all while leading her family through desperate times. An old poem by Xuân Diệu filled her thoughts as America, the land of rebirth and opportunities, slowly emerged on the horizon: “Your feet have hardly tread round this way… Open your arms to clasp the spring, then from your hand let there be light” (translated by Thomas D. Le). And for the first time since her husband’s death, she welcomed the moist tears, for the valiant soldier’s burden had been lifted. Her dauntless mission was complete. 

I’m forever grateful for her valiant decision to bypass social stereotypes and become a sort-of soldier, leading her family to survival, to new opportunities, to an education, to happiness, to America. It’s a natural, humane feeling that is respectful of the wisdom, the strength, and the sacrifices of the old. Every evening, after the tiring cycle of school, I retreat back into my place of comfort: my grandmother’s arms, and for the past 17 years, her past life was but a false, beautiful painting, rid of pain and hardships and suffering. That one night, under a blanket of softly twinkling stars, I retraced her hands, touching them, caressing them, tracing her old, calloused, scarred fingers and her bulging veins, to finally realize the truth: that there was so much I didn’t know about my hero.

Tschauner O. et al. Discovery of bridgmanite, the most abundant mineral in Earth, in a shocked meteorite. Science, November 2014.

A team of scientists has identified and characterized the Earth’s most abundant mineral: “Bridgemanite” makes up about 70 percent of the Earth’s lower mantle and 38 percent of its total volume. It is made of a high-density form of magnesium iron silicate and named after 1964 Nobel laureate physicist Percy Bridgman. For decades, scientists knew of the existence of dense Bridgemanite layers in the Earth’s lower mantle (660 to 2890 km beneath the surface) through theoretical and some experimental studies. However, since the mysterious mineral never survived the trip to the surface, no one had been able to prove its existence. Conveniently, shock-compression that occurs in collisions of asteroids creates an identical hostile temperature (2100 C°) and high-pressure (240,000 times greater than sea-level) conditions to those found in deep layers of the Earth. As such, scientists decided to look at meteorites closely, particularly one that had fallen in Australia in 1879. By using a micro-focused X-ray beam in conjunction with electron microscopy, they were able to successfully detect the Bridgemanite grains for the first time. The discovery of the Bridgmanite’s crystal chemistry will have a significant impact on the future studies of chemistry and geology of the Earth’s deep mantle, and perhaps studies on the formation of the universe.

Male smokers lose Y chromosomes

Dumanski et al. Smoking is associated with mosaic loss of chromosome Y. Science, December 2014.

The Y chromosome is one of two sex-determining chromosomes in men, who have one X chromosome and one Y (women have no Y chromosomes, but two X chromosomes). During normal cell division, copies of all of the 23 chromosomes, including X and Y, are synthesized and sorted into the two new daughter cells. This complicated process sometimes goes wrong and chromosomes are lost. Cells with missing chromosomes usually die, but cells can still survive without a Y chromosome. Scientists initially thought that men lose Y chromosomes as they age and this is a part of the normal aging process. But later studies have shown that the age-dependent loss of Y chromosomes can have serious health implications, as it is linked to a shorter life span and an increased risk of dying from cancer. Even more troubling results came from a recent study that screened for associations between behavioral and lifestyle choices, and diseases. Comparison of the DNA in blood cells of over 6000 men suggested that blood cells from actively smoking men are 3-4 times more likely to be missing Y chromosomes than the nonsmokers in the control. These findings may explain why male smokers have a slightly increased risk of death from the majority of cancers than female smokers. The scientists hypothesized that the Y chromosome loss may create defective immune cells that cannot fight cancer and ultimately make the body susceptible to tumors. The study gives some good news to smokers though. Y chromosome damage by smoking is both reversible and dose-dependent, so you are always better off not smoking; it is never too late to quit.

The world’s oldest case of cancer

Lieverse AR et al. Paleopathological Description and Diagnosis of Metastatic Carcinoma in an Early Bronze Age (4588+34 Cal. BP) Forager from the Cis-Baikal Region of Eastern Siberia. PLOS ONE, December 2014.

Cancer is responsible for one in four deaths in the Western world. It is widely assumed that cancer is a disease of modern times. Since people in older eras were exposed to fewer toxins, ate only natural foods, and adapted physically active lifestyles, many people thought that no one in older civilizations would have had cancer. Yet an analysis of a 4500-year-old skeleton from a cemetery in the Cis-Baikal region of Siberia has seriously challenged this idea. Researchers estimated that the Siberian man was about 35 to 45 years old before he died from a severe lung or prostate cancer. The ancient man’s bones, from head to hip and including his upper arms and upper legs, were covered by lesions and big holes. It is almost certain that the deterioration of his bones left him immobile and eventually caused him a very agonizing death. It is also clear that those around him recognized his situation and placed him in a circular grave in the fetal position with some artifacts ,which is completely different from the rest of the burials in the cemetery. Although ancient skeletons with the scars of cancer are relatively rare, scientists suspect that cancer may have been considerably more common in ancient times than is generally predicted, especially when considering other variables such as naturally occurring carcinogens and longer life expectancies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mimar Sinan example

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

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

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

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

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

Bediuzzaman’s cup example

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

References

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

Honor killings are not a new type of murder or unique to any particular time or place. They are not associated with Islam, and there is no difference in their base causes or those of Femicide and crimes of passion. Several religious and cultural traditions have held the view that women are second class citizens compared to men; that their place in society is to benefit men; or that they are possessions to be dealt with in a manner befitting a man’s choice. In Ancient Rome, “honor played an important part in the structure of Roman society… justifications for honor killings can be found in the family law of the Roman Empire” (Shah-David, 2011 p. 191). The legal differentiations between honor killings and other forms of homicide are based in Roman law. The father, or pater familias (head of the family), had jus vitae ac necis (power of life and death), thus no punishment could be imposed on a father or husband for killing their female family members (Bettiga-Bourerbout, 2005). It is also said that Judeo-Christian religious tradition claims men and women were punished because of Eve’s decision to eat the forbidden fruit; women were punished further by being made subservient to men, and made to suffer through the pain of child birth and menstruation (Azeem, n.d.). Yet as Shah-David claims, killing in the name of honor is also found in other societies, such as Hindu communities and in Sardinia and Sicily. Despite these incidences, “this does not mean that Roman Catholicism encourages it” (2011 p. 191). In Australia, in a case of a Western Caucasian couple, a man strangled his wife, and community members claimed, “It is an honor killing…to avenge his male pride, to reassert his status in the world. He saw himself as the patriarch of the family and refused to accept her right to leave.” (The Age, 2006). The question must be asked why Islam remains as justification for femicide and why its occurrence is amplified when committed in Muslim societies.

Islam calls people to unburden themselves from the restraints and false claims of the material life and to return to God and the true way of life. As such, a society with material values will stand against such an ideal (Abushouk, 2006). Honor killings are a cultural practice, just as the Western media magnifying their occurrence is also cultural. It is statistically recorded that crime incidents against women in some Western countries are drastically higher when compared to Muslim and some non-Western countries. (Nation Master, 2011). These statistics support that Islam is not behind the underlying attitudes of violence towards women.

Honor killing is the murder of a person who has supposedly brought dishonor to a family and where a public display condemning that person is required to restore family respect. This supposed shame is most commonly attributed to a family member who commits – or is accused, or suspected of committing – an indecent sexual act. Even rape is sometimes considered to “blacken” a woman’s chastity, and thus tarnishing her family’s honor. There is a belief that blood will remove the stain upon the family. This means the death of the woman – and sometimes, though less often, the death of the man, too. These deaths are very often public.

Honor killings may also occur when a woman will not enter into a forced marriage, seeks to obtain a divorce, or acts in any way which may be considered sexually promiscuous and a male family member feels dishonored by such displays (Merry, 2009). Being “too Western” is also a reason given to justify this type of crime (Chesler, 2010).

However, Islam gives very clear instructions about behaviors regarding women, adultery, divorce and legal testimony; these instructions go against any justification for honor killings. Women are considered the spiritual equal of men, their responsibilities towards God the same. There are differences between a man and woman regarding their respective worldly duties, but there is plenty of evidence in the Qur’an and in the practice of the Prophet that women should be treated fairly and gently. They are to be treated with a deep respect, going so far as to lay heaven under a mother’s feet (Hadith, Ahmad Nasai), and are entitled to receive honor and the best form of care: “The best among you is the one who is the best towards his wife” (Muslim).

Therefore, the relationship between men and women is to achieve mutual benefit and pleasure, and to help each other achieve their purpose in life. With regard to adultery, both men and women are equally responsible. Even though couples are encouraged to stay together, divorce is still halal (permissible) in Islam if a man and woman feel they cannot be equitable to each other and if they have exhausted all possible solutions. As such, claiming that wanting a divorce is grounds for dishonor and murder cannot in any way be ascribed to Islam. The Qur’an also states that four reliable witnesses be brought to testify against a women they claim is impious (An-Nisa 4:15). This is far from a support for honor killings on grounds of suspicion. A lack of Islam and cultural reasons can be the only other basis for this rationalization. And many people – both Muslim and non-Muslim – have expressed concern over “Western values” spreading through the Islamic world (Abou El Fadl, 2005). Sexual promiscuity may be seen as encouraged by Western media and Hollywood. Yet the concerns people express over this is by no means an excuse or justification for murder, but rather an example of why Islamic values must be holistically implemented, especially in Muslim’s lives.

Any justification for killing in the name of honor goes against true honor from God. Culturally developed and encouraged desires have an influence over people and their self-control, allowing a justification and belief to develop that they have a right and responsibility to commit heinous acts. No example in Islam can support honor killing. Therefore, we see that it is a cultural practice caused by the incorrect or incomplete application of Islam in Muslim societies. There are many examples, as given above, which prove that honor killing or other forms of femicide are among many very serious human problems. It is a grave form of human violence, and a true and comprehensive interpretation of Islamic values proves that Muslims can, and must, positively contribute to solving this problem, not the other way around. If some disgraceful practices are being attributed to Islam, it is not because they are part of Islam but because some Muslim communities are simultaneously practicing and propagating a blend of Islamic, contemporary, and Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic ignorance) teachings. Islam is a holistic religion; a person’s life, death, actions, beliefs, feelings, obligations, and their very nature is addressed in the Qur’an and the Prophet’s practice. Through the revealed scriptures and the examples of the Prophets, God has taught humanity about our vices and virtues, but also how to overcome and strengthen them so we can achieve balance and happiness. A proper understanding of how to achieve this balance entails a thorough, rather than partial, reading of the wonderful sources at our disposal.

Kim Soltani is a student of Islamic Studies at the Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilisation, Charles Sturt University, Sydney, Australia.

References

• Abou El Fadl, K. 2005. The nature and role of women. In The Great Theft. New York: Harper SanFransisco.
• Abushouk, A. I. 2006. Globalization and Muslim identity challenges and prospects. The Muslim World. 96(4), 487-505. Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur.
• Azeem, S. (n.d.) Women in Islam versus Women in the Judaeo-Christian Tradition: The Myth & The Reality. Canada: Queens University.
• Bettiga-Bourerbout, M., 2005. “Crimes of Honor” in the Italian Penal Code: an analysis of history and reform. In Honor: crimes, paradigms and violence against women. (eds S. Hossain, & L. Welchman,) Victoria: Spinifex Press.
• Chesler, P., 2010 Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings. In The Middle East Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.meforum.org/2646/worldwide-trends-in-honor-killings
• Hadith. (n.d.). Ahmad Nasai, Retrieved from http://www.soundvision.com/Info/mothers/inquran&hadith.asp
• Kaandhlawi, Z., 2004. Faza’il-e-a’maal (A. R. Arshad, Trans.). India:Millat Book Centre.
• Merry, S., 2009. Gender violence: a cultural perspective. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.
• Murad, A., (n.d.).Boys will be Boys. Retrieved from http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/boys.htm
• Nation Master. 2011. Crime Statistics Rape (per capita) (most recent) by country. Retrieved from http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita
• Quran. (n.d.). Trans. Sahih International. Retrieved from http://www.quran.com
• Shah-Davis, S. 2011. A women’s honor and a nation’s shame. In Gender, Sexualities and Law (ed J Jones, A Grear, R Fenton, K Stevenson). New York: Routledge.
• The Age. 2006. Honor killing in the suburbs. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Honor-killing-in-the-suburbs/2004/11/05/1099547388469.html%E2%80%9D
• United Nations Department of Public Information. 1996. Women and Violence. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/rights/dpi1772e.htm

With half the world living on less than $2.50 per day and with 46.2 million people in the United States living below the poverty line, poverty is a growing concern.

