Violence. It surrounds us. It is all over the media. It is so common in our society today that violence has become the norm rather than the exception. Perhaps one out of every ten people in the United States have experienced or witnessed a violent crime. Psychology Today states that homicide is the 5^th most common cause of death in the United States in all age brackets between 1 and 44 years. Violence to one’s self, in the form of suicide, is ranked second only to death by accidental causes. As violence is a behavior, it is common to lay the blame for violence to a psychological abnormality. Unfortunately, that is not the cut and dried case.

The potential for violence exists in all of us. It is part of our biology. Especially in males. Men are far more predisposed to violence than women, and this has been the case since the dawn of time. We were violent to hunt for food, protect ourselves and our families and to maintain order in society. As we can see, violence is still required today to do much the same thing.

Everywhere, we see the potential for violence. In how the police keep the peace, in how the military defends politics and diplomacy across the globe. In how one group seizes property, or food, or people against their will through the use of violence.

While we are predisposed to violence as a species, let us not forget that we haven’t brought ourselves to the point of extinction yet. This is because for all of our violent tendencies, society has developed a moral structure. Whether it’s because of a common belief in a spiritual concept, a religion, or just some inner moral compass, society has evolved with laws. These laws guide us through what is right and what is wrong. Such an evolution has brought some structure to societies, and has maintained some control over humanity’s violent aspects.

While yes, psychology is part of the equation of violence, there are other determining factors that make a person more predisposed to violence. For instance, it has often been discussed that environment, and external influence play a large part in violent behavior. A person who grows up in a violent environment, or around violent people may be more apt to be violent themselves. This can be seen across the United States where people grow up, and live in rough neighborhoods. Young impressionable people tend to go with the flow in order to be accepted by the elder violent natured individuals in their society. Observing aggressive behavior makes children learn new aggressive behaviors, for we tend to imitate the specific behaviors that we see, and start to believe that it is OK to do the same (Bandura 1973).

Influences in that environment could be a constant state of war such as we see in developing countries. It could be gang members who recruit younger people through coercion, or exposure to violence. It could be any number of hate groups who are able to influence people, imparting to them at a young age that one race or another is inferior, or to blame for something. In doing so, such groups are able to convince people that an ethnic group is deserving violence. So it can successfully be debated that environment, and external influence, are definitely keys to violent behavior.

There are others who argue that it is only biology that is the defining factor regarding violent behavior. In an article for Medical News Today, the author writes that the Hypothalamus, the ventrolateral part of the ventromedial hypothalamus, and the Lateral Septum areas of the brain are specifically to blame for violent behavior. Biology can be a factor to understand violent behavior in relation to build-up of electrical impulses that finally get released in a physical expression. But it surely does not help to explain exactly why these impulses get built-up.

In my opinion, I believe it is a combination of factors. I am United States Air Force veteran who has deployed to numerous locations where violence is common, and then spent time as a contractor there. From my exposure to these other cultures, I can say that I believe that environment plays a large part in violent behavior along with external influence. The more people are fed the idea that violence is acceptable, the more they are inclined to exhibit violent behavior.

It is true though that biology is really the tie that binds all of us into a predisposition for violence. Studies have shown that any person placed under enough negative mental stress will react violently to the situation they are in. In effect the Fight or Flight response is triggered. This is because regardless of environment, influence, or predisposition, we are all human and are all hardwired in the same way. Violence is a product of the Fight or Flight response. When presented with a given situation imbued with enough negative mental stress, we will either fight or run. Factors such as environment and influence will either mitigate or exacerbate our response.

To make matters worse, the ingestion of certain drugs such as amphetamines can produce states where the individual is more prone to be violent. The same can be said for alcohol, which is notorious for lowering impulse control. If the condition is chronic, then the individual will become violent over and over again. Again this is a matter of an external influence.

Now having said that, there are certain people who argue that psychology is the only defining factor. According many health professionals, mental illness is widely considered the principal cause for violent behavior.

People with psychotic tendencies who have no real sense of right or wrong are certainly more predisposed to violence. This is especially so in Paranoid Schizophrenics, where people come to believe they are being persecuted. They may then attack the person they believe is persecuting them. The same can be said of people who are sexually deviant. Often they will perform violent acts against other people to satisfy a psychological need. However, there is a standing argument that sexual deviance is a product of both environment, and the individual being a victim of sexual violence themselves. Therefore, potentially, sexual deviance is a result of environment and negative external influence.

The trend of violence in today’s society has reached epidemic proportions. In violent riots, people may act out violently because people around him or her are acting violently. It is perceived as normal to do so in such situations in which peer pressure, an external influence, lowers an individual’s self-control, thus allowing for violent behavior.

A child with a history of parental abuse kills small animals for the sheer enjoyment of doing so. The child has experienced violent behavior and is looking for an outlet to express his or her own violent tendencies. Once the child knows he or she has an outlet, they will continue to find ways to express their violent tendencies. The concern here is that as this person gets older, the need for release will need to be satisfied to a greater degree. Much in the way a drug addict needs larger and larger doses to maintain a high.

A soldier acts out violently on numerous occasions. He has a string of prior violent actions before joining the Army. Because of his violent tendencies, he is more accepted as a soldier. In such a situation, where violence is considered the norm, a person with a predisposition to violence could function for years before anyone caught on that they were actually emotionally disturbed.

A man with an automatic rifle walks in to a church and opens fire, killing dozens of people. Perhaps he has a deep seated hatred for an ethnic group. Or perhaps he has an issue with the religion being preached in the church. What is disturbing is that he has convinced himself over time that his actions are acceptable. He has decided that it is right to render violence to other people.

We see so much violence now that we have become jaded to it. Oversaturation of the topic by the media has made us numb to the violence in our society. We have in fact come to expect it. This is because the media knows that bad news sells better than good news. This is another example of external influence.

It is therefore my opinion that yes psychology does play a part. So does environment and external influence. When these three factors are combined with the fact that we are by nature, and biology violent creatures, the predisposition for violence increases exponentially. A word of caution however in stereotyping people who, based on these factors, are predisposed to violent behavior. We are all capable of violence. It merely depends on the situation we find ourselves in at a given moment in time.

References

• Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

·       Fields. R. Douglas. 2016. “The Science of Violence,” Psychology Today.

• https://psychweb.chbs.jmu.edu/Graysojh/pdfs/Volume101-ChildrenWhoAbuseAnimals.pdf
• https://www.traversebaycac.org/2018/06/15/animal-abuse-child-abuse-link/

Question: Why are the elite having difficulty in accepting truths?

Answer: In every period of history, as well as today, there exists an oligarchical minority who try to suppress people who think differently from them and who are not one of them. They wish to design the world according to their own will.

Defending rights

It is wrong to imagine that they can always dominate the society. There have been times, particularly during periods when religious and moral thought prevailed in the true sense, when they regressed and were condemned to remain in a narrow sphere. However, even when they had to withdraw, it is a reality that they retained their thoughts about enslaving society, and moreover, they kept on developing new projects and plans with the aim of moral destruction. When they gain the opportunity, they invade all areas of life, resort to brutal force and smash everyone who does not side with them.

However, this situation should not be solely attributed to their obstinacy and oppression. Other factors such as the heedlessness and negligence of the masses, the failure of virtuous people who could actually struggle against them to maintain a spirit of togetherness, and their acting without any forethought or plans, also play an important role in the emergence of this tyranny. Actually, seeing every trouble and hardship we suffer as a consequence of our own mistakes and wrongs is a piece of advice from the Qur’an. God Almighty, may His glory be exalted, states in the Qur’an: “Whatever affliction befalls you, it is because of what your hands have earned, and yet He overlooks many (of the wrongs you do)” (ash-Shura 42:30).

The late poet, Mehmed Akif, said that the sole true owners of right in this world were those who speak up for defending their rights. In this regard, merely shouting and making a fuss in the face of oppression and the violations of the oligarchical elite will not yield positive results. On the contrary, it is necessary to struggle by means of reason and logic. If we have been unable to defend certain rights, we must make every possible effort to reclaim them. The right to live humanly must be reclaimed by endeavoring within a legal framework of law and justice.

The powerful voice of truth

Just as it happened yesterday, today, the people who control the capital, power, government and certain high positions look down on the rest of the people as if looking down to the ground, and they see themselves as being so high up, as if they are looking at the firmaments. In our present time, their number has become so large that even calling them an oligarchical minority will not suffice. Surely, their power bears no importance against the strength and power of God Almighty and does not really mean anything for those who seek refuge in Him. The void that appears as a result of our inactivity and weakness is what makes power more meaningful, and the oligarchical minority is using that power against us.

It is not correct to think that such elites that leech off the people will always remain in such a position. One day, there may appear some among them who regret the oppressions they have committed, who become sincerely repentant, who change their feelings and thoughts, and prefer to live in a human way. We can see so many examples of this during the Prophet’s time. Although at the beginning of Islam, the majority of the believers were poor people—such as Bilal al-Habashi, Ammar ibn Yasir, and Abdullah ibn Masud—who worked near the controllers of wealth and power, the leading personalities of Mecca also came to be included in this blessed circle in later years.

By studying the identities of the people who accepted faith first and formed the center, it is possible to make some psycho-sociological analyses. For example, you can say that they had been seeking a savior to save them from the negative life conditions they were experiencing, and when they saw the prince of the Prophets with his truthfulness, decency, Prophetic intelligence and resolution, they ran to him with the intention of seeking refuge in him. Or, by considering that those people owned very few worldly possessions and did not have much to lose, you may think that it was easier for them to dedicate their lives to the path of God. You may also think that the Messenger of God’s treating those oppressed people with his immense compassion, opening his bosom for them and supporting them was a factor in their speedy acceptance of Islam. Additionally, you might also interpret the fact that people in abject poverty followed such an infinite light as a result of Divine guidance. However, no matter which factor you ascribe this result to, you see that the majority of the heroes that formed the first rank of Muslims were poor people disdained by those prominent in society.

However, there came the day when those prominent people, who accosted the Muslims at every opportunity and tried to smash them, also joined their ranks. For example, during the sixth year of Islam, the unpleasant invectives against the noble Prophet tugged at the humane feelings of Hamza, who took a stance against the polytheists in return. Abu Sufyan, who was unparalleled in obstinacy, took his place near the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, after the conquest of Mecca. Like him, so many leading figures from among the polytheists submitted to the truth and changed sides later on.

Nobody should be deprived of the goodness

On account of the reasons we mentioned so far, from the oligarchical minority who in their imaginations see themselves at the uppermost level of the caste system and behave as if it were their essential right to oppress others, God knows what potential heroes may appear and may lend you a hand with your ideal of establishing universal values. Even today, it is possible to say that its signs can be seen—not as showers but rather like dewdrops on leaves. There are people who have ample worldly means, seen by some as being at the uppermost level of their imagined caste system, who see themselves as having a distant worldview from you and whom you do not see as likely to share your ideals; when they witness the beautiful things you do, they may support the activities on the path of humanity and peace. You may see that some of them want to open a school somewhere, others wish to sponsor a university to be opened somewhere, while others want to provide a field for a new educational institution to be opened. As they also set an example for others with such services, those who see this will also wish to do the same.

Therefore, the duty that falls to us is taking care of all individuals in society without making any distinction. The thought that the reformation can only be carried out by poor or middle class people is not correct. These people may have welcomed the good things done and have opened the doors of their hearts wide from the very beginning. You may rather have spent time with them at the beginning. However, on account of the great scope of the tasks needed to be done for the sake of humanity today, it is necessary to spread our wings wide, and try to reach every place and every person. For this reason, it is necessary to make efforts to include those who have worldly means and look down on others. However, while making this effort, you should not forget that in order for them to accept the values you believe, although a single day or week may suffice for some, for some of them it may be necessary to make visits for a month or even a year.

Who knows how many times the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, knocked the door of Abu Jahl and communicated his message to him? Without getting angry or feeling bitter, he made use of every opportunity and tried to make him feel the truths of faith. Note that Abu Jahl was one of the prominent figures of the Banu Makhzum tribe. Those days, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, did not solely make visits to Abu Jahl, but also went to all the leaders of Mecca time and time again; he presented his message to them without growing weary or being broken down. Although Abu Jahl was not honored with faith, a day came when his son Ikrima accepted faith before the beneficence and compassion of God’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him.

In this regard, it is necessary to utilize every opportunity to reach all sections of society and to advance with alternatives. It is necessary to knock on everybody’s door without becoming weary, giving in to hopelessness, or feeling broken.

If you want to know why some of us are so poetic, while others are strictly straightforward, then read on this unprecedented discussion and see how the Left Brain and the Right Brain discuss their differences.

Moderator – Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Tonight, we have two guests that have long been the focus of media attention: Left Brain and Right Brain. We are going to discuss their opinions on various issues. Without losing much time, I want to get to the first question. Many public figures who have inspired people go through a period of self discovery, after which they define their identities and their surroundings anew. Did you have a similar self-discovery period? And if yes, how do you define yourself now?

Left Brain – I guess I never had a distinct enlightenment period, but I kept building on top of what I already knew about myself. So, my self discovery starts with my babyhood, really. For example, as the eyes gained the ability to distinguish colors and to focus on objects at different distances, I realized that I can collect information about the outside world through colors, shapes, and distances. As the muscles became stronger, I felt free to move my body and developed the notion of being distinct from other things around me. I also realized that I can gather data about what is where, how I can find what I need… When I learned to speak, I developed the notion that there are other people like me out there, for whom I am the other. And so on…

Right Brain – Before I say anything, I would like to bring to your attention that the way I am named is not something I came up with or something I am delighted by. For me, there isn’t a left-right distinction. There is a brain, and that’s it. And actually, I would not call the eyes separate organs. They are only a different part of the same organ, i.e. the brain. Muscles are alike. They are not distinct entities. We are all part of the same organ. So, for me too, self discovery started with my babyhood, but realizing my new abilities forced me to redefine myself, again and again. For example, when I discovered my legs, I did not become a brain with legs, but opened my eyes to a new dimension of my existence. I realized that I was not just about what I thought I was. The same goes for vision, or smell. When you smell something for the first time, that is a creative act. When you taste a fruit for the first time, that is an invention for you. All these culminate in a notion in which everything unifies. Walking is thinking, thinking is walking. Seeing is tasting, tasting is seeing. So, for example, if you cannot solve a problem, try smelling it, tasting it, walking it.

Left Brain – Let’s not get poetic here. If you cannot solve a problem, that’s because you either haven’t gathered enough data or haven’t yet developed a known pattern of solution. It’s also possible that your attention, in the moment, is distracted, due to things like walking, smelling, tasting; you know what I mean?

Moderator – Let’s not lose our focus here. The next topic I want to bring forward is a little more subtle: love and marriage. What do you think love is, and why are marriages today more restrained than before?

Left Brain – There are different categories of love. For instance: the love between couples, the love between parents and their children, and the love between friends are not the same kinds of love. So I am assuming that you are specifically talking about the one between couples. Even in this type of love, there are various facets. Sometimes, it means dedication to support each other. Sometimes it is being valued by the other. You can extend this list. Love is like light. The same phenomenon can display itself in different colors and strength. Today, there is a lot of research about the physical manifestations of love, and the properties of successful marriages. There are also studies on divorces. It seems that, for the moment, there is no predictor of the fate of a given marriage in the long run. Having said that, I should admit that there are some proxies of an imminent divorce. For instance, addiction or a lack of intimacy often lead to divorce. Aside from the factors that are related to the conscience of individuals, there are more subtle factors that need extra focus. The fast pace of change in modern life versus the slow change of cultural settings definitely brings stress to many couples. The norms and expectations from each other depend on one’s cultural and emotional baggage. Whether one can fulfill those expectations given the modern conditions is another story. All these are playing a role in restraining the family in our times.

Right Brain – Like anything else in the universe, we look for unity. If you love someone, you want to be with them, because love is a realization that part of your existence is in the other. We all crave for being one with those we love. But why don’t we feel such emotions for anyone but only for certain people? Perhaps, this is one of the points where the veils before destiny are pulled open. When we tell someone that we love them, we actually mean, “I need you… and I need to be needed.” This is a two-way hunger which is quenched by the unity of the lovers. This is why love inherently demands continuity; for unity is only established when all separations in time and space are eliminated. And this is why, perhaps, marriages are most troubled today. Life conditions and individual choices are not made in order to nourish continuity. Staying side by side is mistaken for unity.

Moderator – Have you ever fallen in love?

Left Brain – Is there anyone who hasn’t? As one colleague of mine says, “we are wired for love and belonging; that’s why we are here.” Love is one way of becoming a part of something bigger than us: having a family, raising children, and contributing to the well-being of our society through various love-inspired activities. Even ascetics and saintly people pursue a path of love inspired by God. So, love is all around us.

Moderator – But I asked if you ever “fell in love.” I understand if you don’t want to go that deep into your private life.

Left Brain – (pauses for a second) … I might have felt special things for some people. But, in the long run, I saw that those feelings did not bear any meaning for the real life. And this realization gave me immunity towards those special feelings. If you can stand back, and take a deep breath… Oh yes, and let me say this as an aside: this is how love works. You cannot step away from the situation and breathe deeply or think clearly. Love only works when you can’t think clearly. This loss of brain power is eliminated when you hit the bottom of the love you are falling into. So, what was I saying? If you stand back and take a deep breath, you’ll see that there are thousands of people with whom you can get along with at least as well as the one you are with at that moment. Nobody is irreplaceable. There is always another one more beautiful, friendlier, more generous, more sacrificing, etc. There is always going to be another love following the current one. So, no need for falling!

Moderator – What about you, Right Brain? Have you ever fallen in love?

Right Brain – I can’t breathe without love! For me, life and everything in it gains meaning only through love. And this meaning is not always visible at first sight. “L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux. On ne voit bien qu’avec le cœur.” As the fox tells the Little Prince, what’s essential is invisible to the eye; one only sees well with the heart. So, falling in love reveals the meanings hidden behind objects and events. It’s not that you fall in love with something that is extraordinary, but that love makes the ordinary things extraordinary. It is the intertwining of their destinies that make people special for each other. Imagine this: the Great Author of the universe is writing a love story of you and your beloved one. What greater meaning can you ask for? For me, each and every person I fell in love with is special, no matter how the story ended. I always keep a room reserved for them in my heart.

Moderator – In the last century, scientific thought and technological achievements led many people to question their religious teachings and affiliations. Their faiths were shaken as a result of their experiences in intellectual and social areas. I even remember a book titled Youth’s Faith Is Stolen by Questions. My question to you is: how do you define the relationship between religion and science?

Left Brain – This question has been asked on many other occasions. For me, this is a straightforward issue. Personally, I am a believer. For me, science gathers information about the outside world. Religion tells me about the purpose of the world. A more cliché way of saying the same thing is, “science answers how, religion answers why.” Therefore, I don’t see why the two should contradict or clash. You can have a user’s manual for a car or a computer. But what you are going to do with it is totally up to you. Science and technology are like that manual. From them, we learn to make use of what is available here in this world. But religion guides us in what we should do, or how we should do it.

Right Brain – If you go back in history, you’ll see that religion and science were not different entities. Even the several branches of science we have today were united as a single body. If you were a knowledgeable man, you knew everything. Of course, with the accumulation of more and more information, a classification was needed, but unfortunately this classification led to oblivion among these different classes. Nowadays, people are rediscovering the value of the unity of knowledge through interdisciplinary studies. The same, I think, is true for religion and science. Had things taken a different route in history, one in which the sense of unity was essential, the definitions we are using today would have been completely different. Science would not be the study of how the universe functions but how God executes his will in the physical realm. Similarly, instead of being perceived as a set of rules that bound both God and people, the laws of nature would be defined as the stable patterns (straight paths) of creation that host the travelers in life. Accordingly, those stable paths would be a restriction for us, as humans, but not for the Lord of the worlds. Such an understanding would have, perhaps, fostered a completely different history than what we have now. Reading the creation as verses from the Perfect Designer, treating life events as personal instant messages from the closest Friend would transform our journey in this world from a merciless struggle of survival to being the hero of our stories, which are produced by the Supreme Sustainer.

The same goes for how religion is perceived and practiced. Instead of becoming a set of precise actions and words, religion would be the way to educate our conscience and will in order to be respectful lovers of God. Instead of becoming a formula that “ensures” heaven solely for its followers, religion would be the means to spread peace and prosperity to everyone, just like the All-Merciful one sustains even those who deny His existence.

Moderator – Finally, I would like to ask you the ultimate question. Where is the world headed regarding its current economic, ecological, and political unrest? Do you see hope for the future?

Left Brain – Oh, absolutely! People have been voicing similar concerns for such a long time. Even when the world population was a third of what it is now, there were debates on whether food would be enough, and so on… But today, we are here with 7 billion people. It may be painful, but I am sure in the long run, things will get settled.

Moderator – Painful? What do you mean by that?

Left Brain – Of course there are wars , and there is a disparity in the distribution of wealth, and healthcare is not accessible in many places. So, it is going to take some time until a global welfare and healthcare system is established to cover everyone. But with the advent of technology in communications and transportation, this is going to become easier over time, and we’ll get there. Until that point, though, there are going to be losses.

Right Brain – There is an old saying: “If He didn’t want to give, He wouldn’t give us the need to ask from Him.” I think the fact that we are yearning for a better tomorrows is a sign that we’ll get there.

Moderator – Then, would you blame the turbulence of today to yesterday’s lack of desire for better tomorrows?

Right Brain – You’re making me smile. Desire for a better tomorrow is not the same thing as desire for a better income. If everybody dreams for a better tomorrow, then this becomes a global prayer for peace and prosperity. If everybody wants what’s best for themselves, things don’t add up. This is even worse if some people think of their prosperity at the expense of others. So, in this sense, I think we can talk about a lack of desire for a better tomorrow, which governed the world for most of the last century. Today, though, through the growing means of communication and transportation, interfaith and intercultural dialogue activities are blossoming. These carry the potential to initiate a global prayer for peace and prosperity. When that happens, I am hopeful that that prayer will be answered.

Moderator – Thank you Left Brain and thank you Right Brain for allowing us to have a peek into your personal worlds.

Today we seem to accept that “reality is a construct” made up of meaning and values, a moment in the life of human consciousness, both at the individual and social level. The dynamic character of what we call “reality” has implications on our understanding of culture, science and man.

Culture is now understood as the set of symbols and values that constitute the virtual horizon that validates the reasonableness of human actions. By the same token, the principles of science are as valid as the arrival of other principles that revolutionize the preceding ones. Science no longer seeks necessary laws but rather the best available explanations about the universe that is today understood as open, dynamic and evolving.

Man is seen as a unity in tension, holder of a polymorphic consciousness that shapes his understanding according to a set of unconscious and preconscious processes that determine his intentions and decisions. He is known to also possess a consciousness with an unrestricted desire to know and a criterion allowing him to examine himself as he examines reality around him, simultaneously. This unrestricted desire to know leads him to an unrestricted objective: being.

This new way of viewing our own universe has two important implications: the acceptance of diversity and the forward looking mentality of man in almost every aspect of life. The forward looking character of man is associated with dramatic breakthroughs in science and the challenge of important paradigms of humanity, including the fact that this is the first time in history where human inventions and life styles can even extinguish all life on the planet.

In relation to diversity, post-modernity tends to be more colorful, heterogeneous, ecological and multi-religious than modernity. And in relation to looking into the future, the construction of things like a global civilization seem to form part of the feasible horizon to man.

Throughout human history, two things have characterized what is new: a process of simultaneous unity and conflict with what already exists, and the fact that the new state of being is not necessarily better than its predecessor. Post modernity is united with modernity in the sense that it requires the preservation of the critical spirit of the Enlightenment. However, the two eras are separated in the criticism of what can be called the “superstitions of modernity”, namely that future solutions lie only in the application of ever growing doses of science and technology, and in the repression of religious instinct and of religion in general.

There is no guarantee that this new era we are calling post-modernity will be better than the previous one. The future that opens before us can be one of a “clash of civilizations” or a time where future generations will acknowledge as an era of global splendor. The fact of the matter is that we have already left the modern “comfort zone” a long time ago. We are on a trip into the unknown and depending on how well we are equipped for this journey, we stand a better or worse chance of arriving at a safe harbor.

As with any journey, regardless of how well or how little of it we know, it is important to understand what the destination might be. We have already said that the destination of post-modernity is in the quest for meaning and being. And the reason is simple: modernism was based on progress as a paradigm and the supremacy of man over himself and nature. That is, human intelligence promised to liberate us from political oppression, provide a higher standard of living, and attain “perfection” in every field of life through the application of human mastery over knowledge, science, and technology.

Modernity appeared as a reaction to the backward looking world of the Renaissance. Post modernity in contrast, is a quest for meaning. This quest is not a return to the past and starts with achievements of human consciousness that are worth preserving, like the fight for justice, freedom and equality, and against intellectual and religious obscurantism. This quest is making a special impact on re-signifying paradigms and conquests of modernity. All over the world, thousands of people are modifying their understanding about democracy, technological progress, high standard of living and reason.

This important process of soul-searching in our times is taking place amidst spiritually-mindful people all over the world. For them, the times we live in are not the “end of history.” On the contrary, self complacency with the so-called achievements of modernity in science and communication underscores the importance of social justice, care for the planet and transcendence as pillars of a new world, since this cannot be the end of history so long as there are wars, hunger and injustice.

As the chances for economic and political systems to be radically transformed are high today, spiritually-mindful people will play a very large role in this transformation. The main reason for this is that truly spiritually-mindful people have little to no expectation in the so-called “comfort zones” because they always live to balance between what they know and the expectation of a world that has been promised to them by God. Whatever the culture he or she may have been born into, the seeker of the Truth is sensitive to the emerging probabilities where the human condition can be improved and they opt for them.

In this unconditional commitment for dynamic love lies the freedom of the spiritually-mindful person. This love is not only limited to the act of knowing but also to the act of choosing. He or she knows that unless action is undertaken, the elements that constitute a new world will never come to be. In the ethic to permanently destabilize his or her own self with already acquired ideas about the world, religion and culture, in thought and action, is implied the contribution of spiritually-mindful people to the world that is opening before us today.

A caveat however is that believers do not seem to be united across religions and cultures. Despite progress in communication, increased religious dialogue and an openness to alterity, there is little concerted interfaith action. Yet, this will only change in time if spiritually-mindful people can adequately identify and correct the many biases existing in every belief structure that in the name of God, have kept separation and strife amongst religions.

Human consciousness today is in need of an active and meaningful recognition of religious diversity. For some religions like Islam, such recognition has been established since its foundation, but has not been always followed in some regions and times in history. The same applies for Eastern philosophies and religions that have focused particularly on the discovery of God inside the heart of man. However regarding Christianity, which has only after 1965 recognized that salvation is possible outside of the Church, there is still a lot of progress to be made.

In the new world that is opening before us, it is probable that religions will not live side by side to each other in a juxtaposed manner as they do today. Instead, growing numbers of people will be able to make a clear distinction between the diverse manifestations of the names of God, and the way in which they have been interpreted and communicated. They will be more aware about the things that unite religions than the ones that separate them.

This will ultimately enrich all of them. There is a lot to be learned in the religious sense from the Arab Spring in the Middle East or from the many types of theologies that have evolved out of Vatican II all over the word or from the many teachings of Eastern beliefs. It is time for spiritually-inclined people all over the world to raise their heads and watch what their brothers from other religions are doing, inspired by the spirit of love and mercy. These people should speak to one another as this can only contribute to make the quality of their faith grow stronger.

All religions have prophets and saints that stand as a common heritage of humanity. Today, there are many people in every religion whose devotion, love of God and mankind, and heroism should be known and praised by all. They have a series of qualities important to the present quest into post modernity: they teach us that it is necessary to leave the “comfort zone” advertised by many worldly powers, they set the example in terms of the authenticity of their actions and they inspire us to transform ourselves from the inside as a precondition to make changes on the outside possible and meaningful.

In synthesis, a new world is emerging in a dialectics of many powerful forces: economic, political, military, scientific and social. A new force is required in the process: a divine spiritual guidance. This force that is depended on by millions of spiritually-mindful people is crucial, for they are in a privileged position to stand their ground on the basis of the authenticity of the process. They have not only evolved interested patterns of knowing and deciding, but by the nature of their belief, they seek a disinterested desire to know which is aimed at an unrestrictive objective, which is the finality of mankind as it unfolds into the universe of being.

Juan Fernando Lucio, a former adviser to presidential candidate Sergio Fajardo in Colombia, has advised on peace and reconciliation issues and done extensive research on the foundations of interfaith dialogue. He is currently an independent consultant and does research on the topic of liberation in contemporary religious thought.

Some of the incidents we are experiencing today might seem as if they have no precedent – this is both true and false; yes, no precedents on the scale we see today; and no, for violence is something we human beings have always been prone to. Thus, peacebuilding is not possible via revisions in educational policies alone; it is to a no lesser degree relevant to human character, virtue, and moral development. And these are some of the discussions you will find in our coverage in this issue.

The lead article focuses on value transmission in education of the young and how it is so critical for a nation to maintain its existence. Johnston McMaster discusses pluralist democracy and global citizenship as two main goals which education should be geared towards. Michael A. Samuel shares his observation of Turkish teachers inspired from Fethullah Gülen and the Hizmet philosophy who migrated to South Africa with a sense of “responsibility to guide the world to a better realization of its potential fullness of being; towards a greater goal of good.” Zekeriya Ozsoy warns teachers that an imbalanced conduct of reward might shift the motivation of some students to material prizes and cause them lose their intrinsic capacity to strive and achieve.

Two special contributions from Nigeria give us hope that sound-thinking leaders and scholars might enable this African star to be rescued from the current violence based on religious and ethnic differences.

New Jersey-based Helping Hands Relief Foundation (HHRF) is one of those relief organizations that have quickly responded to the call for help from the Horn of Africa. Many volunteers of HHRF have already taken off to Somalia to deliver donations and food to the victims.

The world is undergoing several major tests. The problems caused by economic crises one after another, terrorism, global warming, and others have to be tackled with immediately. But the emergency of the current famine has no comparison, and we have to act now. It is time to delay our own needs today and rush for help to the victims of the famine. This is the greatest test we as the human family have to be pass.

‘Peaceful coexistence is the most important project of our era. But we cannot do it alone or in isolation; we must do it together.’

The world has become very small.

Mass communications, mass travel, and economic interdependence have created a contemporary world in which we as individuals and groups no longer can live in isolation from other groups as well as we could have in previous periods. Nations and groups of people who barely knew of each other now see each other’s lives and worlds in living color and in real time through television and the internet. Governments who counted on secrecy and submission just a few years ago now find themselves humbled, bewildered, and even overthrown through mass communications that broadcast their tyrannical deeds—and the bravery of those who resist them—to the entire world. Regions who thrived in their own prosperity in isolation from the poverty and stagnation of other regions now find their economies racked by volatility as globalism ties the purse strings of world commerce together into complicated knots.

The world has become small, and we are with each other—knowing of, affecting, and interacting with each other—more than we ever have in the history of the world. And we are not the same. Yes, we are all human beings. Yes, all of us are subject to the universal conditions of human existence like uncertainty, change, loss, and death. But how we deal with those conditions and what we make them mean depends in large part on our distinctive cultures, backgrounds, languages, and histories. Herein lie the differences in the human family. We do not think the same. We don’t pray to the same gods. We don’t choose the same cultural values. We don’t share specific histories. We interpret the world, and ourselves in it, in very different ways.

