In recent years, attitudes and legislation have made life more difficult for oppressed peoples, including refugees, around the world. Many people believe their countries should accept fewer refugees. People believe that refugees are nothing but a burden to their countries, and that they will take away jobs and reduce the standards of living (Wike, Stokes, and Simmons, 2016). Tougher laws against refugees and asylum seekers have been passed in countries like Austria; these laws restrict access to protection for refugees. The law also restricts the rights of the asylum seekers, allowing authorities to turn away migrants at the border (Hume, 2016). Increased security concerns such as the belief that refugees will increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks and increase the crime rate in a country have been used to turn away these oppressed groups (Wike, Stokes, and Simmons, 2016).

Cases of increased racial discrimination towards members of other religions and races, as well as towards immigrants, asylum seekers, and refugees, have increased where they are deprived of access to the most fundamental of human rights and protection. In such instances, minorities are left exposed to and unprotected from xenophobic attacks and discrimination. In such climates, media often plays a role in building a hostile environment of mistrust and misinformation.

Since the days of the famous economist Max Weber, religion has been viewed as both a cause and outcome of economic development, with the adoption of religious principles being a contributor to economic progress (Michalopoulos, Naghavi & Prarolo, 2014). For instance, the adoption of Muslim economic principles has a long term effect on the economic development of Muslim lands; the adoption of Christian principles, mainly Protestantism, had a significant effect on the economic prosperity of many individuals in the West; and a change in the Judaic religious doctrine in the second century improved Jewish human capital by increasing literacy (Michalopoulos et al., 2014).

 Different religions have different values and perspectives on how the issues of economic inequality, racial discrimination, and intolerance should be addressed. An understanding of Islamic, Christian, and Jewish values will lead to a deeper knowledge of the three Abrahamic faiths and an understanding of how to improve the common good.

The three religions agree that caring for others is essential and obedience to one’s faith will reduce negative attitudes towards vulnerable groups. People practicing the three Abrahamic religions can work together and condemn the individuals targeting minorities and newcomers, reducing the effects of intolerance and racism while also combatting economic inequality.

Islam

In Islam, economic inequality is considered as human condition only in the proportion of skill, initiative, and effort. Islam also teaches against extreme economic inequality, and it emphasizes that all resources are a gift from God, with Qur’an 2:29 stating that “It is He who created for you all of that which is on the earth…” People are entrusted with these gifts for a short time (Qur’an 57:7) (Christopher & Hayat, 2012).

The Islamic economic system is based on three divine principles which establish a “falahi” or an Islamic welfare economic system. The first principle is that man is not the absolute owner of resources because they are God’s and man is just a trustee. Second, economic activities should not be guided by self-interest only. And third, the religious aspect of earning and spending are as important as Islam’s other worship obligations and practices (Haq, 2013).

Haq (2013) identifies the systems of Ushr and Zakat, elements of the Islamic economic system which has significant implications on the distribution of income and wealth. Ushr is an obligatory payment from agricultural output, while Zakat is paid for accumulated wealth; Haq (2013) identifies the latter as a major instrument of restricting the excessive accumulation of wealth, as Zakat helps the poor and vulnerable members of society. The wealthy and the elite are warned that they will be hold accountable for disregarding vulnerable groups (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 24, Number 486).

Muslims are expected to value the poor, and they should spend from their wealth to help the poor: “God said, ‘O son of Adam! Spend, and I shall spend on you’” (Sahih-Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 64, Number 264). Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, reformed the value of taking care of the poor and treating everybody with respect as a way of addressing economic inequality.

Islam also teaches that there should be respect for people of other religions. