(Circle3: On the touchy implorations by Imam Zeynel Abidin, continued)

Together with all of the fears and worries that this saintly person voices at his entreaties, he does not neglect to petition God with reference to divine beneficence and his heart changes rhythm with the excitement of hope. By behaving in this way, he presents an attitude that calls to mind the act of straightening up after bowing to God. For those who continue to struggle spiritually, he thus points to the ampleness of Divine Mercy with reference to the fact that “God’s mercy takes precedence over His wrath” [1]. One cannot help but remember the following words of a poet at this point:

“What would happen even if my sins were like the mount Qaf, O Majestic One,
Compared to Your sea of Mercy, it is surely a little thing”

He acts in accordance with this poetic idiom and spits in the face of sins and faults by imploring, “Please hold my hand to guidance, O God!” He places his head down on the doorstep of hope and petitions God once more by saying, “Mercy, mercy!” then he enters a mood as if he were sipping fresh oxygen and sighs on. Here are a few droplets from those breaths:

“O the One who responds with mercy as soon as His servants turn to Him, who never leaves their hopes unanswered, who saves them from the grief of falling apart from Him with the extra ways and disciplines that make them closer to Him, who covers up the defects of those polluted with sins and vices! O my most exalted Lord! As you never turned down those who turned to your door with hope and placed their head on Your doorstep empty handed, do not abandon this humble servant of Yours to despair either!”

With these cries, he makes petitions with a tone of fear and hope and thus gives the successors of his path signals for turning to that door with the feeling of hope. With a call to prayer, he lets the vastness of Divine Mercy be heard, even by unfortunate ones who have lost their sense of prayer direction. He calls to them to share his experiences and to hopefully inspire them to find their way. By presenting them with the most vivid messages woven out of hope and fear, he shows the ways towards a fresh revival with lyrics of resurrection after death; afterwards, like the archangel’s breath to initiate the resurrection, he blows life into them and turns them to the direction of the Divine they lost.

There are so many points I omitted from this profound session. With apologies to him and to readers, I would like to conclude with these diamond-like considerations. With other imploring groans special to his spiritual anatomy with heavenly riches, I would like to refer to some other life-giving points that sound like angelic melodies which he makes while his tears stream on. His tongue is guided by the heart, his thoughts beyond metaphysical realms, his sir (secret faculty) in citadels beyond and beyond, surpassing our comprehension. Here are a few droplets around the same theme as examples of those considerations, which deserve to be called a “legend of spirituality”:

“My God! Though I am without provisions, my reliance and submission to You is complete. In spite of this, when I think that my transgressions are boundless, I shake and fear from being subjected to Your punishment. On the other hand, when the ampleness of Your mercy comes to my view, my heart overflows with a feeling of optimism. So, when I am in that mood, although my sins make me groan with fear about perdition, my hope about Your pardoning gives signals of possible forgiveness to my soul.” What a balanced approach, which is found in those closest to God! What a profound blend of hope and fear! He continues to say, “Even though I came to Your sublime presence empty-handed, the consideration of the ampleness of Your bountifulness reinvigorates this servant of Yours and my eyes start shining brightly with Your beneficence’s promise of benisons. So much so that at the same moment when I am brimful with transgressions, my heart begins to experience changes of rhythm one after the other, with extra surprises of Your pardoning and breezes of proximity. Here I am at Your presence, O God! I let myself to the waterfalls of Your mercy and get away from myself as far as I can and turn to You with the entirety of my being!”

With a feeling of fear and insight of expectancy, he has an attitude of admitting failure to give his position its due. Then this great personage from those closest to God changes his orbit of prayer; virtually, with the idea that “worship is a result of blessings already enjoyed,” he once more takes into consideration the shower of Divine blessings that he has already received and begins to resonate with thankfulness by touching his face onto the doorstep of gratitude. He responds to God’s blessings beyond count and measure with thankful praises by giving his tongue and lips under the command of his spiritual intellect:

“My God! I do not know what to say before your immense blessings that come showering on the horizons of my perception consecutively. Before the Divine favors out of Your grace and generosity I remain spellbound and lost for words. When I consider Your very special blessings that come flowing like waterfalls and much beyond my deserts under the light of “Were you to attempt to count God’s blessings, you could not reckon them” (Ibrahim 14:34). Helpless to say anything, I double over with this feeling. Before those special bestowals of Yours, I feel manifold humility of indebtedness: My revival to life in the real sense with faith. Turning to Your door via Islam, with the honor and sense of duty of being sworn to worship only You, my head is down on the doorstep of munificence and grace, my hand on the knob of beneficence and bestowals, upon which I say “all of these are from You” and feel revitalized with thankfulness. Actually, even this feeling of thankfulness is from You. Whenever I offer thanks to You, given that thankfulness is another blessing of Yours – with such a virtuous cycle of thankfulness, I will never be able to offer due praise and thanks to You.”

If only we could continue our lives always on this course with awareness of these bestowals! Although we are not capable of thorough comprehension, I wish we could take what He has given as a sign of what He will give and thus take up the path to eternal bliss. It is especially important to remember this considering that this world is often compared to a carcass, without letting our hearts fall for this transient world. If only we could turn our backs to worldly status, fame, glory, wealth, corporeal desires, and thus always walk to the sun of suns without faltering. Alas! We fell for the attractions of this transitory world! With delusions of immortality, we were entangled with long-term worldly ambitions and suffered such losses on what could otherwise be a suitable ground for winning. Bediuzzaman put it so beautifully: “Alas! We have been deceived. We thought that this worldly life is constant, and thus utterly wasted everything. Indeed, this passing life is but a sleep that passed like a dream. This life, having no foundation, flows away like a brook.”

It is such a bitter fact that we fell for this deception, and at the expense of losing eternity. We were captivated by the passing attractions of these faithless desires and thus totally condemned the eternal realms to oblivion and thus darkened our futures. So much so that we were neither properly give the due of Divine bestowals and benisons nor were we able to comprehend them. To put this in the breaths of Ziya Pasha:

“We are the losers of this game once again;
For the loss is obvious, but I don’t know if we won anything at all.”

Actually, it was not possible for us to win. Because we led a carefree life as if we would never die and rendered this world—an arable field for the Afterlife—into a wasteland. By destroying the bridges extending to eternity on our course in the world one by one, we ceased the thoughts of the realms beyond and belief. We did not manage to come to our senses to see our miserable condition and turn to God.

Note

1. Bukhari, Tawhid 22; Muslim, Tawba 15.

Related Articles

• Facing Oneself
• Facing Oneself-2

Across the country, in the months following 9/11, other events took place; although they were of a different scale, they were equally evil. The murders of Muslims or people identified as Muslims, the willful destruction of Muslim-owned property, and the bullying and mistreatment of people with “Muslim-sounding” names occurred frequently in the guise of retaliation or justice. This atmosphere of intolerance did not sit well with me. I knew that my neighbors who were Muslim were not evil people, and I felt that a faith which had birthed so much beauty over its history could not be solely evil. My own faith was one of the many Christian traditions born in the spiritual renewal which swept through the United States in this nation’s early days. Many of these early Christians had been persecuted by their neighbors due to intolerance and fear born of ignorance; this element within my family’s history helped me to recognize the injustice of what was occurring.

I am a Christian minister, I am an artist, and I am an educator. My responsibility to my faith is to seek God and His goodness wherever they might be found; my drive as an artist is to recognize and share the beauties of God’s creation wherever they may be; and my goal as an educator is to help open minds so they may be receptive to knowledge and the inspiration of God’s love, however it manifests. After 9/11, I was determined to learn about Islam – not from the media-driven mindset of sensationalism and sound-bites, but with an eye open to truth and a mind open to the promptings of the Spirit, and to give the faith the same respect I felt my own beliefs deserve. I met with Muslims and asked them what they believed, and I read the source documents of the faith, the Holy Qur’an and the Hadith. Those who responded to my questions were scholars, imams, sheikhs, and laity from all over the world, from multiple schools of Islamic thought and practice. From these many, many points of view a picture of Islam as a faith and Muslims as a people emerged. This picture shook me profoundly – there was a great deal more we shared than I had thought possible.

Muslims love their children. Muslims believe in God – the same God in which I believe (in Mark 15:34, in the New Testament, Jesus called God “Eloi,” the same word in Aramaic as “Allah”). Muslims love education, finding truth, and caring for their neighbors. The list could go on and on. There was nothing I could find in the Qur’an which said anything about the supposed glories of terrorism; in fact it was plain that such violence angers our Creator more profoundly than almost any other evil. How then could I share this knowledge with those around me? Shortly after asking this question, I happened upon the tradition of the 99 Most Beautiful Names of God, or Asma al-Husna, and I recognized this was not a coincidence. The answer was to begin building and showing glass sculptures to explore the wisdom and meaning of each of the 99 Names from the point of view of a Christian.

The 99 Names Project is meant primarily to provide an excuse for dialog; each work is the result of prayerful research bringing together Muslim views of each Name with the points of convergence I see in my own Christian faith. As such, the initial dialog begins with me. I read references to the Names in the Qur’an as well as in the writings of scholars like Rumi. I visit Muslim scholars, ecclesiastical leaders, and laity, and ask them about the Names. I then cross-reference what I learn with what I find in the Bible. Then, I prayerfully consider what motifs and designs in Islamic artistic tradition best correspond with what I have discovered; develop new images and patterns emulating traditional works; and build up shapes with the sculptures to communicate this whole process of learning. One of the first things I discovered is that unlike in my own Christian tradition, figurative work having to do with the Deity is entirely inappropriate in Islamic tradition, so the works are abstract and non-representational.

There are three elements which consistently return in the works. The most visible is geometry: all truth comes from the same Source regardless of the site of its discovery or the language of its transmission. It seemed the best way to symbolize this is through the purity of mathematics and its material manifestation. Another primary element is architectural structure. One truth shared between my Christian faith and that of my Muslim brothers is the honor and responsibility of building the kingdom of God on earth, and the earliest Muslim buildings were shared in peace by the believers of many faiths. The third element is a bookbinding sensibility. The widespread use of art in books is perhaps the most important element shared among my sculptures because it symbolizes the vital role of the Qur’an. In my Christian faith, I recognize Jesus as the Word of God made flesh and he is the bridge connecting me to God; in Islam, the Word of God is made legible, and the miraculous bridge uniting God and man can be read every day.

Building the Name Forgiving (Al-Ghaffar) is a good example of the overall process. The shape was built as a softened cube and doors were mounted on each surface, perpetually pointing inward. The design elements were drawn from Ottoman history, one of the most pluralist and inclusive societies of medieval times. The floor of the sculpture is etched and painted with the traditional 8-pointed star and cross pattern known as “Compassionate Breath,” and a cup of white liquid is in the center. I had considered several colors for the liquid, including clear and gold, but felt prompted to use white.

At the first display of the finished sculpture, a Turkish man complimented me on the work and asked why I had placed milk in the center of the welcoming doors. I explained I had no idea, but felt compelled by something outside myself. He explained that the cup was filled with the color of the rivers of heaven, and felt the sculpture was just right. The ongoing experience of this project is a dance between what I am learning about Muslims and the nudges or promptings I receive; these are my heartfelt responses to the Divine Names of God, built from a place of reverence and respect for those I now know are my spiritual siblings, fellow children of father Abraham. I may have no idea why the nudge or prompt to action comes, but experiences like this one show me how important it is to listen to that small voice.

When this project started, I was given counsel by many of the Muslims I interviewed to take my time and open my heart to Divine guidance. It has taken 3 years to build the first 25 sculptures, and I have documented these in a book, 99 Names: 1 to 25 (A Christian’s Exploration of the Names of God from the Qur’an in Glass). There has been some negative feedback, including a very small minority of Muslims who felt it was inappropriate for a non-Muslim to examine Muslim themes and a few Christians concerned I was losing my perspective as a Christian. However, something remarkable happened. Throughout this process, I have learned about many points of agreement and separation in our respective faiths. I have rejoiced in our similarities and I respect our differences – and rather than diluting my Christian beliefs, my faith has expanded, grown, and deepened. As Fethullah Gülen teaches, something holy happens through the process of education, and such an exercise can only result in the growth of those involved.

These sculptures are meant to show our many points of convergence and understanding, and to celebrate opportunities for learning, dialog, and friendship. Regardless of the faith we claim or how we pronounce the Name of our Creator, we are all, first and foremost, human and His creations. God is Beautiful and loves beauty, and I pray He finds this offering acceptable.

99 Names: 1 to 25
A Christian’s Exploration of the Names of God from the Qur’an in Glass
2013
978-1490510750
CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform

Zeno of Elea was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher of southern Italy and a member of the Eleatic School founded by Parmenides. He argued that an object in motion can never pass from one position to another, because between the two there is always an “infinity” of other positions, however close, that must be successively traversed in the course of the motion, and this “infinity” can never be exhausted. David Hilbert is a German mathematician who postulated a hypothetical hotel with “countably infinitely” many rooms, all of which are occupied. Since the hotel has “infinitely” many rooms, we can move the guest occupying room 1 to room 2, the guest occupying room 2 to room 3, and so on, and fit a newcomer into room 1. By repeating this procedure, it may be argued that it is possible to make room for any finite number of new guests, although every room of this hotel initially contains a guest.

The following two quotations from two contemporary authors may provide more substance about the nature of the problem:

On the other hand, involvement with the infinite brings with it a huge range of difficulties. In particular, there are the many puzzles and paradoxes that have been outlined in the pages of this book. Moreover, there are the many quite fundamental problems that arise for such apparently simple notions as counting, adding, maximizing, and so forth. Because we are so firmly wedded to limit notions-“best,” “first,” “greatest,” “maximum,” and so forth-that do not sit easily with the infinite, it is very hard to see how we can make our peace with the infinite.

The infinite has always been a slippery concept. Even the commonly accepted mathematical view, developed by Georg Cantor, may not have truly placed infinity on a rigorous foundation.

In the present article, we attempt to summarize Rene Guenon’s (1886-1951) alternative way of thinking on the idea of infinite from the perspective of the traditional metaphysical science. Much more detailed presentation of his perspective can be found in his (1886-1951) valuable study The Metaphysical Principles of the Infinitesimal Calculus from which we will extensively quote here.

Guenon considered mathematics as providing a particularly proper symbolism for the expression of metaphysical truths to the extent that they are expressible. However, he states that “in order for this to be so it is above all necessary that these sciences be rid of the various errors and confusions that have been introduced by the false views of the moderns.” To follow Guenon’s paradigm it is necessary to start with the metaphysical notion of the universal-All which comprehends all possibilities, the non-manifested as well as the manifested Universe, that is, the cosmos. The universal All leaves outside itself only the impossible that is a pure nothing. A determination is to define a certain domain of possibilities in relation to all the rest which is expressed by Spinoza (1632-1677) as omnis determinatio negatio est (all determination is a negation). The first of all determinations is Being itself. “Number is only a mode of quantity, and quantity itself only a category or special mode of being, not coextensive with it, or more precisely still, quantity is only a condition proper to one certain state of existence in the totality of universal existence.” Number, space, and time are all determined conditions.

The Infinite, understood in its true, metaphysical sense, has no limits since its opposite, finite is synonymous with limited. Therefore, according to Guenon,

… one cannot correctly apply this term to anything other than that which has absolutely no limits, that is to say the universal All. Furthermore, there can obviously be only one Infinite, for two supposedly distinct infinities would limit and therefore inevitably exclude one another.

He further states, “The Infinite, in its true sense, can have neither opposite nor complementarity.” The scholastic distinction between “the infinite in a certain respect” and “the absolute infinite” cannot be accepted. If a thing is not limited in a certain sense or in a certain respect than one can legitimately conclude that it is limited in no way at all, and since a determined thing does not include every possibility, as such it can only be finite.

Given any number, one can form the next by adding a unit gives the sequence of numbers to us. Therefore, we cannot actually reach its limits. However, the impossibility of reaching the limits of certain things in the manifested Universe should not cause the illusion that these determined things have no limits at all. In order to replace the false notion of “determined infinite,” Guenon introduces, the idea of the indefinite, which is precisely the idea of a development of possibilities the limits of which we cannot actually reach; and this is why we (Guenon) regard this distinction between the Infinite and the indefinite as fundamental to all questions in which the so-called mathematical infinite appears.

According to Descartes (1596-1650), the indefinite is that of which we do not perceive the limits, and which in reality could be infinite. On the contrary, Guenon affirms that

(T)he indefinite cannot be infinite because it always implies a certain determination, whether it is a question of extension, duration, divisibility, or some other possibility; in a word, whatever the indefinite may be, and according to whatever aspect it is considered, it is still of the finite and can only be of the finite.

The idea of an “infinite number” understood as “the greatest of all numbers,” or “the number of all numbers” is contradictory. The impossibility of an “infinite number” can be established by various arguments:

(T)o every whole number (integer) there corresponds another number equal to its double, such that one can make the two sequences correspond term by term, with the result that the number of terms must be the same in both; but there are obviously twice as many whole numbers as there are even, since even numbers alternate by twos in the sequence of whole numbers; one thus ends up with a manifested contradiction.

Guenon insists that number, despite its indefinitude, is by no means applicable to all that exists and the multitude of all numbers cannot constitute a number, which, moreover, is finally only an application of the incontestable truth that what limits a certain order of possibilities must necessarily be beyond and outside that which it limits.

On the other hand, the idea of multitude, contrary to that of number, is applicable to all that exists which allows one to speak of the multitude of divine attributes for example, or again of the multitude of angels, that is, of beings belonging to states that are not subject to quantity, where, consequently, there can be no question of number.

Number itself can also be regarded as a species of multitude, but on the added condition that it be a “multitude measured by the unit” according to the expression of Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274).

The term “indefinite” consists of something unfinished. The “non-measured” is that which has not yet been defined, which is only incompletely realized within manifestation. The multitude of all numbers is “innumerable” or “non-measured,” which is not to say they are infinite, but merely that they are indefinite.

Guenon calls whole number as true number or pure number. He accepts that the numbers other than whole numbers can be considered as the extensions or generalizations of the idea of number. However, he adds that these extensions are also distortions. According to Guenon, numerical quantity has a discontinuous character, whereas spatial or temporal magnitudes, for example, are continuous quantities. “Between these two modes of quantity is a difference of nature such that a correspondence between the two cannot be perfectly established.” He distinguishes the arithmetical unit from the “units of measurement,” which are magnitudes of another sort than number, notably geometric magnitudes. He defines a continuous quantity as an extension-however small it might be that will always remain indefinitely divisible.

Guenon is against atomism, which necessarily implies the discontinuity of all things. He argues extension cannot be composed of indivisible elements, for these elements would have to be extensionless to be truly indivisible, and a sum of elements with no extension can no more constitute an extension than a sum of zeros can constitute a number, that is why points are not the elements or parts of a line; the true linear elements are always distances between points, which latter are only their extremities. Points multiplied by any quantity at all can never produce length, since, rigorously speaking, they are null with respect to length; the true elements of a magnitude must always be of the same nature as the magnitude, although incomparably less: this leaves no room for indivisibles.

Further,

The point, which, being indivisible, is by that very fact without extension, that is, spatially null, but which, as we (Guenon) have explained elsewhere, is nonetheless the very principle of all extension.

For Guenon, Zeno of Elea’s arguments are against atomism and indeed, they prove that without continuity there would be no possible motion.

It is this very conception of motion that is in error, for it amounts in short to regarding the continuous as if it were composed of points, or of final, indivisible elements, like the notion according to which bodies are composed of atoms; and this would amount to saying that in reality there is no continuity, for whether it is a question of points or atoms, these final elements can only be discontinuous.

And, “The possibility of motion presupposes the union, or rather the combination, of both temporal and spatial continuity.”

We consider Guenon as an important and prominent example of thinkers who tried to remind people of the traditional metaphysical ideas. This metaphysical perspective does not share the modern tendency to attribute more importance to the practical applications of science than to science itself. This perspective attempts to link science back to principles of a higher order so that a particular science can be used as a support for elevating oneself to a higher knowledge.

“Fear” and “hope” are two great blessings that God has given us or will do so in the future. Using these two blessings in a measured way as a vehicle to reach God is another blessing, indeed a greater blessing.

This question carries an implied assumption that there exists an association between one’s sense of security and a life of comfort and possibly luxury while fear is connected with leading a life in poverty and destitution. At first glance, this may readily provide a partial explanation, but it would be wrong to assume that this is an exhaustive commentary. Another way to understand this hadith could be as follows:

“I will not give my servant two assurances at the same time.” If a person is living carefree and in indulgence in the world, is not concerned about the next life, and has no worries about the destruction of his soul and spiritual life, and if that person has no fear of the losing his subtle qualities, no fear of the death of his feelings and the extinction of his spiritual faculties and thus lives without fear, that person cannot be without fear in the next world.

If a person lives with fear in this world-fear in the sense mentioned above-and is always anxious both in his words and actions, saying, “O my Lord! If it were not for Your benevolence, I could not protect my faith; if not for Your grace, I could not protect my subtle points; if not for Your generosity, I could not survive; if not for Your Compassion and Mercy, I cannot enter Heaven. If not for the Beloved, the Mercy of the World, I would not have found my way and would have remained in depravity.” If he can always exist in this fear and frequently take himself to account, control himself, and take the opportunity to renew himself, in the next world-God willing-there will be no fear for him.

However, there is an indispensible truth in the way this question is phrased, and it is not far from the meaning expressed in the hadith. If a person acts without concern and fear as if he came to this world only to live, and if he never feels any anxiety, then that person should be concerned about himself. In fact, even if this does not happen often, he should worry about living only in comfort and languor and feel shame for it. The following example clarifies the matter a little more: As related in sound narrations, Umar b. Abdulaziz would sometimes repeat the verse, “When the chains are around their necks, and fetters (around their legs). They will be dragged,” (40:71) and would fall on the floor. In addition, he would read this verse many times and pass out: “You consumed in your worldly life your (share of) pure, wholesome things, and enjoyed them fully (without considering the due of the Hereafter, and so have taken in the world the reward of all your good deeds). So this Day, you are recompensed with the punishment of abasement because of your scornful arrogance on the earth against all right, and because of your transgressing (the bounds set by God)” (46:29).

Yes, it is very normal for a believer with a sound heart to have such a concern, and actually this fear is the result of profound contemplations. But God may have also given this world in terms of substantial health to a person as He gave to Abdurrahman ibn Awf and Uthman ibn Affan, two giant believers. In that case, believers should make use of their wealth for the sake of lofty purposes and serve humanity for the sake of God. It is not necessary to give away possessions entirely; it is better to give in measured terms to those who are in need. A part of the assets should be retained so that they can be invested and wealth multiplied; thus, in the end one can donate a greater amount. Let it suffice that our intentions are pure, that we know this wealth is a trust from God and that we are ready to give it away when our Lord wants it.

This should be a benchmark against which we frequently check the level of our hearts. Can we comfortably say, deep within our consciences, that we are ready to give every time we hear the command and suggestions by Our Lord? Can we say, “Yes, O My Lord, I am ready to give!”? If we can do this, in other words, if the state of our heart is not attached to the possessions we have, then an increase in wealth can bear no negative impact upon us, and our property will not be the cause of any worry concerning the Hereafter, if God so wills. On the other hand, if a person insists on living heedlessly, having no belief or spiritual quest, simply, yet unwisely seeking to please the never-pleased carnal self-may God forbid-such a person will be bogged down in the swamp, headfirst. Let these two points not be confused.

While these conflicts are represented and justified in terms of religion, historical linkages and occurrence, resources, election or ethnicity, a critical look at these “points of division” increasingly clarifies certain underlying currents: group affiliation, attachment and solidarity. It is this affiliation, attachment and solidarity that have informed the increasingly common dichotomy of people, locally and sometimes internationally, between the “we” and the “them,” “the in-groups” and “the out-groups” or, as is used among the Yorubas in western Nigeria, between the “Omo-ilus” and the “Ara-ilus.”

In the Yoruba language the Omo-ilus denotes a group of people who belong to a particular area in terms of religion and culture, and not only reside in such areas, but are attached to the land. Conversely, the Ara-ilus are people who find themselves in the same area as the Omo-ilus, but who are considered aliens by the latter because of history, religion, tribe, etc. Therefore, there is a clear division to the extent that an Omo-ilu tends not to see an Ara-ilu as his tribal brother even when the latter has stayed in the Ilu (village or locality) for more than 20 years, or even where he was born in the Ilu and haz imbibed some of the culture of the land, including its religion. Though elsewhere, this division is termed the native-settler syndrome, the underlying logic is similar.

The “group thesis” as an explanatory paradigm postulated by Arthur Bentley is not new in the social sciences, but its essence and relevance has been a subject of academic standoffs, while the respective groups continue to move towards violent settlement of issues. Even the global system has not been left out in this segmentation of the humanities. While Huntington spoke about a “clash of civilizations,” President George W. Bush partitioned the world into “Our Allies” and the “Axis of Evil,” even as some Arab scholars and leaders publicized an “Arab Renaissance”-sometimes termed “Arabism”-which splits the Northern African countries from other parts of Africa, and in other, more Machiavellian usage justifies conflicts in places like Darfur, Sudan. All these assertions and points of view tend to perceive of the global system as a mixture of groups with mutually exclusive interest and existences. These patterns of thinking, though gaining grounds, qualify as perhaps the greatest form of communal self-deceit. Men will always remain interrelated and interdependent on one another.

It is within this milieu that I propose Justobification, a simple interpersonal disposition to be adopted or adapted by these various groups. Justobification is a personal experiment that has helped me understand, to a large extent, someone from “another group.” Today that someone is my wife. It is simple and replicable in a wider context. Most importantly, it is adaptable in attempting to address some of these socially constructed divisions with a sense of love and respect, emphasizing centripetal rather than centrifugal forces. Justobification is a story, spanning nine years of my life and culminating in my marriage to my friend, classmate and, now, wife, Justina Olatuga. We had different backgrounds in terms of religion, state of origin (a key means of division and appropriation in Nigeria), family background and differing opinions on a number of issues. Though we belonged to the same Yoruba ethnic group in Nigeria, the aforementioned differences created a dialectical summation which made us Omo-ilu and Ara-ilu simultaneously, depending on whether we are in my native Lagos State or in her Ondo State in Nigeria. To complicate issues, our parents are religious leaders: a Pastor and an Alhaji. Justobification is in itself, and originally, an attempt to merge my native name and hers to form a word: Justina and Tobi. It was coined by a colleague of ours who had, unknown to us, watched us since we stated our friendship in 1999. But beyond his coinage, I proceed to justify Justobification.

I have always had the belief that one’s position and stage in life is determined by a number of factors. These factors have been broadly identified as nature or nurture. By nature, it presupposes the fact that a human being’s way of seeing things is shaped by the way he or she was born. Thus, often it is said in some cultures that a fat person is usually friendly and lively, or a baby with a gap in its tooth means that it will be a socialite when it grows up. More clearly, race and ethnicity are key nature-factors; for instance, people who are born by European parents see themselves as Europeans just as an African, in the strictest form, gives birth to an African, though nurture also has a role to play in the formation of racial or ethnic identities.

The nurture angle argues that human beings are influenced by those events that they experience and the circumstances in which they find themselves. This means that the opportunity for and location of their education, their friendship, the books they read, their family orientation and so on all being a function of what occurred after birth. In other words, experiences have an enduring impact on the way we see things. As a factor, religion-without any attempt at interpreting the embodiment of the Books-falls under nurture. Thus, a large number of people are Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sango worshipper, etc., most often because their parents belong to such religions.

However, while nature-nurture makes human beings different in terms of their culture, race, tribe, region, religion, etc, this nature-nurture engendered classification has been at the core of local and international crises. These crises are reinforced by the fact that some of the emergent groups tend to view themselves as superior or more civilized or more indigenous than the other, as can be seen in the native-settler violence in Middle Belt of Nigeria, the Hutu-Tutsi violence in Rwanda, violence in Darfur in Sudan, Kenya with regards to the recent electoral violence, the crisis in Ireland some years ago, pre-1990 apartheid in South Africa among others.

My marriage to Justina exposed me to certain points. First, all religions teach love and respect. Similarly, all ethnic groups, which are likened to race, teach morality in which love and respect are central. There is hardly any religion, race, tribe, etc, that advocates violence and mutual hatred for the followers of other religions or members of other tribes or groups for no just reason. As friends, not only did we love ourselves as creatures of the Almighty, but we also respected our various points of view on nature-nurture factors such as ethnicity, religion, tribe, class, etc. We understood that these views are personal but we also, most importantly, understood that we must not assume that these individual views must be accepted by the other party. The global system can learn from this in the sense that civilizations, to use the words of Huntington, should not claim to be on a mission to civilize another civilization. Instead, efforts should be made to understand and respect the others’ views through love. Love, if present, allows individuals and groups to overlook the mistakes of others. This certainly does not mean that we should ignore human rights violations, injustices, and corruption; more appropriate and influential means of interaction should be used if we truly want to eliminate such violations.

Second, listening to ourselves helped us make sense of some of our beliefs. This helped us scale the hurdle of assumptions and the breaks in communications which are some of the reasons for group related intra/inter-state conflicts. These can be illustrated by such events as the myth of the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, the emergent Sunni-Shiite enmity around portions of the middle east, a failure to communicate between the top leaders of Palestine and Israel, the continuous religious vacuum created in the neglect of some Islamic leaders in Somalia (Oshodi, 2009) and the ethno-religious violence in 1994, 2001, 2002 and 2008 in Jos, Nigeria to mention just a few. Listening to people helps one to understand their respective points of view. The importance of listening allows the Ara-ilus and Omo-ilus to understand one another better. For instance, our interactions have helped me understand some aspects of Christianity that I never knew existed. Also, I was able to relate a number of the verses of the Qur’an to her, even before we decided to marry.

Thirdly, Justobification helped me understand that some of the points of difference among groups could be transformed to points of understanding. We achieved this by learning to see our similarities rather than overplay our differences. Even as there were areas where we did not agree, we laid more emphasis on the centripetal forces such as common humanity and love, while understanding the centrifugal forces by listening to each other with respect and understanding. Unfortunately, some group leaders tend to over-blow these differences to a massive level, leading to the emergence of hybrid interpretations which find expression in the various violence and counter-violence among a large number of the nature-nurture groupings of the world.

Fourthly, Justobification showed me the importance of prayer for peace and friendship. Though it is unquestionable that prayers are a communication between human beings and the Creator, these prayers often have a psychological effect on us. By praying for a person, you tend to wish such a person well, thereby overcoming any hitherto existing antagonisms or hatreds. I recommend that groups pray for other groups. By this I look, hopefully, for a day when Sunnis pray for Shiites in Iraq, and vice versa in their mosques on frequent occasions, or the day when Christians pray for Muslims, Arabs pray for Americans, Yorubas pray for Hausa-Fulanis, or leaders of larger groups/states pray for others. For instance, the Israeli President pray for Palestinian leaders, or ex-President Bush praying for President Ahmadinajad of Iran, and vice versa. Though this may be considered laughable and debateable, there is no doubt that saying a prayer for peace and friendship will soften the hearts of these groups and their leaders.

In conclusion, even as I write there is the threat of nature-nurture related violence in different parts of the world. Societies are dividing along ethnic, religious, tribal or civilizational line. Sadly, this may continue unless we, as humans, begin to see the need to love, respect, expand points of unity and pray for peace and friendship. Simply put… we could all use a little Justobification.

Abdul-Gafar ‘Tobi’ Oshodi is a lecturer in the Department of Political Science, Lagos State University (LASU), Lagos, Nigeria. Also a trained journalist, Tobi Oshodi specialises in Advanced Specialised Reporting and International Political Economy with bias for the “African Condition.”

References

• Huntington, S. “The Clash of Civilizations,” in Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993.
• Oshodi, T. “Religious Vacuum and the Making of a Failed State: Somalia in the Eyes of the World” a paper presented at the Conference on Religion and International Relations in the Post Cold War Era held at the Uthman Dan Fodio University (UDU) Sokoto, Nigeria, January 16th – 17th, 2009.

The surfaces of soap bubbles have a very important feature. These surfaces which have minimum surface-tension potential energy also have minimum areas. That is, soap bubbles or clusters have a natural tendency to minimize area for the volumes they enclose. Two different frames and the areas formed are shown in Figure 1. For a given closed frame, at least one such minimal area can be formed; however, mathematicians have had to strive to prove it.

The famous mathematician Richard Courant (1888–1972), together with his students, did soap bubble experiments with various frames.

Minimal areas can also be formed by using more than one closed frames. Figure 2 shows the minimal surfaces obtained by holding two circular frames parallel. If the frames are kept too far from each other, no surface will form. If they are kept sufficiently near to each other, surfaces similar to those shown in Figures 2a and 2b will be obtained. If they are kept close enough to each other, then three minimal surfaces adjacent to each other as shown in Figure 2c can form.

The minimum energy principle is commonly observed not only in living organisms, but also in lifeless matter. A chain will take the shape which produces the least potential energy of attraction when it is fastened at two points onto a rod as shown in Figure 3. This form (function) is called “catenary” in mathematics.

The areas which are formed as a result of rotating the catenary curve around an axis A are called catenoids. Two different types of catenoids are shown in Figures 4a and 4b. As presumed, catenoids are minimal areas and can be obtained by the use of soap bubbles. If such formations were selected and used in everyday utensils, such as glasses, dishes and so forth, ideal shapes which cause the least loss of heat could be designed.

If the katenoid shown in Figure 5a is cut from its edge as shown in Figure 5b and turned by being slightly extended, a helical form or a helicoid will be obtained as shown in Figure 5f. This helicoid also is a minimal surface. Architects have widely used this form in spiral-shaped staircase structures. See Fig. 6.

Fig. 1-Closed frames and soap film surfaces formed1 Fig. 2a&b–Single foam film surfaces over two parallel circular frames1 Plus, the perpetual screw system which is widely in use in technology is also in a form similar to this geometry.

If a cylinder of the smallest volume that can house a helicoid is drawn (Fig.7a) and the lines on which the surface and the cylinder intersect are marked, then a double helix structure (Fig. 7b) is obtained; this is used in modeling DNA molecules which are the genetic codes of living species.

There are two elementary principles related to soap bubbles. The first principle says that if a bubble touches a surface that supports it, it unites with that surface in a way to make 90° angles. The soap bubble on that plain surface forms into a semi-spherical shape and the angle between the bubble surface and the supporting surface will be 90° at every point of contact. The second principle says that if three soap bubble surfaces come together, they form 120° angles along a line. If soap films come together within a tetrahedron frame as in figure 8, then the angles between the lines will be 109° 28′ 16″.

The Steiner problem which is an elementary problem in mathematics can be solved by the application of the 90° and 120° principles. The Steiner problem investigates how n points over a surface can be united in the shortest way by a web. Two transparent surfaces are connected with thin and parallel pins of equal lengths and then dipped into a soapy solution. When it is taken out, soap films will form. These films have a 90° angle with the supporting transparent surfaces and when three soap films come together, they connect at 120° angles with one another.

When observed from above, the intersecting lines between the soap film and one of the surfaces give the shortest web which unites the points in n numbers. How four points are united is shown in Figure 9a and how five points are united is shown in Figure 9b. Someone seems to have equipped lifeless objects such as soap bubbles with the ability to solve complex problems like a math genius.

Periodically repeated minimal areas have been observed on walls separating organic and inorganic substances in the skeletons of certain sea animals like the sea urchin and the starfish. Figure 10 shows the micro structure of a sea urchin’s skeleton. It has calculated that the geometry of its skeleton has perfectly been shaped in such a way as to prevent the extension of possible cracks.

Experiments with soap bubbles have been a source of inspiration also for architects. Such experiments have yielded inspiration for roof and tent designs. The German architect Frei Otto is one of the most eminent names in this regard. Figure 11 shows the minimal areas which Frei Otto managed to obtain by dipping hair-thin threads in soapy water.

In order for such a soap bubble model to be converted into an architectural structure, it is carefully photographed and precisely measured. Later, solid models are made and tested in wind tunnels. The tensile pressures likely to form under loads of wind and snow are measured by special precision instruments. In real structures, thin steel cables having high tensile strengths replace the hairy threads, and transparent plastic and synthetic materials replace the soap bubble film.

Figure 12 shows roof of the Munich Olympic Stadium, Figure13 shows the roof of the Munich Olympic Athletic Arena and Figure 14 shows the roof of the Olympic Swimming Arena in the same city. All these roofs have been designed and erected using the minimal surfaces obtained from soap bubble experiments.

Children love playing with soap bubbles very much; they usually blow a round circle after dipping a wand into soapy water and then watch the bubbles flying out of it. However, it is not only children who play with soap bubbles and soap films. Scientists have, for hundreds of years, been doing experiments with soap bubbles, developing mathematical theories, obtaining various surfaces and transferring the compiled data into technology.

Experiments with soap bubbles have been a source of inspiration also for architects. Such experiments have yielded inspiration for roof and tent designs.

2) These roofs can easily be erected, dismantled and transported to elsewhere, whereas traditional buildings cannot easily be re-located.

3) These structures which are designed according to tensile strengths are very sturdy all over, whereas the tensile pressures of classical buildings are so high that extremely heavy materials such as concrete and brick are used in order to balance the pressure.