Given these differences, how can we all live together? Is peaceful coexistence possible globally, regionally, or even within one family? If so, what are the necessary components that create it? In other words, what are the preconditions—philosophically, socially, politically, culturally, or otherwise—for peaceful coexistence among different people? These are powerful and complex questions that require asking even more questions in order to answer.

First we must ask questions of history.

Have we as human beings ever lived together peacefully? Have people of very different faiths, for example, ever lived with each other for a sustained period of time without seeking to oppress or eradicate each other? Answering these questions requires a significant and thorough study of world history.

If we determine that sustained peaceful coexistence has been achieved in certain situations—for example, under the Ottomans in the fifteenth century, or in thirteenth-century Spain—we must further determine what factors allowed that coexistence to occur. What were the specific conditions—economic, political, social, cultural, etc.—that made that coexistence possible? These conditions and factors are myriad; to distinguish them so that they can be meaningful to us today requires intensive analysis from highly skilled and knowledgeable individuals.

Once distinguished, can the conditions that made peaceful coexistence possible elsewhere and in a different era be transported to the present time, into a current situation of conflict and violence? Can the conditions be recreated today, the present time, although taken from the past? This may seem simple, but it is not. People change from era to era. Notions of what is permissible, moral, and just change over time even within one culture, much more across cultures. What worked in a previous period, in terms of a conception of societal harmony and justice, cannot simply be picked up and moved into a new era with different notions of morality, truth, society, etc. Things must be translated first, and even before being translated, we must determine if the factors in question can be translated at all. Worldviews may have changed so much in the intervening centuries that they no longer work as viable concepts for today.

If certain conditions and factors that generate peaceful coexistence can be translated from the past into today’s world, they must then be implemented socially, culturally, politically, economically, and legally. In many instances, this will require a fundamental overhaul of current socio-political systems. Transformations of this nature are daunting simply because of their sheer magnitude. Moreover, such societal transformations contain within them the seeds for violence and injustice. They rarely happen without conflict. Implementation of new societal structures must happen in a way that minimizes or omits opportunities for breakdown, violence, and retribution from those who may feel left out or trampled upon by the changes. Otherwise, the implementation of a new system for peaceful coexistence ends up perpetuating yet more violent conflict.

These are the questions we must ask of history. But we cannot stop there. We must also ask questions of the religions.

What is the general stance of our religious traditions to those who do not share its beliefs and commitments? Does it demand eradication of all contrary belief systems and the people who propagate them? Or does it request accommodation of ‘the stranger,’ or those who believe and live differently? In short, do people of faith ground themselves into patterns of tolerance or intolerance as they root themselves in their faith traditions?

These are difficult questions to answer because the religions themselves, as historical entities that grow and change over time, sometimes seem to have multiple ways of being with regard to peaceful coexistence. Over the centuries, adherents of the largest two religions in the world—Christianity and Islam—have lived both peacefully and non-peacefully with each other, and with people of other religions they encountered. Certainly, the teachings of both religions encourage peaceful coexistence in their respective sacred texts and traditions. However, both these religions also have suffered violent expression in the hands of those who either ignore the teachings of coexistence, or twist the teachings to justify violence and terror.

Whatever our religious traditions were intended to be, the fact is that historically they have been used to perpetrate some of the worst imaginable violence ever created in the human family. And we have to face this hard fact with courage, and with resolve to enlist our religious traditions as major players in the project of peaceful coexistence.

The potential for religious conflict in society is the chief reason why societies that have achieved peaceful coexistence to any extent champion religious tolerance as a chief civic virtue, and they actually implement that virtue into society culturally and legally. Given the diverse and absolute claims of many religious and moral traditions, tolerance is really all we can ask of people. We cannot, in a truly pluralistic society, expect morally committed or devout persons to embrace or to celebrate practices that they, due to their faith or ethics, consider to be sinful, heretical, or abhorrent. We cannot expect them to acknowledge the legitimacy of gods, or modes of worship, or ways of life they consider to be false. To expect this in the realm of religion is to be fundamentally intolerant. We cannot advocate, in the name of tolerance, a society that tolerates everything but certain forms of traditional religious or moral conviction.

Tolerance, then, is the capacity to put up with or to accommodate ideas, beliefs, and behaviors that one finds deeply problematic, and is society’s most essential civic virtue, especially in societies as ethnically, religiously, and racially diverse as many countries are becoming in this period of globalization. Daily life in such societies simply will not move along if the citizenry cannot practice basic tolerance. Of course, simply gritting our teeth and grudgingly putting up with others we don’t like or with whom we disagree is the low-water mark of societal growth. Ideally, we would grow to a place of greater understanding and appreciation for those who are radically different from us, even if we still do not accept or agree with their beliefs or practices. Sometimes, however, basic tolerance, especially in matters of religion, is the best we can do.

These are the questions we must ask of our religions. But we cannot stop here, either. We must also ask questions of ourselves.

We must search ourselves and examine our hearts. Are we really committed to living together with people who are different from us? Do we really accept the fact that we as people will never all believe, think, pray, live, or act the same—and that we just have to deal with it? Or do we resent these ‘facts on the ground’ and spend our efforts trying to coerce others or force them into changing to be more like us? Or, having given up on making other people like us, do we isolate ourselves into enclaves of sameness and construct the daily arc of our lives so that we don’t have to encounter many people who are different from us?

Part of the reason why achieving peaceful coexistence is so challenging has to do with individuals. All the legal, cultural, and societal structures that support peaceful coexistence may be in place; however, they will fail to show results unless one thing is true—people genuinely must want to live in peace. This is not a given. While we may think, and commonly say, that all people really want is to live in peace, this is not true. Not everyone wants to live in peace. Often people put qualifiers to the prospects for peace in their lives and worlds. For example, they say, ‘I want peace in my region, but not if it means giving up any of our land.’ Or, ‘I want peace in the region, but we cannot allow attacks on our national honor.’ In other words, we say we want peace, but not if it means we have to give up something that we deem more important than peace. Many of us value other things more than peace.

Even in our personal lives, in our relationships with family and friends, we often keep grudges and enmities in place for years and years despite many opportunities to do away with them and create peace. Why? Because we would have to give up something that we value more than peace, in order to achieve peace in that situation—a feeling of being right, a sense of superiority, the perverse joy we take in condemning other people or groups, and other things. We have to let go of these types of things to create peace, yet we often prefer them to peace. So, the conflict and tension endure year after year, and all the while we are saying, to ourselves and to others, that we want peace. We are not being honest about the situation. We value other things more than peace.

Ultimately, achieving peaceful coexistence at the individual, interpersonal level has to do with a person’s capacity for difference. How comfortable are we with people who are different from us? Do we feel threatened by them? Do we feel nervous around them? Or, can we be relaxed and comfortable within ourselves even when surrounded by people who believe, look, and act differently than us? Today’s global world demands all of us to expand our inner capacities for difference, so that we are not easily threatened by people who are not exactly like us. All of us must stretch our comfort zones beyond their current boundaries.

These are the hard, searching questions we must ask ourselves.

Only when we give ourselves authentically to these questions with a view toward creating sustained, peaceful coexistence will we have a future worth living for. Moreover, all of us must do this work together—religious and secular, liberals and conservatives—all of us. Otherwise, the forces of globalization that have made our world smaller will bring with it new and more barbaric forms of hatred, oppression, and violence.

Achieving peaceful coexistence is, then, the most important project of our era. And we must give ourselves to it wholly, with our fullest capacities for knowledge and understanding, with our truest intentions for truth and justice, and with our bravest strengths in order to journey through the challenges and difficulties that the process entails. We most certainly can do it. But we cannot do it alone or in isolation; we must do it together.

Licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra) is a Mediterranean perennial plant having light blue flowers, feathery leaves, and a sweet, distinctively flavored root. Its generic name, “Glycyrrhiza,” comes from the ancient Greek words glycos riza, meaning “sweet root.”1 It has grown in the wild in many Middle Eastern, European, and western Asian countries.

Licorice is 50 times sweeter than table sugar, though some researchers have placed it at more than 150 times sweeter than sucrose. This intense sweetness can be traced to Glycyrrhizic acid, a multi-purpose molecule that consists of two sugar moieties. Glycyrrhizic acid, one of the main components found in Licorice root, is believed to contribute to the herb’s healing properties. The varied properties of this molecule have led to the surprising mix of products containing licorice today: medicines, cough syrups, herbal supplements, gum, drinks, and candy.

History of licorice as a healing herb

Licorice root has been used since ancient Egyptian, Greek and Roman times in the West, and since the second and third centuries B.C in the East. Hindus, Chinese, Sumerians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and eventually the Greeks and Romans all were acquainted with its sweet flavor. Egyptians used it as the main ingredient of a very well known drink, called erksoos,2 which is still popular in modern times. In Japan, the oldest specimen of licorice introduced from China in the middle of the eighth century still exists in the Imperial Storehouse. Ancient soldiers found that if they chewed the root on long marches, it would prevent thirst. The benefits of licorice were also known by physicians in the Middle East, so they prescribed it as a medicine. Ibn Sina (Avicenna), the famous physician and philosopher, said that: “the infused licorice purifies the voice and the trachea, and is useful in disorders and diets.”3 He used this plant in treating his patients nine centuries ago. Greeks and Romans ate licorice to treat coughs, asthma, colds, and sore throats. Today it’s still a popular flavor for cough drops and other medicines. During the Ottoman Empire Eastern Turks used to make a drink called “Meyan serbeti” by combining licorice and water. Even today it is sold by the street vendors in Southeast Turkey.

Medicinal uses and indications

In both the East and West, licorice has been used to treat a variety of illnesses ranging from the common cold to liver disease. This herb has long been valued as a demulcent (soother) and expectorant (which rids phlegm and mucous from the respiratory tract). It is particularly popular for relief from respiratory ailments such as allergies, bronchitis, colds, and sore throats. It is also used as a treatment for stomach problems, diseases of the skin, relief from stress, and diseases of the liver.

Today’s studies and findings have revealed the amazing properties of licorice, which will be a remedy in medicine for different diseases beside pharmaceutical products.

• Animal studies and trials in humans have supported the value of licorice for stomach ulcers. “If I had an ulcer, the first thing I’d go for is licorice,” says James Duke, Ph.D., botanist at the US Department of Agriculture. .Dozens of studies, he says, endow licorice root with formidable anti ulcer properties.4 Many studies have shown the licorice is just as effective as the commonly used ulcer drug Tagamet in healing ulcers.

• The Journal of Drugs in Dermatology July edition reports that licorice, among other natural products, is very effective for use in treatment of rosacea, atopic dermatitis, irritated skin, drug-induced skin eruptions, and psoriasis.

• Licorice is showing well in studies of its use in heart treatment. In recent research, people with high cholesterol experienced significant reductions in total cholesterol after taking licorice root extracts for one month. Systolic blood pressure was reduced by 10%. These measures returned to their previous elevated levels when participants stopped taking the licorice supplements.

• Researchers at the University of California have been studying licorice root to prevent cavities. Studies which have been done so far have shown that compounds isolated from licorice root could be inhibitors for microbes to cause tooth decay. “More studies are needed before it is proven that the compounds effectively fight cavities in humans. If further studies show promise, the licorice compounds could eventually be used as cavity-fighting components in mouthwash or toothpaste” says Wenyuan Shi, Ph.D, a microbiologist at UCLA’s School of Dentistry.”5

• Some people in the USA face a serious oral problem which is the severe pain in the mouth called “canker sores”. Dentists have been trying different types of treatments for this disease. Studies have shown that the best result received the treatment that is used the adhesive patch with the licorice extract.6

Even though there are many benefits to using licorice, at high doses there may be some side effects such as high blood pressure and low blood potassium levels, and fluid retention because of glycyrrhizin. Some licorice root extracts, with the glycyrrhizin removed, are known as deglycyrrhizinated licorice (DGL). This form retains many of licorice’s healing properties and is the better choice for long term use. Scientific studies have shown that DGL reduces inflammation and is as effective as prescription drugs for gastric ulcers without side effects. Natural health experts Phyllis and James Balch reported to naturalnews.com that “it’s best not to eat more than three ounces a day and it should not be used on a daily basis more than seven days in a row by persons with diabetes, heart diseases and high blood pressure.”

Food and other uses

Licorice root has a long history of being used to make candy. Two licorice candies that originated in England are Allsorts and Pontefract Cakes, which have been around since Elizabethan times when licorice was grown in the Pontefract district of Yorkshire. Allsorts are pastel-colored and round-square candies. Pontefract Cakes are soft, coin-shaped black licorice. Today, some of these candies are decorated with a stamp of Pontefract Castle. In Finland, red and black licorice is shaped like little smoking pipes, while in Germany it’s shaped into wheels. Salty licorice, shaped in coin-diamond, is very popular in Holland. Another popular Dutch candy is Katje, shaped with black cats and made of strong-flavored licorice [10]. Although it seems odd, many flavors such as mint, coffee, cherry, honey and chocolate are combined with licorice to make tasty treats. Unfortunately, many American candies that are called licorice actually contain no licorice at all. Licorice, fennel, and anise all have an essential oil called anethole, which gives them a distinctive taste. Many “licorice” candies are actually flavored with anise instead. Next time you eat licorice, check the package to see if licorice extract is one of the ingredients.

Although licorice is something to eat or drink, some of its more interesting uses have little to do with food. Much of the natural licorice grown today ends up flavoring tobacco instead of candy. But what about the parts of licorice that remain once the flavor is removed?

One of the products of licorice roots is a foaming liquid. This can sometimes be added as a flavoring in some beverages, but an unexpected use for the same liquid is found in fire extinguishers. It can extinguish fires in oil tanks, where other traditional methods are unsuccessful.

Even after every drop of liquid is removed from roots, they’re still useful. Pulp mills blend the root’s fibers with other ingredients to make boxes and wallboards. Walls with only a half-inch-thick piece of this fiber board are better insulators from heat, cold, and sound than six-inch walls of brick, stone, or concrete.

Until several decades, Scientists have emphasized only how plants do photosynthesis other than informing or searching other amazing functions. Today, scientists have been studying plants in order to get more useful benefits from them. The licorice plant needs further research in order for us to discover other benefits to human being’s ecology. In the light of explored results about licorice, numerous ways of using this plant have been proven and caused people to ponder about how a simple plant is able to carry the varied properties in its roots. It is basically wood, but sweeter than sugar.

Conclusion

Almost every day humankind faces a new health problem which can never be healed by medicine, nor can they determine the root cause. Today, by understanding the amazing properties of the Licorice plant, we should explore the earth for other plants in search for what has been created and its benefits to us. There are surely countless other unknown and useful plants waiting to be discovered and used for their real purpose of living.

Even though there have been many promising findings, there are ongoing debates in the scientific community regarding the value and side effects of licorice products. Further studies are needed.

Despite its long history, licorice may yet surprise us. Its presence in the candy aisle, at the pharmacy, among the natural food products, and on the checkout stand attests to the complexity and rich chemistry of this sweet beneficial root.

Sumeyra Dural Cokavci has a Master’s degree in Nuclear Physics, Georgia State University, Atlanta.

References

1. The Green Pharmacy Herbal Handbook: By James A. Duke p:194

2. Toxicology and clinical pharmacology of herbal products By Melanie Johns Cupp, p: 223

3. http://www.asehlicorice.com/

4. Food–Your Miracle Medicine By Jean Carper p:177

5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2632514?dopt=Abstract

6. http://www.food-info.net/uk/products/sweets/liquorice.htm

No matter how expressive and stylishly it is told, what matters is that this important phenomenon of the era should be related. It should, after all, be related so that we add a footnote to history and show our respect for those devoted people who performed such heroic deeds. If, on the other hand, this soft breeze, this warm atmosphere, this fresh thought and this love, and the gentle winds felt across the globe were to be described very briefly, it would be disrespectful toward the noble traits, such as magnanimity and altruism.