The United States is known all over the world to be a very powerful and rich country. It is not just American people who believe in the American Dream, but also many people from other countries have been dreaming of coming to the US to live in better conditions. Although the US is thought to be a rich country, we still see hungry and homeless people, especially women and children in the streets. Women, who are either married or unmarried, whether supported by their husbands or single mothers with no support, struggle to earn money for food, clothes, safe shelter, and other intangible needs such as love and happiness. When observed closely, it is easy to understand the reasons why this is so. It is because of the wage gap between men and women, the decreased amount of opportunities in having high income jobs, and the fact that more women are the head of their household compared to men, means that the ratio of poor women is rising, and the increased need for governmental help makes “welfare” necessary.

Understanding the definition of poverty becomes very important because it categorizes people into groups which are poor and wealthy. Richard Ropers states that poverty can be understood and described in numerous ways, and that people will not understand the meaning of poverty if they do not recognize the situation of the poor. To be poor means to not have any sustenance, shelter, or any support from family. However nowadays, living alone, or being pushed out of society, being under depression of unchanging destitution also describes poverty. Being fired from a job, losing self-esteem, having no power, or being away from cultural values are also other parameters to describe poverty (Ropers, 25). Ropers also describes “widespread poverty” as a disloyalty to the democratic values’ failure to gain optimism. Successful leaders must aim to provide economical comfort for their citizens. If the majority of the people are not happy because of poverty, it means the government is not as strong to deal with the problems.

The official poverty line is inadmissible as an accurate system to determine the number of poor people. “The US government identifies the poverty line by multiplying the cost of a minimally nutritious diet by three,” then the number of people who live in the same house is calculated (Popers 35). According to the Census data for 2011, 46.2 million people in the United States lived below the poverty line. According to Peter Edelman, a law professor in Georgetown University, even though there are so many hard working people, they are still living in poverty or just barely above the poverty line (Bilitteri, 723). These people are not given the necessary governmental support. There is also a huge gap between the poor and the wealthy people in the US (Cooper, 337). The highest income is $102,000 for households, just 1% of the population, and the lowest earning is $250 for people, who make up 90% of the population, explains Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez (Bilitteri, 723).

One given image portrayed in the media is that “the poor have only themselves to blame” (Mantsios, 638). The problem of poverty is not just one individual’s problem. There is a strong connection between the poor and society. How can a defenseless child be responsible for being poor, not having shelter, and for not earning any money? How can a single or divorced mother with a little baby, without any family help, be expected to work full time without feeding the little one for hours. The term “poor are eyesores” (Mantsios, 637) is not a responsible and thoughtful depiction, rather, it is a way of not being able to see the problems of the people outside and breaking away from the realities of the poor.

More and more women, especially single mothers, are experiencing poverty at a higher rate than the rest of society. Ropers notes that 58% of women are facing poverty, and in this category 48% of the women are the head of their household. According to Albelda and Tilly, 50% of single women are below the poverty line with no support of a husband. In 1993, while 16% of families struggled against poverty, simultaneously, 52% of single mothers, bereft of husband or family support, experiences real difficulty to provide for their basic needs. Most women work at least two jobs at the same time. On the one hand they work at home without earning any money, and on the other hand work outside to earn money (Albelle & Tilly 307). In 1947, about 38% of women were working mostly in paid labor jobs; however, in 1954, the number of working women who were African American, doubled to 54%. Then in 1996 the ratio of working women rose up to 88%, as reported by Albella and Tilly. Even though the number of hard working women is increasing year by year, they are still, except for a small percentage, earning low income and their situation still remains below the poverty line. According to Albelda and Tilly, “women’s earnings are considerably lower than men’s, approximately 70 cents to the man’s dollar.” This difference makes women’s lives miserable as they try to work outside and head the household all at the same time.

