As educators have such an important position in society, it is vital to reflect upon the questions of how a teacher should conduct their teaching and what kind of a personality a teacher should develop in order to fulfill their mission as an educator. Although it is hard to provide satisfactory answers to such deep questions within the scope of a short essay, a couple of points might be worth mentioning.

First of all, an educator should have the dignity of bearing knowledge. They should be aware of the fact that if knowledge is the spirit, a set of actions is the body that carries that spirit. If a teacher is not setting an example for their students with their actions, then the knowledge will lose its meaning in the eyes of the students. As most would agree, the greatest teachers in the humanity appeared among the prophets. Prophets, with all their wisdom and deep knowledge about both the physical and the meta-physical world, first established their reputation in society with their outstanding moral values, and by demonstrating the best examples of human character and behavior. Presenting the values in conduct (tamsil) always comes before teaching the values (tabligh). Changing this order would result in ineffective teaching and inner hypocrisy for one who tries to teach.

A teacher should look at the universe from multiple angles. They should not confine themselves within the walls of the school or within the limits of the syllabus. They should teach their correspondents how to see a view in its multidimensionality and how to turn any input of data into information and thus into knowledge. An educator should not be a transmitter of information before checking whether the “receivers” are ready to detect and absorb the information. One who teaches should never forget that “the purpose of learning is to make knowledge a guide for your life, to illuminate the road to human perfection. Any knowledge that does not fulfill these functions is a burden for the learner and any science that does not direct one toward sublime goals is only deception.”

As Bertrand Russell stated, “The good individual is he who ministers to the good of the whole, and the good of the whole is a pattern made up of the goods of the individuals.” A teacher should build bridges between each person and society by using the school environment as a construction site, and mobilize the unique potential embedded in human personalities for the use of society, and more generally, humanity. Nobody should be treated as insignificant and as a result no capabilities of the students will be wasted. The greatest and most dangerous waste is the waste of human capital. A teacher knows that every human being is actually a miniature universe and that each one of their apprentices is as valuable as the heavens. The emotional, spiritual, and physical aspects of human nature offer such a wide spectrum of colors that the ideal teacher will enable their students to discover their own colors within this spectrum.

Teachers are the architectures of character. A teacher is expected to see every student as a possible masterpiece and to construct that masterpiece according to a carefully designed, individual and specific plan. This is not an easy task. No one person can fit into all the dresses in this shop. The teacher has to make their students think that they are special, that they are cared for, and that the teacher is tearing down the walls of limitations with bare hands to make room for them. Even though the teacher may not be able to make the difference that they intend to, their actions and then their intentions, which carry on after their actions are exhausted, will send the message to the students. This is what it means to make a difference in the lives of one’s students. The human body develops from one fertilized egg; the human spirit and character is far more advanced than the body, turning small seeds into giant fruit bearing trees.

Educators are advocates on behalf of their students, defending their weaknesses in learning, and looking for different approaches to overcome the obstacles between the knowledge and the student. Teachers can only prosecute themselves. They see their students’ failures as their own failures and never indulge in the luxury of self-forgiveness. Like poets who treat their verses like their children, yet always try to replace them with better ones, teachers ask themselves if their students could be any better than they are in terms of what they have learnt from them.

Teaching is also learning. A teacher learns from their students how to become a better educator. A good teacher should be able to listen to the silent words that pour from their students’ tongues of disposition. Students may not talk to the teacher directly, but their looks, facial expressions, their interactions with their teacher, their voice levels and tones, all reflect a teacher’s ability to instruct. Educators who do not carefully observe these signs are like those who close their eyes during the bright daylight and wonder why they cannot see.

If a teacher considers teaching to be a simple matter and is never aware of the burden of making an impact on others, then one must wonder about the dedication of this teacher. A teacher must be willing to take this road while also being aware of the long distances, deep valleys and oceans of hardships ahead. As Rumi stated, in the end, a teacher should be ready to say “I was raw; I was cooked; now I am burned.”

Yasin Ceran is a math teacher in Dallas, Texas.

]]> https://fountainmagazine.com/all-issues/2001/issue-33-january-march-2001/religion-and-human-conflict/ Mon, 01 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0000 http://107.21.79.195/all-issues/2001/issue-33-january-march-2001/religion-and-human-conflict/ People disillusioned by false practices of faith, as well as the nonreligious, argue that religion brings only fear, misery, and bloodshed to humanity. This contradicts religion’s very definition according to its sources: A worldview and code of conduct that lead people to true happiness in this world and the next through their own will.