The structures of light and strong materials granted to living things are splendid. The lightness and endurance of our skeleton system, the perfect endurance in the stems of slender plants such as wheat and barley, the extremely thin and elastic structure of a fly’s wing, and thousands of similar examples can be given.2 The word of German architect Frei Otto in this subject are expressive: “Biology has become indispensable for architecture.” Witnessing similar perfections also in inanimate structures such as soap bubbles proves that laws in nature originate from the same hand.

Obtaining minimal surfaces has become much easier as a result of immense increases in computer capabilities. Extremely complicated minimal surfaces which can be obtained through computer-aided-designs and calculations have become easily available as alternatives to soap bubble experimentations. If we, as human beings, are aiming to realize developments in science and technology, we should look,more carefully and meditatively, at events which are seemingly simple and unimportant around us and we should also discover the beauties and perfections that God has granted us and put them into service of humanity. The more our designs are compatible with the laws of nature, the higher our chances of success will be.

References

• S. Hilderbrandt, A. Tromba, The Parsimonious Universe, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996.
• M. S. Polatöz, Tabiatta Mühendislik (Engineering In Nature), Kaynak Publications, Izmir, 2003.
• A. B. Smith, The stereom microstructure of the echinoid test. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 25, 1–85, 1981.

Eternia is the land of eternity, the land where there is no end to anything. I learned it from an animated cartoon named He-man. At that young age, I did not really feel what it meant to be eternal, because I was not in search of it. For me, what mattered was the excitement I felt in catching the cartoon on time every week. Once the episode was over, the unknown and unexpected adventures of the next episode used to keep my excitement active until then. Today, as I age into maturity, the unknown outcomes of the events in my life and the uncertainties about the possible realizations of my dreams keep me in a state similar to that which I experienced in my childhood. But this time, I am the hero, and the world around me replaces Eternia. I am the one who is going through troubles to gain inexhaustible satisfaction and joy. If you follow me, I will tell you the “sesame” f o r m u l a that opens the doors of Eternia. “It was the fall of 1977. The corridors of the hospital reverberated with the cries of a newborn. His delayed birth was taking place at a later time of the day, due to his mother’s reluctance and fear to deliver him.” Given this very same start, a thousand people could come up with a thousand different stories. You can go further and specify an end to this story, such as “As the sun fell below the horizon, he permanently closed his eyes with tears and a deep smile on his lips.” Still, there will be an infinite number of possible ways of moving from the given start to the given end.

The existence of infinite possible ways of life results in our inability to accurately predict the future. Here are some actual examples to further our thoughts. Lincoln, who finally had great political success, lost so many times in his past enterprises. Without seeing the final point, it is impossible to tell if he was an idealist destined to success, or a loser with an obsession. Similarly, in the case of Einstein, it was impossible to tell at first whether he would be a famous and successful scientist despite his awful start in education, or a dropout student due to his non-conformity and academic inadequacy.

These examples show that we are not only unable to penetrate into the future but also ignorant of the true nature of events. The reason for our both shortcomings is the uncertainty inherent between two points in the time line. Exactly the same thing can be seen in geometry. There are infinite number of curves that pass through a given pair of points, which means there are infinite number of equations that can describe the distribution of a pair of points. The concept of infinite number of curves is enabled by the uncertainty about the path connecting the two points. Are there other instances linking uncertainty to infinity?

What is the size of the universe anyway? Many people have been dazzled by this question throughout history. Studies were done to see if the universe had limits, and if so, to determine its size. Still, we do not have an established answer to this question. Simply, we say the universe is infinite. The reason behind this unproven conclusion is the uncertainty about the limits of the universe. In effect, our ignorance of them translates into the conclusion of an infinite universe. Once more, we see the strong relationship between uncertainty and infinity.

Why is a prison a prison? Is it because you cannot get out of an area whose borders are visible? Or, is it because you are only allowed to certain number of actions there? Both can be part of the answer. Now, help the inmates and make the area of the prison larger so that they cannot see the borders anymore. Let us make their building larger as well. Does it not sound like our situation within the borders of a country? What is happening is that you are introducing a significant amount of uncertainty into the limits of the prison area, which induces a feeling of infinite land for the inmates.

Although we like uncertainty when it gives a flavor of infinity to pleasures, we usually do not like it when it is present in fears and losses. The fear of losing1 and not knowing the limits of the loss are two killers of all pleasures. Uncertainty induces a fear of infinite loss. Try to remember a rendezvous with a friend for which he/she was late. Until the time your friend showed up, the uncertainty of the time of arrival triggered a feeling of infinite waiting time, which made you impatient. When you are sick, not knowing the time you will recover also puts a lot of burden on your soul.2

Another example is found in male-female relations, especially in the western world. By not marrying each other and continuing with dating, individuals introduce uncertainty into their relationship, which gives them a sense of infinite freedom of action in their couple life. The comfort of infinite freedom of action due to uncertainty transforms into selfish moves in the long run. Then, insincere attitudes fostered by infinite freedom trigger an ever-growing mistrust within the couple due to the uncertainty about the individuals’ fidelity to each other, and the pair disintegrates.

Similarly, the uncertainty of the moment of death triggers a feeling of infinite life.3 Our lack of vision of God and the angels induces an infinite level of freedom of action. Human beings, especially youth, are challenged by this hypothetical infinity of life and their supposed freedom of action. However, the actual coming of death permanently removes the uncertainty about the angels and God. Thus, uncertainty serves as a means of eliminating the permanent residents of paradise from the permanent residents of hell.4

To conclude, this world is a land of uncertainties except for two things: birth and death. Although their qualities and actions are uncertain, whoever comes to this land definitely leaves it one day. By exercising our free will here, we weave our deeds, as everyone else does, between the same start and end, i.e. birth and death. However, the uncertain nature of this world tempts us with a hypothetical infinity embedded in its pleasures and burdens. Maybe this supposed infinity is a manifestation of two eternal lands, i.e. paradise and hell, whose existence is uncertain for us. Then, we, as humans, need a Helper to survive under the uncertainties of this world, a merciful Omnipotent Being who can convert these uncertainties into the infinite bliss of the actual Eternia-paradise in the company of our Creator.

Notes

1. Hadith: “Remember death very frequently, the spoiler of pleasures.”
2. Nursi, S., The Flashes, 25th Flash, 11th Remedy.
3. Nursi, S., The Flashes, 21st Flash, 1st Means of Attaining Sincerity.
4. He Who has created death and life, so that He may try you (and demonstrate to yourselves) which of you is better in deeds… (Mulk 67:2)

1. Is “Allah” the same god as the God of the Bible?

2. Trinity and Tawhid (oneness).

3. The divinity of Jesus (pbuh) and the concept of Prophethood.

4. The authenticity of Holy Scriptures.

We will now briefly touch upon these four points in the same order given above.

Is “Allah” the same god as the God of the Bible?

A frequently-asked question by Christians in such meetings is if the word “Allah” refers to the same Deity mentioned in the Bible. The answer to this question is different for each side. According to Islamic teachings, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, Who sent prophets throughout history to mankind, speaks in the Bible as well as in the Qur’an. Thus, the answer is undoubtedly a “yes” for the Muslims. On the other hand, we cannot expect the Christians to accept this answer with similar enthusiasm, as this would also mean that they accept the Qur’an as the Word of God.

The Names and Attributes of Allah as they are mentioned in the Bible are very few compared to the many found in the Qur’an and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him. Despite the fact that these Attributes and Names are similar, the Christian understanding of God shifts from the God of the Old Testament that commands an “eye for an eye” to a very compassionate God presented in the New Testament. Naturally, when a Christian hears the word “God,” he or she immediately begins to think, what kind of a God figure is being referred to? Is He like that of the Old or the New Testament?