For so many years, women have been endeavoring to have the same rights, opportunities, and benefits as men have in their working lives. Although women’s working situations are not as bad as some years ago, women still face graceless and unpleasant discrimination when they look for jobs. Even though women are more educated nowadays and have more opportunities to get a job, there are distinctive wage gaps between men and women. Being the head of the family (Bernstein, 370), giving birth to a child, being under differentiation of occupation, and being sexually abused by employers are some of the common reasons as to why women are behind men when it comes to the benefits of the jobs (Wage Project, 373).

Family responsibilities are one of the most common reasons why women work in a part time job instead of having a full time job (Bernstein, 371). There are so many married or single women who do most of the household responsibilities while trying to work in a job. It is hard to deal with the chores and manage the expectations at work at the same time. For this reason, women in these kinds of situations prefer to work in part time jobs. According to Bernstein, only 25% of women are able to work full day, for the rest of the women cannot dedicate their whole day for work. This being the case, women cannot get the equal remuneration like other women who work in full time jobs. Interestingly, there is also a huge payment gap between women who work full time and men who work full time. Bernstein explains that “on average women work a lot less than men: 1,498 hours a year, vs. 2,219 worked by the typical man.” According to The Wage Project, part time women employees make only 38% of men’s full time yearly salary. Bernstein also mentions the Hartmann and Rose’s data which shows that women employees can have the same benefits if they leave all the family responsibilities behind and come to work behaving like a “traditional man.” The continuation of such unfair treatment is sure to wear down woman, a situation that’s already strained them enough.

Another reason for the wage gap between men and women is the choice a women makes to have a child (Wage Project, 378). Bernstein says after quoting Bergland that after delivering a child, women have to work part time or stay away from work for a while because they do not receive the necessary help from the society.

Nowadays, the position of women employees is assumed to not be as powerful as men’s by most bosses (Wage Project, 377). Even if men and women have the same educational level (Bernstein, 372) and women show more talent, the suggestions made by women are mostly not considered important until, of course, there is no other choice but to accept (Wage project, 375). Bernstein states that women’s yearly salary is much less than men’s, even when they are at the same educational level.

Sexual harassment is another important factor for women to leave their jobs (Wage Project, 377). Sometimes in situations like these, women are unfortunately seen as sexual means by their bosses. If the women, even if they are educated, do not accept the advances of their bosses, they have no choice but to leave or drop out of their jobs, benefits, emotional solidity, and sometimes even their lives (Wage Project, 377). Women encounter such discriminatory situations at the same time while they are dealing with difficulties which they have in their personal lives.

Some people think that people are getting welfare because they are too lazy and they don’t want to work. This theory can be true for just a few people. Making this kind of generalization for all people who are in poverty is derogatory against them. Albelda and Tilly say that the reasons for the poverty experience by single mothers and their families is not because of their laziness or lack of ambition. They are in poverty because they don’t have parent support, they face job discrimination, they earn less than men, and they have the added responsibility of taking care of their children. Blaming the poor is so easy, but being aware of their situation and helping them out of it would be the best thing for all.

Making reforms on the welfare program will make it work well. Some malicious people display themselves as poor to get support from welfare. Under the welfare program, the situation of the applicant must be clarified through an attentive investigation. Determining the really needy persons, eliminating their needs, and opening free high qualified career courses will make welfare a more beneficial program for the poor and will reduce the complaints made against the program.

Being in poverty is mostly not a personal choice. People in poverty don’t just lack food or safe shelter, but they have also lost their hope and happiness. Women, especially single mothers with no support, encounter the most difficult situations of all. Having an income less than men, taking care of their children without any support, facing job discrimination, and heading the family are the most common adversities faced by women today. Receiving no government support will not help reduce their problems; on the contrary, having access to effective government support will let people in poverty know that there are people with helping hands, people who care about them and who think about them. Poor people need helping hands, at least to not let them give up their hopes and dreams.