As religion cannot be the source of happiness and misery at the same time, we examine these two perspectives. Among the examples typically cited to support the misery argument are Islam’s expansion (seventh to sixteenth centuries), the Crusades, and Europe’s ‘religious’ wars. While seemingly plausible at first glance, further analysis reveals that this argument overlooks key historical information and misrepresents others. In the following article, we examine this argument from a theological and historical perspective.

The Holy Scriptures

First we look at the religious sources: the holy Scriptures. The Qur’an condones war only in self-defense and preventing injustice and aggression, and equates killing one person unjustly with killing humanity (5:32). Examining early Islam’s so-called ‘religious wars’ reveals that each one was fought in self-defense or to prevent injustice. The total number of people killed in any battle of Prophet Muhammad never exceeded several hundred.(1)

The phrase holy war, the common translation for jihad, is a misnomer. Jihad essentially means struggling in God’s cause, of which war is only one form and allowed only under clearly defined circumstances. The New Testament tells victims to embrace aggressors with love or restore justice in the most appropriate manner (Matthew 5; Luke 17:1-5), while the Old Testament says: ‘Thou shalt not kill’ (Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5:17) and ‘He that kills any man shall surely be put to death (Leviticus 21:17).

Any aggression not conducted for self-defense or preventing injustice is not based on true religion. A good treatment of this in the context of Islam can be found in Prophet Muhammad as Commander.(2)

The Twentieth Century

The claim that religion is responsible for much of the bloodshed and death from a historical and statistical perspective is incorrect. The majority of deaths throughout history occurred during the twentieth century, and the majority of those happened during wars stemming from nonreligious motives.(3) World War II tops this list: 15 million soldiers and 25.5 million civilians. World War I is a close second: 9 million soldiers and 9.7 million civilians. Other examples include the Russian civil and the Russo-Polish wars (1917-21: 2 million soldiers, 7 million civilians), the Korean War (1950-53: 2 million soldiers and .9 million civilians), the Franco-Vietnam and US-Vietnam wars (1945-73: 1.3 million soldiers and 1.4 million civilians), the Sino-Japanese War (1937-41: 1 million soldiers and 1.2 million civilians), and the Soviet-Afghanistan War (1979-89: 500,000 soldiers and 1 million civilians).(4) These wars, which are responsible for the great majority of human loss through history, cannot be attributed to religious zeal.

The Soviet Union

While the motives of certain wars and other acts of aggression can be debated, certain self-proclaimed atheist, fascist, or otherwise nonreligious regimes, such as pre-World War II Germany and the Soviet Union, committed unprecedented crimes against their neighbors and citizens. According to Laqueur: ‘One of the cardinal features of the totalitarian dictatorships of the twentieth century was internal terror, the huge number of ‘enemies”and potential enemies’interned and executed. A striking example of this phenomenon is the era of Lenin and Stalin in Soviet Union. The atrocities committed during the time of Stalin are well documented.'(5)

According to the most conservative figures, allegedly based on secret KGB archives, between 510,307 and 1,727,970 Soviets were in labor camps between 1934 and 1950. A further 457,000 to 1,145,000 people were sentenced to labor colonies during roughly the same period. According to numbers released by Major General Anatoli Krayushkin, head of the Ministry of State Security’s archives, 3,853,000 arrests and 827,995 death sentences were made between 1917 and 1990. According to official KGB sources, 681,692 persons were killed between 1937 and 1938. In addition, 1,053,829 persons died in the Gulag between 1934 and 1953. To these numbers, one should add such figures as the Polish officers killed in 1940 in Katyn and other camps (15,000 to 20,000), and the Kazakhs who disappeared during the 1930s (1.5 to 2 million).