This movement is a phenomenon to be written about and underscored. A few dozen passionate people set off in all directions for the sake of God without stopping to think about their longings or their feelings of separation and without uttering the words “foreign lands” or “unknown places” at a time when nobody could even fathom what lay ahead. They were full of determination, firm of intention, and self-reliant. They suppressed their love for their country and their homeland, replacing it with a love for mission. They were aware of their efforts for the cause of God as few have been, they lived as such, and they walked to the east and to the west saying:

We have entered the path of love,
We are lovesick.
(Nigari)

At the most colorful period of their lives, when worldly pleasures and material objectives attract young people with an irresistible lure, and when physicality oppresses the hearts and minds of a person, they virtually flew to all these places with a passion for accomplishment that suppressed the various desires and compulsions; the excitement of those in the first row was in their hearts. This flight abroad was not like the departure of lovelorn youths who chased a false siren that had entered their lives at an unlucky time, those youths who pursued their dreams for a lifetime, who became lovesick, and who were strangers to their own nature, yet unable to reach the desired goal. The mission of these youths was from the heart and based on emotions, on consciousness, and determination; it had a depth of good faith and sincerity. You could say that these were the usual dynamics of faith, the natural conditions of divine ambition, the ideals of the devoted, the guides of the Infinite Light, or the efforts of those who had abandoned their selves and their beloved ones in order to express themselves. Indeed, they were neither prevented by their own shortcomings nor did they surrender to the obstacles in their way; they walked to the far corners of the world, the only never-fading love in their hearts being God’s favor and the ambition to meet Him. They walked; the roads took pride in this, the angels cheered them on, and, naturally, the devils beat their breasts. They walked; they had neither horses nor cars, nor weapons, nor ammunition. Their source of energy was their incredible faith and the excitement in their hearts that seethed like magma; on the horizon was the happiness of humanity, consent, and pleasure. Their destiny equaled that of the Companions and the Apostles. Soon after dawn they attained, with their chastity and purity, a manner that was tantamount to kinship with the angels. They became a theme for legends and a thing of never fading memory. They brought streams of light from eternity wherever they went. They lit a fire all around; the flame, ember, and smoke of this fire was happiness. The spell of tyranny and darkness gave way. The disbelieving bats were deprived of their sleep, and darkness unceasingly grumbled. Lies, calumny, and intrigue were hindered once again. All this made boorish thoughts and bigotry intolerably arrogant, making it want to tread on others’ ideas and set up traps for faith. However, all opposition was in vain: the light shone everywhere. The light that radiated from eternity embraced the entire world. Now it was the time and the epoch of the bright souls, although the murky situation still prevailed and the horizons were foggy, but the magic of darkness and the boorish thoughts were already undone.

Now it was the turn of the bright souls to speak. Humanity would discover itself through them and take its true place in the hierarchy of creation. Therefore, it was a generation that had long been awaited. As people had been waiting for them, wherever they went they always bent double as a consequence of their reverence for God and their respect for humanity, their eyes fixed on the doorway of the Most Gracious, meekly and humbly, awaiting the time when showers of light would be unleashed, while their heads and feet touched the ground. No matter how the people of today assess the issue, these were the children of tomorrow; the bright future bore their secrets. These lucky people, who were the apostles of resurrection, each in their own way, held the flowers of friendship in their hands and the verses of brother and sisterhood on their lips. Their tongues, sharper than sharpest swords, were nourished by Qur’anic waterfalls and their words had divine dimensions. These words destroyed darkness, but did not harm anyone. They brought the sound of the rivers of Paradise within earshot, but they did not lead to a longing for Paradise. In fact, these people needed neither hands nor tongues. Their pure faces that reminded one of God wherever seen were so magical that words stumbled in the presence of the meanings that emanated from their manners, and tongues became mute. Even their shadows burned the night moths; not to mention their light, which dazzled anyone that came near. We rightfully say, “Tongues and words have nothing to say in the presence of actions. When manners speak, is there a need for speech?” They are the representatives of this truth. There have always been multitudes of good people on the Earth; however, the manners and words of this latest group are entirely different. I can hardly say that they were singular or unique, but were I asked to explain how they were, I would not be able to immediately reply. I would probably say, “They look like angels,” and give up there.

Wherever these bright souls go, dry deserts turned into gardens of Eden thanks to the light they radiated. Much coal has been transformed into diamonds. Natures made of mud and stone have ascended to the rank of gold and silver. And everybody is talking about them now, waiting for the days when the love, brotherhood, and tolerance they promised will be realized. Today, only those who confuse darkness and light and who spend their lives in the realm of physicality are speaking against them. The bats are uneasy. The wolves and jackals are baring their teeth. The fools are restless. I find all these natural, and say, “Everybody exhibits his or her true nature.”

Whatever happens, despite those who blow out the candles, these men and women have long illuminated the hearts that are thirsty for light wherever they go, they warn the pure natures of what lies behind things and events, and they announce the universal human values to unspoiled souls.

I firmly believe that, just as intercontinental obstacles were once overcome thanks to the Qur’an, and love, respect, and dialogue were permanently established, a new ground for reconciliation has been or will be founded by the efforts of these lucky people today. Humanity used to recognize our nation, with its smiling face and fortunate destiny. Why should this very fact not also be true today? A flood of love among the people has started overflowing in almost every place that these bearers of the mission visit. There have been breezes of happiness and gladness, one after another, that can be felt all around. Moreover, islands of peace, which we can call invulnerable castles of harmony and stability, are forming near and far.

Who knows, maybe in the near future, thanks to these volunteers who devote themselves to letting others live, the mind and soul will embrace each other once again; conscience and logic will become complementary depths of each other; physics and metaphysics will stop fighting and withdraw to their own realms, and everything will find the opportunity to express the beauty in its own nature through its own language, the intricacy of legislative rules and the principles of creation will be rediscovered, people will regret having fought each other over nothing, an atmosphere of peace that was not previously established in the marketplaces, in the schools and homes will be established, and breezes of happiness will blow, chastity will not be violated, honesty will not be oppressed, hearts will always breathe respect and esteem, no one will envy others, their property or their reputation, the powerful will treat the weak justly, the weak and the poor will have the chance to live humanely, nobody will be arrested on the strength of mere suspicions, no dwelling or workplace will be raided, nobody’s blood will be shed and the weak will not cry, everybody will adore God and love humanity. It is only then that this world, which is the hallway to Paradise, will become an Eden that is fascinating to live in.

Notes

1. The author has dedicated this article to countless educational activists who have gone all around the world, with a motivation to provide quality education and to promote peace between different nations and cultures. All throughout his life and career Gulen has preached the importance of education and directed his audience to participate in and support educational activities.
2. Seyyid Nigari: A famous poet of Azerbaijan. He was an important representative of nineteenth century mystical poetry.

Today, those who have made it their business to identify and cure these feelings of emptiness and the consequent loneliness that is experienced by the human self have presented panoply of solutions, usually gift-wrapped in various intellectual discourses. People struggle with each discourse, hoping that maybe one will, after all, be their stamped pass through the golden gateways of enlightenment. Time unwraps each solution and lays its contents bare. History stands as a graveyard, giving testimony to the inadequacy of the philosophical critiques and theoretical discourses of modernity and post-modernity. The world is still in a state of chaos and, within this existentialist milieu, human beings still question their solitary existence.