To make things more complicated, the word “Lord” is sometimes used to refer to “Jesus” in Christianity. Thus, in a Muslim-Christian Dialogue the two sides may have significant differences in the very concept of God, the first article of faith. The key to successful communication on this topic is probably to discuss the Attributes and the Names of Allah as they are presented in the Bible and the Qur’an. This should be done without confusing the issue by discussing the personality or the claimed divinity of Jesus. The similarities in the way the Creator describes Himself in both Books will surprise the parties and clearly show that it is the same Divine Being Who is speaking in both Books.

Trinity and Tawheed

Trinity is often misunderstood by Muslim populations, including some learned men of religion. Most of the time, it is portrayed as believing in three gods or in three deities. However, as is well known, Christianity is a monotheistic religion, not a polytheistic one. The confusion comes from the fact that the godhead of Trinity has three distinct characters. But, to a Christian believer, these three characters are like three different manifestations of the same Divine Being on different platforms. In one of the most-quoted verses of the Bible, Jesus says “Father and I are one.” So, to a Christian, Jesus is the manifestation of the Heavenly Deity on Earth. This may be the grounds for many other disagreements between the Muslims and Christians about the personality of Jesus, but it certainly does not make Christianity a polytheistic religion.

This is, in a way, good news for the dialogue efforts. The most important article of faith is shared by both sides, which is the fact that God is One. He is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth, Almighty, All-Knowing, Pre-Eternal, Everlasting God that we all worship.

The oneness of God is not the only tenet shared by these two major world religions. The list indeed is very long. According to most Christian denominations, God will judge us on our deeds on the Day of Judgment and He has an eternal life prepared for us. The good will be rewarded and the evil will be punished. But, we all count on His Mercy rather than on our own deeds or acts of worship for our salvation. The concept of the Hereafter and the Day of Judgment are the most central articles to both faiths after the Oneness of God.

The divinity of Jesus and the concept of prophethood

Many Muslims simply fail to understand how central the divinity of Jesus is to the Christian faith in most denominations. It is not very uncommon for Muslim speakers to start their speeches by claiming that Islam respects Jesus so much so that it considers him as one of the five major prophets of God. It is in fact a great blasphemy for a Christian to consider Jesus as less than divine. As much as Muslims disagree with it, the idea that Jesus was sent to earth by God as His beloved son and that he died on the cross as a ransom for the sins of believers are main tenets of the Christian faith and they are as central as the Trinity itself. For a Christian to accept that Jesus was indeed a man just like us, and/or he was actually not crucified is the same as abandoning the Christian faith in its most orthodox form as practiced by majority of churches.

On the other hand, the high respect paid to the institution of prophethood in Islam, both for the major and minor prophets, is not shared by the Christian scripts. The Old Testament contains many accounts of major acts of sin committed by the prophets. The life style of the prophets depicted in these stories very often does not resemble that of God’s chosen people, contrary to their counterparts in the Qur’an. Consequently, it is very difficult for a Christian individual to feel the same high respect that a Muslim feels for the prophets. Therefore, calling Jesus a prophet in an attempt to find a common ground with Christians backfires for two reasons; first anything less than divinity for Jesus is not acceptable to a Christian mind; second the institution of prophethood is not as lofty for a Christian as it is for a Muslim.

Where is the common grounds regarding this matter? As mentioned above, the divinity of Jesus should not be addressed by the Muslim side at all. Neither should they insist on calling Jesus a prophet. A more productive approach for the Muslim side would perhaps be to emphasize the fact Islam recognizes Jesus as the promised Messiah and as the Word of God (Kalematullah, Qur’an: 4:171), and that he has been strengthened with the Holy Sprit (Ruh-ul Qudus, Qur’an: 2:87 and 2:253). He indeed has a very special place among the other prophets in the Qur’an.

The authenticity of Holy Scriptures

Christians have a diverse opinion as to how much and what parts of the Bible were inspired by God. The opinions on this matter extend from those who believe that each and every word in the Bible is inspired and hence binding to those who value the words of Jesus above the rest, as those are indicated in red ink in the “red lettered” Bible. Most Christians are probably of the opinion that even though the actual quotations from Jesus in the red lettered New Testament are few, the Bible is inspired by God in its entirety. Even the ones who do not agree with this statement would at least believe that the Bible is a book of good guidance as a whole. One way or another, the definitions of what is the Word of God, what is inspired, and what is from holy men who proclaimed the divine message throughout history are not profoundly important concepts to the faith of a Christian on the personal level. What matters is the fact that the Bible was written by so many authors over a period of thousands of years and that they all confirm each other. This is what it makes the Bible good guidance.

For the Muslims, however, it is simply not acceptable to found a religion on information that is doubtful in its authenticity. Religious principles can only be derived from the Holy Qur’an, every word of which is believed to have been revealed, and the examples from the life of Prophet Muhammad. Thus, Muslims again approach the Christian Scriptures on the matter of authenticity with severe criticism. In general, Christians do not see the need for a word by word authenticity in a religious Scripture for the foundations of the religion to be strong. In fact, they think that this is hardly possible as the Bible was written by 66 different authors. It is very much expected and acceptable that some parts of the book should be the words of holy men who committed themselves to spreading it to others, in the form of letters and such, mixed with the inspired words by God. Word by word revelation, as happened with Muhammad, on the other hand, is a new concept that Christians only become familiar when they talk to their Muslim friends. Therefore, the Muslim challenge to the Christian mind on this matter does not mean much more than the fact that it is another point which Muslims use to attack the foundations of Christian faith.

A more productive approach in a Muslim-Christian dialogue would be to point out the fact that the very fundamental tenets of the Christian faith are shared in the teachings of the Qur’an. The Ten Commandments revealed to Moses are laid out and detailed in the first several chapters of the Qur’an. The message of Jesus , the love and compassion that he had for others, regardless of who they were, his embracing of even the lowest in rank in the society and the giving of the glad tidings to the pious; all of these principles were also preached by Prophet Muhammad. Emphasizing the parallelism between the Bible and the Qur’an in the spirit of their teachings and not in their wording would be a much more productive approach than scrutinizing these books for authenticity in expectation that our Christian friends will have a higher respect for the Qur’an.

The selection of terminology

Furthermore, simple mistakes made in the selection of terminology can be misleading. The same word in the English language can bring quite different concepts and connotations to the minds of Muslims and Christians. Obviously the selection of the language determines the terminology. Each Biblical word in English has a long history in the minds of the people who speak this language. It is impossible not to get caught up in these connotations when Biblical terms are used to translate Qur’anic concepts into the English language. For instance, each of the words “grace,” “Lord,” and “saint” have deeply rooted meanings in the Christian tradition, which may be used as translation of Arabic words “ihsan,” “Rab,” and “wali.” However, these English and Arabic words do not overlap exactly in meaning. Islamic concepts like “rububiyah” are impossible to translate with one word. If one uses a made-up word to translate these Islamic terms, then the translation loses its religious flavor and its influencing power on the reader. On the other hand, if Biblical words are used, then it becomes impossible for the Christian mind not to get caught up in the Biblical connotations of these words. Therefore, one should not think that conveying Islamic concepts to Christians is a matter of having perfect translations. It will take many years before Islam establishes its own vocabulary in the English language amongst the native speakers of this language with well-understood meanings, as it did in many other cultures throughout the history. Considering the short history of indigenous Muslims in the West, particularly in English-speaking countries, the growth of Islamic media and their circulation is very encouraging.