These are conservative estimates, given their source. Some researchers put the total number of deaths under the Soviets at between 10 and 20 million. According to Alec Nove, there were some 11 million ‘excess’ deaths between 1927 and 1937. Steven Wheatcroft, another Soviet-era researcher, says between 4 and 5 million people died.(6)

While Stalin remains notorious for internal terror, Lenin has been viewed differently’as a visionary whose ideals were betrayed by his followers. Is this correct? Recently declassified Soviet documents tell a different story. The following is a letter from Lenin to his comrades in which, appallingly, he mentions a specific number of people to be hanged: ‘Comrades! The uprising of the five kulak districts should be mercilessly suppressed… Hang (hang without fail, so the people see) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks.'(7)

In 1922, Moscow sought to confiscate all valuables of the Russian Orthodox Church and its monasteries to secure badly needed assets and to break the Church’s power over the peasants. Lenin hoped that the terrible famine sweeping Soviet Russia and Ukraine in 1921-22 would turn the peasantry against the Church. In the industrial city of Shuia, soldiers fired and killed several civilians (devout Christians) trying to protect their church. This event prompted the Politburo to delay further confiscation. When Lenin learned of this, he urged Politburo members to continue the campaign ‘mercilessly,’ as the time was ripe for such an action:

It is precisely now and only now, when in the starving regions people are eating human flesh, and hundreds if not thousands of corpses are littering the roads, that we can (and therefore must) carry out the confiscation of church valuables with the most savage and merciless energy… to secure for ourselves a fund of several hundred million gold rubles.

One wise writer on matters of statecraft (8) rightly said that if it is necessary to resort to certain brutalities for the sake of realizing a certain political goal, they must be carried out in the most energetic fashion and in the briefest possible time because the masses will not tolerate prolonged application brutality…. the struggle against us will be made more difficult if right at this moment, precisely in connection with the famine, we suppress the reactionary clergy with maximal speed and ruthlessness.

Therefore I come to the categorical conclusion that precisely at this moment we must give battle to the Black Hundred clergy in the most decisive and merciless manner and crush its resistance with such brutality that it will not forget it for decades to come.(9)

In another letter, Lenin openly instructs his comrades to terrorize the state’s enemies:

To Comrade Krestinsky:

I propose to form a commission immediately (initially this can be done secretly) to work out emergency measures (in the spirit of Larin: Larin is right). Let us say you+Larin+Vladimirsky (or Dzerzhinsky)+Rykov? Or Miliutin.

It is necessary secretly’and urgently’to prepare the terror. And on Tuesday we will decide whether it will be through SNK (the Council of People Commissars) or otherwise.(10)

These letters demonstrate that Stalin’s internal ‘cleansing’ campaigns of the 1930s and 1940s only continued Lenin’s policy and practice, and were not, as some claim, a betrayal of his high ideals.

While love and respect for fellow human beings is an essential principal of all major religions, in practice this has not always been the case. Aggression in the name of religion has long been exploited to show that religion brings tyranny and misery. Certain individuals, organizations, states, and regimes have used religion to justify the suffering they have caused, but this does not prove that religion by itself is to blame. As a matter of fact, nationalism, ideological extremism, or simple greed for power and material gain have caused incomparably larger suffering, as shown by documented statistics of wars and internal terror.

Conclusion

We looked briefly at the former Soviet Union, an atheist regime that committed some of the worst crimes against its own people in the name of communist ideology.

The twentieth century saw unprecedented advances in science and technology and, unfortunately, unprecedented human misery and suffering. Most crimes against humanity, as documented by statistics and recently revealed secret archives, were committed by totalitarian regimes during the twentieth century. Thus it is to claim that religion is responsible for most of history’s bloodshed and death. This responsibility lies with modern racist, atheist, or simply greedy regimes and not with religion, which was revealed to guide people to true happiness in this world and in the next through their own will.

Footnotes

1. Ali Unal, ‘Killing for Religion?’ The Fountain, no. 2 (Apr.’June 1996), 14.
2. M. Fethullah Gulen, Prophet Muhammad as a Comman der (Truestar: 1998).
3. Richard F. Mollica, ‘Invisible Wounds,’ Scientific American (June 2000).
4. Ibid.
5. Walter Laqueur, The Dream That Failed: Reflections on the Soviet Union (Oxford University Press: 1994).
6. Ibid.
7. Letter to V. V. Kuraev, Ye. B. Bosh and A. E. Minkin, August 1918. Located in Richard Pipes, The Unknown Lenin (Yale University Press: 1996).
8. Editor Note: Lenin is referring to Machiavelli (1469-1527), an Italian political philosopher and statesman synonymous with placing politics above everthing else.
9. Ibid., Letter to the Politburo, March 1922.
10. Ibid., Memorandum to N. N. Krestinsky, Sept. 1918.