References

• Albelda, Randy.,& Tilly, Chris. 2001. “‘Women, Income, and Poverty’: There’s a Family connection.” Race, Class, and Gender in The United States. Ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. New Jersey: Worth,. 305-314.
• Billitteri, Thomas J. “Gender Pay Gap.” CQ Researcher 18.11 (2008): 241-264. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. “Domestic Poverty.” CQ Researcher 17.31 (2007): 721-744. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. Cooper, Mary H. “The Working Poor.” CQ Researcher 5.41 (1995): 969-992. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008 “Income Inequality.” CQ Researcher 8.15 (1998): 337-360. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008
• Glazer, Sarah. “Welfare Reform.” CQ Researcher 11.27 (2001):601-632. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008 Berstein, Aoron. 2007. “‘Women’s Pay: Why the Gap Remains A Chasm.” Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. Ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. NJ: Worth. 370-372. Mantsios, Gregory. 2007. “‘Media Magic: Making Class Invisible.’” Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. Paula S.Rothenberg. New Jersey: Worth. 636-643. Ropers, H. Richard. 1991. Persistent Poverty, New York: Plenum. Rothenberg, Paula S. (Ed.). 2007. The Wage Gap And Its Costs. Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. NJ: Worth. 373-378.

Come and see them in their graves.

Only a large shirt is their share

And even those, without sleeves

Dignitaries they had been

With servants standing before them

Now come and see, you can’t tell,

The late masters from their men

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.

Futuwwa, defined as youth and chivalry, is really a composite of such virtues as generosity, munificence, modesty, chastity, trustworthiness, loyalty, mercifulness, knowledge, humility, and piety. It is a station on the path to God as well as a dimension of sainthood, and also signifies that altruism and helping others have become one’s second nature. It is an important, indispensable dimension of good conduct and a significant aspect of humanity.

Derived from fata’ (young man), futuwwa has become a symbol of rebellion against all evil and the endeavor for sincere servanthood to God; the following verse expresses this eloquently:

They were young men who had believed in their Lord, and We increased them in guidance. And We strengthened their hearts, when they rose up and declared: Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and Earth; we will not call upon any god beside Him, or then we had spoken an outrage. (18:14)

The verse We have heard a youth talk of them (the idols); he is called Abraham (21:60) expresses the position and influence of one who has achieved perfect futuwwa in his or her community, one who has sought to guide humanity to truth. By contrast, the young men mentioned in the verses: With him there came into the prison two young men (12:36) and: (Joseph) told his young (servants) to put their merchandise (with which they had bartered) into their saddle-bags (12:62) were ordinary young men without chivalry.

As many people have written on or talked about futuwwa since the Age of Happiness, the concept has been defined in many ways: not despising the poor or being deceived by the rich and riches; being fair to everybody without expecting fairness in return; living one’s life as a pitiless enemy of one’s carnal self; being ever-considerate of others and living for them; smashing all idols or all that is idolized, and rebelling against falsehood so as to be wholly devoted to God Almighty; bearing whatever evil is done to oneself, but roaring when the rights of God are violated; feeling remorse for the rest of one’s life for committing the smallest of sins, but overlooking others’ sins, regardless of how large they are; seeing oneself as a poor, lowly servant while considering others as saintly; not resenting others while maintaining relations with those who resent you; being kind to those who hurt you; serving God and the people before everyone else, but putting others first when it is time to receive one’s rewards.

Some have summed up futuwwa in the four virtues mentioned by Haydar Karrar Ali, the fourth Caliph and cousin of the Prophet, upon him be peace and blessings. They are: forgiving when one is able to punish, preserving mildness and acting mildly and gently when one is angry, wishing one’s enemies well and doing good to them, and being considerate of others’ well-being and happiness first, even when one is needy.

Ali was one of the greatest representatives of futuwwa. When he was stabbed by Ibn Muljam while leading the morning prayer in the mosque, his children, who saw that their father was going to die, asked him what he wanted them to do to Ibn Muljam. He did not order his execution in retaliation. During a battle, Ali threw his enemy to the ground and then released him. When ‘Ali was about to kill this man, the latter spat in Ali’s face, which angered him. Fearing that his motive for killing the man was now confused and sullied, ‘Ali released him. He felt sincere grief when Zubayr ibn Awwam, a leading Companion and his enemy in the Battle of the Camel, was killed. Since he always considered others first, even when he was in need, he usually wore summer clothes in winter and trembled with cold (because he would give away his winter clothes). It was said about him that there could be no young, chivalrous man like Ali, and there could be no sword like Dhu al-Fiqar (Ali’s sword). Ali lived with the Prophet, upon him be peace and blessings, and was raised by him. He lived a perfectly honest, pure life without any stain, and embodied God’s answer to Prophet Moses, upon him be peace, about futuwwa: It means that you are able to return your self to Me as pure or untainted as you received it from Me.