It seems that history has selected a fistful of people who deem themselves destined to step into the arena of intellectual combat, jumping to the rescue of humankind. The common man finds themselves in a literary laboratory where they are left to experiment with the latest medicines that have been prescribed for their affliction. In a desperate attempt to break free from the onslaught of isms hurled at us by the age of modernity and post-modernity, the intellectuals of our age have come up with a new literary concoction. The era of isms has ended. It is now the age of paradoxes. There is an increasing trend of juxtaposing ironies in the guise of facts and universal truths. Language is the best-seller in the market for dressing-up contradictions with such frills; one is often left so dazzled by the linguistic niceties that they are unable to detect any lacuna in the logic presented. People develop unique dictionaries for each of these. The logic presented for this discrepancy in the repertoire of every person is simple: each person’s world is made up of their distinct life experiences, their memories of the past and their imagination of the future, as well as their comprehension of the now and their plans of action for grappling with the present. Thus, the language one employs and the peculiar meaning it entails is contingent upon one’s very own, individual privé monad. It is these self-concocted dictionaries, composed of their distinct vernacular along with their numerous subtleties, which form one’s individual mental architecture by which the affairs of one’s life are orchestrated.

This novel concept of individual dictionaries rotates round and round the dining tables of the most “progressive” of humankind. People prize themselves as being part of what is now being hailed as a grand intellectual revolution. This revolution, it is believed, gives one the ability to guard one’s pristine exclusivity. Inherent within this exclusiveness of the individual self from the “other” is the championing of the self, and a sense of security prevails, giving humankind the assurance that the esoteric nature of our pristine binaries of right and wrong, true and false, beautiful and ugly make all that we do and say a private matter. And, some like to believe, within this privacy, within this unique sphere of personal space lays the epitome of freedom that humanity has ever been able to reach.

It is within this multiplicity of one’s private, peculiar lingua franca that they are able to ascribe meaning to their very existence. One’s conceptualization of the self and one’s ferocious defense of this newly-acquired perception of freedom are what form the basis of one’s interaction with those around them and the world that they live in. This sense of exclusivity leads to what Habermas has called a breakdown in “communicative action”-the absence of common relatable backgrounds to the extent that no one can any longer imagine being in another’s shoes. Without this mutual taking of perspective, the very precious element of human emotional intelligence that is known as “empathy” is automatically removed from many people’s dictionaries. Empathy is the same trait that makes a child burst into tears when another one cries in front of them, thinking that the pain is not the other’s but their own. This quality of being able to relate to, to actually understand and feel not only the other’s pain, but also their happiness, is what forms the main spring of the concept of rescue, a concept upon which entire literary laboratories have been established. If it were not for empathy, the demarcation between the self and the other would make it unimaginable for anyone to surmount those towering walls to rescue another; this would have been a thing of fairy tales and folklore. This is the point when an eagerly embracing the age of private dictionaries, with their golden masquerade of personal freedom, draws one actively into an intellectual maelstrom against the “other,” and against tolerance.

Confronted by such tempestuous times, when I look upon the glorious pasts of our ancestors in an attempt to find some point of reference that could aid in navigating, one string of events presents some relevant points to my argument. While growing up, my life, just as that of any other child who was growing up at the same time, was colored by numerous stories and legends. Over time, I managed to dust off images of flying horses and heroic men coming to the rescue of people who were being tortured by brutal potentates. But the more human memories have remained with me to this day. As a young child, I often saw my grandmother leave the house and walk over the next-door neighbors’ house with some delicious dish she had prepared. The visits had an almost ritualistic feel to them, since every single time some delectable dish was cooked and brought over to our house; I knew some of this would find its way to our house. On the occasions when I was allowed to accompany my grandmother on these visits, I would witness her place the dish on the table, and then either herself or the recipient would divulge some important piece of news, each launching off into a torrent of complaints and remarks about this, that and the other. On one such occasion, the meeting took a sudden unpleasant twist. I remember quite vividly that my grandmother severely rebuked one of our neighbors, a regular receiver of sweets and meals. The hot halawa lay on the table in front of her, sending off sweet enticing whiffs while both grownups were engaged in a heated verbal brawl. The point of contention was indecipherable to me, as grown-ups at that time had a way of skillfully employing a code language in front of children; perhaps this was part of an attempt to protect our innocence from being tarnished by the realities of adulthood. At the end of the quarrel, my grandmother apparently had the last word and made her way home with the hot dish of sweet-smelling food still sitting on the neighbor’s table. From that time onwards, there was a continuation of exchanges of harsh words over hot delicious meals or sweet mouth-watering delicacies. My young mind was at first befuddled and later exasperated by the on-going quarrel, the continuation of which was clearly contingent on the exchange of meals. I knew that all the trouble would effortlessly come to a halt if neither lady were to cross the fence that demarcated their house from the other. No ties of blood bound them and the cessation of any contact whatsoever would not have disrupted the routine of our lives. It was as simple as that.

What left my young mind baffled in the past was the persistence of my grandmother and our neighbor to maintain contact, despite the conflict; however, this makes sense to me now. People in the past had a more wholesome experience of life because it was framed within a sense of collectivity. Their dictionaries were not discrepant from others and they spoke a common language based on a certainty that their essence was unique to them not as individuals, but as an individual human race. It was their recognition of the unity of essence, shrouded within a multiplicity of existence, which enabled them to forge ties that were so tenacious. This notion of being united in essence, in their human proclivity to do good and believe in the Absolute Truth, was translated into their relationships and their persistent efforts to maintain relationships that had been forged willingly. The entire saga of my grandmother’s quarrels with the neighbor is intelligible to me now as a part of ongoing effort to remind her friend not to detract from this natural inclination towards goodness that was rooted within her very makeup as a human being. The whiffs of sweet-smelling treats were left as a message that her act of reprimanding her friend did not spring from a desire to claim a higher moral ground based on her own personalized set of rights or wrongs, but rather from an active concern for the community that she perceived herself to be a part of. The fact that the neighbor welcomed her at the door each time before the drama took place relates the moral pattern of people at that time, or at least within the confines of such interactions. It reflects a broad moral consensus of the entire neighborhood; they were actively involved in saving not just the one who was being wronged, but also the one who was doing wrong. Each person comprehended the fact that the underlying reason for the argument between the two found its source in the legacy of mutual concern, handed down to them from their elders. An active sense of empathy, of the fear that the wrong that was being committed today could be committed by them tomorrow, the fear that if it was not ended it would form a part of the legacy of their children, existed among these neighbors.

Today, people find a false sense of security in the notion of privacy and personal space. A sense of relief is felt that no busybody from the neighboring apartment will come knocking on the door, with the sense that the gift of a sole meal or a plate of sweets grants them the moral right to correct one’s wrongs or to criticize acts. One finds themselves comfortably ensconced in this preservation of private space and thus fails to recognize that the so-called privacy that is so aggressively guarded is actually shrinking with every passing day. In the past, at least one was able to walk down a street without having some person or another trying to sell them expensive means to look socially acceptable. But the case today is the total opposite of this. The alienation that is a direct cause of protecting what we now term “personal space” has curtailed our freedom to guard our natural proclivity towards goodness which connects us with humanity. The percolating sense of otherness and spreading intolerance are just two sides of the same coin.

The decisive factor in the above discussion is that no time is in and of itself golden. It is the people who are living at that time who cast it in varying hues, hues by which the future generations will remember them. Only if people could burst their own bubble which divides them from the other and embrace the unified proclivity towards Good and Absolute that is part of their human makeup, will they be able to live up to the moral responsibility that they have, not only towards themselves and their contemporaries, but also towards their future progeny. In this hour of need what we need is not another so-called glamorized intellectual revolution, but rather a grand intellectual revival of the human estimation of one’s own self. In my opinion, expensive intellectual laboratories and large think-tanks can help, but a revolutionary revivalism of that which can help us find a positive continuity with the past and a beneficial connection to the future could play a small start. The muddy hand of a child is enough to hold up a mirror to each and every one of us, shattering any claims of uniqueness or separateness. This brief muddy treasure will remind us of what we are made of and of what we mean to one another. Within this humbling realization, I believe, flickers a great hope.

Raaza Jamshed Butt has an MA degree in international relations from the International Islamic University, Malaysia.