Concluding remarks

Sincere efforts of dialogue should always start by learning the other party’s fundamentals of faith and what is most dear to them. Christian-Muslim dialogues, in our opinion, can be much more productive if the four points discussed above are carefully addressed during these meetings. First, Muslims should be very sensitive when discussing the personality of Jesus, who is not just a prophet to Christians, but everything that Christianity is built on. It should be clearly spelled out that calling Jesus a prophet is literally attacking the very foundations of Christianity and it should be avoided. Furthermore, the Trinity is a concept that is misunderstood by Muslims. It is in fact true, as often pointed out by Muslims, that Christian clergymen have difficulty explaining the concept of Trinity to themselves. But, this does not mean that the subject of Trinity, particularly the divinity of Jesus is a trivial matter to the followers of the faith. On the contrary, it is something very important and something taken to heart without question by the Christians. It is an issue of faith rather than reasoning. Therefore, Muslims should not try to explain this point with logic. There is nothing to be gained on this point in terms of finding a common ground with Christians and it will be a deal breaker if insisted upon.

The Christian side can also do their homework by paying attention particularly to the concepts of prophethood, and the Attributes and Names of God in Islam. As they study Islam, it will become clear that a prophet has a much loftier place in the mind of a Muslim than it ever has to a Christian. Also, the Attributes of Allah mentioned in the Qur’an are not different than those in the Bible, but only there is more information about who God is in the Qur’an than there is in the Bible. The faith that Muslims have in the prophets of the Old Testament and the second coming of J esus are two more crucial points that Christians can quickly discover to their surprise. Dwelling on these points first before the problematic ones listed above may be a good starting point for successful dialogue.

A point of Divine Unity*

In His Name, be He glorified.

There is nothing but it glorifies

Him with praise.

My dear and faithful brothers and sisters! While reflecting on air during a mental journey, a subtle point related to Divine Unity suddenly became clear to me in the word He in There is no deity but He and Say: He is God. I observed that the way of belief is so easy as to be necessary, and that the way of misguidance and associating partners with God is so difficult as to be inconceivable. I shall explain this comprehensive matter briefly.

A handful of soil serves as a flowerbed for hundreds of flowers. If this process is attributed to nature or causality, each handful must contain hundreds of minute machines or factories [to produce the flowers] and an immaterial factory [to determine and govern their lives in place of the Divine Knowledge and Destiny]. Or, each particle must know how to make each flowers different characteristics and living elements. In other words, each particle would possess infinite knowledge and power, both of which are unique to God.

Each air molecule (a conductor of Divine Will and Command) in each gust, each shift of air making the sound He, must have minute centers, exchanges, receivers, and transmitters of all human means of communication so that each air molecule could perform those countless acts simultaneously. Or, each particle or molecule must control all relevant faculties (of mind, spirit, personality, etc.) of all means ofcommunication, know their users languages, and transmit them to the other particles simultaneously. Unbelievers, naturalists, and materialists ask us to believe this impossibility.

(If attributed to the Majestic Maker, however, all air particles become soldiers under His Command. Through their Creators permission and Power, their connection to and reliance on Him, and the manifestation of their Makers Power, they perform their innumerable universal duties as easily as if they were one particle with only one duty.)

Their duties are performed instantly, and with the ease of uttering He and the movement of air. And so air becomes a page for the Pen of Powers endless, wonderful, orderly inscriptions. Its particles become the Pens ribs, and the particles duties become the points inscribed by the Pen. All of this is done with the same ease as it takes to move one particle.

While observing and studying the world of air, I saw this truth clearly and in detail. I realized with a certainty based on knowledge that this is so because the actual word He and its utterance are both brilliant proofs and gleams of Divine Unity. I understood that its meaning and resonances contain a radiant manifestation of Divine Oneness and strong proof of Divine Unity. Moreover, that proof contains an indication to the identity of the One to Whom the indefinite, third-person, singular pronoun He refers. I came to know that both the Quran of Miraculous Expression and those who constantly recite the Divine Names frequently repeat this sacred word to express Divine Unity.

If several points are jumbled around one, it is almost impossible to distinguish that point. If you do several jobs simultaneously, you will be confused. If a living creature is loaded with many burdens at once, it will be crushed. If you listen to or say many words simultaneously, they become confused and muddled.

However, I saw with a certainty based on clear observation that although thousands of points,letters, and words are deposited in each air molecule ” even in each particle ” they are conveyed without confusion or irregularity. Also, the air performs its duties simultaneously and without confusion. Each air molecule or particle bears heavy burdens without lagging behind or displaying any weakness. Also, I witnessed countless words enter ears and leave mouths with perfect order.

(By carrying out all of its extraordinary duties, each particle and air molecule proclaims in the tongue of its being and functioning, in ecstasy and perfect freedom, and through its testimony: There is no deity but He and Say: He is God, the One. All of them travel among air-clashing waves like lightning and thunderstorms in perfect order and harmony.)

Given this, can we assert seriously that each particle or air molecule necessarily has infinite wisdom, knowledge, will, power, and all qualities needed to dominate all other particles so that it can perform those functions? Or, from a position of certainty based on knowledge, clear observation, and personal experience, can we assert logically that air functions here as a changing page for the Pen of Power and Destiny, used by the All-Majestic One with infinite knowledge and wisdom, and as a signboard (the Tablet of Abrogation and Confirmation) reflecting a changeable copy of the Divine decrees preserved on the Supreme Preserved Tablet?

Air shows the above-mentioned wonders and manifestation of Divine Oneness by transmitting sound, and shows the impossibility of what the misguided assert. In the same way, it performs other duties (e.g., transmitting such subtle forces as electricity and light, attraction and repulsion) while simultaneously transmitting sound. It also carries out duties essential for plant and animal life (e.g., respiration and pollination) with perfect order and without confusion.

Air is a very important means of conveying the Divine Will and Command. It performs its duties without any real or imagined interference from random chance, blind force, deaf nature, confused and aimless causality, or powerless, lifeless, and unknowing matter. I also understood that each particle and air molecule proclaims in the tongue of its being and functioning: There is no deity but God and Say: He is God, the One. Just as I witnessed these wonders in the physical aspect of air with the key of He, so air itself became a key, like He, to the World of Symbols or Ideas and the World of Meaning.

Peace be upon everybody!

* Adapted from Bediuzzamans Thirteenth Word.

Then, as the weather grows warm toward the end of winter, you witness an overall resurrection on earth. The seeds of innumerable species of grasses, plants and trees germinate under earth and each individually, without confusion, takes on its own form and puts on its own charming dress. Countless living beings brought back to life change the dead earth into a paradise and enjoy the happiness of awakening to a new life. The number of flies which fill the earth in a single season of summer make up, alone, is a more populous community than the whole of humankind from the time of the Prophet Adam to the end of time. Each living being restored to life again, whether of plants or animals, is given its special provision without any neglect, and supplied with the equipment necessary for its life. All this takes place in so short a time and yet so perfectly and in such a miraculous harmony that, like the rays of the sun being indicative of the sun, it points to the Single One of Unity who rules over all things and creates everything on a particular pattern and with a particular nature and disposition.

Indeed, who other than the One with infinite power, all-encompassing knowledge and an unlimited wisdom, can have a part in those infinitely complicated yet harmonious events of creation and recreation or revival and provision, instruction and training and discharge from life? If anyone other than the Supreme Being, who gives existence to all living and non-living things, had had a part in these events, which are each a miracle, everything would have been in a chaos. Whereas, as all branches of science have concluded after long years of study and research, there is a wonderful, overall order and harmony in existence, with nothing in confusion or disorder.