The signs of a fata’ (young, chivalrous one) are that the individual, created with the potential to accept Divine Unity and Islam, is totally convinced of the Divine Unity; this urges him or her to live according to the requirements of this conviction; that, without being captivated by carnal or bodily desires, he or she lives a pure, spiritual life; and that he or she always seeks to please God in his or her deeds, thoughts, and feelings. One who cannot be saved from the temptations of the carnal self, Satan, appetites, love of the world, or attachment to the worldly life cannot climb upward to the peak of futuwwa.

Futuwwa is a treasure obtainable by climbing high beyond
All the “highest mountains of the world”;
What business have those who fall tired
Even on a smooth road with such a treasure?

Notes

1. Ibn al-Athir, Usd al-Ghaba, 4:118.
2. Shamsaddin Sivasi, Manaqib Jiharyar Guzin, 258.
3. Al-Haythami, Majma’ al-Zawa’id, 9:150.
4. Ibid., 9:122.
5. ‘Ali al-Qari, Al-Asrar al-Marfu’a fi akhbar al-Mawdu’a (Beirut, 1986), 367.

Walking into patients’ rooms during random visits always demands courage, self-esteem, and a positive outlook, together with a strong sense of spirituality. But chaplains learn early on to overcome a fear of rejection when they initiate a visit, enter a hospital room and experience a patient who opens their heart in a slow but sincere manner.

Some people think it is about religion. But I found that people accept or reject a chaplain’s visit for a variety of reasons. Religion often never enters the conversation. Chaplains are, in most cases, expected to leave that part to the patients. We just carry them wherever they want to go. Sometimes people respond that they are “Okay that way,” which I interpreted as having their own way of meeting their spiritual or emotional needs. For many, loneliness was one of the main reasons to accept, and anger, the main reason to reject a visit from a chaplain.

In the emergency room, when doctors put forth their greatest efforts to save a patient’s life, death is oh so near. How this death, which we always imagine as being a million miles away from us, so close at that moment? I reflect; “Am I in the same room with the angel of death at this very moment?” The reality of death removes all blocks between the chaplain and the patient; it brings us back to our humanness and our primordial state in front of God.

I encounter lonely, elderly men. These were once tough men, brave men; men who fought in our country’s wars. They were hard workers, often at menial jobs done sacrificially to provide for their families. Most never knew how to express their emotions. Many of them, shattered by the horrors from fighting in wars and suffering family tragedies, needed to be heard. It is a privilege to be the one listening to their stories and moved by a compassion that was never before experienced.

It is not often that any of us witness older men shedding tears. In the privacy of our visit, they voiced their doubt, fear and anger. “No one should ever have to see what I saw, what I was involved in. God – where was God then?” My heart would be crying out to God, “How do I respond? What do I say?” They were asking difficult questions that deserved more than a glib reply. I did not possess the words or the compassion in my own strength. I needed to increasingly rely on God in my encounters. I too wondered “why” and felt their fear and frustration. I listened. I know “God works all things for the good for those who love him” (Romans 8:28). Yet, meeting these men and women, voicing their prayers and concerns to God with them, I grieved.

A life-threatening illness grants a saint’s wisdom to the most vulgar person. Not an automatic or an easy transition, but it cultivates the soul gradually, inch by inch. Since the time Albert learned about his cancer, he has been seeing through a different lens; “All my accomplishments, my goals and ambitions meant nothing for me in seconds when I learned that I had cancer.” Lost is the pleasure of health, and the reality of life and death are finally under daylight. The sick person has the longest time in the world to reflect on this.

Anxious and distressed, an old lady complains that the young do not understand the suffering that old age brings. “Why does God, whom we know as merciful and compassionate, let us suffer?” is a common question among the sick. Some patients are angry with God. Their inner struggle covers up the beauty behind the illness. Yet, it is not ours to correct anything too fast. Their feelings are precious. Acceptance of God’s will can eventually follow the anguish, uneasiness and questioning in the beginning of illness.

To say that life sometimes hurts and is often unfair is an understatement. And it does not satisfy the “why” questions. Facing what is a major fear of all people, the loss of all we hold dear – abilities, youth, dreams, beauty, wealth, pride, fame, life itself – we can only listen.

They see with the eye of certainty and I come to understand with them, that our bodies are prone to separation and death; and the pleasures of this world do not continue. This warning is very bitter and painful at first, yet then it becomes beautiful. We should remember that we are mortal; we have a duty in life and we should prepare well for the next life. It is said that a good friend is harsh but honest. So is illness, it seems.

Sometimes being around patients’ sadness, fear and hopelessness day after day is depressing. But the most draining encounters are with the ones who have turned completely away from God. I honestly grieved for those, who in their times of terrible tragedy, seemed to feel no need for God.

Amidst the dark thoughts, I hear a patient reminding me that life is not only about sickness, but it is a reflection of God’s beautiful Names in miscellaneous ways. I happen to see only the sad part of patients’ life stories, as a chaplain, but that is not all. “Just as, through hunger, you learn of His Name, the All-Providing, so too through your illness, you come to know His Name, the All-Healing.” Thoughtful as he is, Jack says: “I might have cancer now, but I appreciate life in general; there is so much that I am thankful for. Just one big thing that I learned from my sickness: I never thought that I took life for granted. But now, I understand that I did.”

Arthur Frank, a former cancer patient and the author of At the Will of the Body, says there is a problem with the view that physical recovery is the ideal ending of illnesses. He asks “if recovery is taken to be the ideal, how is it possible to find value in the experience of an illness that either lingers on as chronic or ends in death?” Along the way of a health problem, there is the opportunity for spiritual transformation and renewal. This renewal, as a result of physical illness, is the ideal. Either an illness ends with death or not, but one should be aware that there is more than pain that one can receive from illness. From Job we learn, “Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?” (Job 2:10).

I feel that this man who became poor-looking and weak in the hands of his illness was one of the fortunate ones, as he benefited from this gift of his serious illness. While some of his fellows become neglectful and forget God Almighty through the calamity of good health, this man’s long talk was only about God’s beautiful Names. His illness is good health while for some of his peers good health is a sickness.

Listening to patients is the most valuable gift that one can offer them. Asking questions to make patients talk is one major task of a chaplain, and preaching is not a way to reach out to them without truly understanding their problems. Who would care to listen to any advice without given the right of being heard? As I listen to the words of wisdom pour out of this very old man, he reprimands me and says “You’re the one who should be preaching to me, but here I am preaching to you.” Yet I smile at these words of comfort about God’s love and our need for Him. And I remember the verse: “Those who say when afflicted by calamity: “To God do we belong and to Him is our return” (Qur’an, 2:156).

Lucinda Miller is ordained in the Free Methodist denomination and is now serving as a hospice chaplain. Gulsum Kucuksari is in the process of completing her PhD in Islamic Studies at the University of Arizona.

Notes

1. Said Nursi. The Gleams, Twenty-Fifth Gleam, NJ: The Light, Inc., 2008, p. 292.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid. p. 293.

the seashell becomes treasure,

a catalyst of daydreams. Tunes

hummed by innocence reach

the seagull nearby who gives up

flight to breathe in this fresh air.

An air that only they can bear,

that we forget through years

of aging hearts.

The sand still has memory of us,

although we forget. And that starfish

under the stars awaits our return,

but we turn. Away from the past

that gave us sight into a spark

of the divine. To see creation

in its purest form, its brightest shine.

Each grain of sand will be called to

tell his story. Can you imagine?

When from the seen and unseen

Worlds come Men and Jinn.

And to be asked from such an old age,

why we could not stay like a child.

For a moment to see like a child.

To dream like a child.

To take into our heart,

the Heart of the world,

as a child does,

with every blink of existence.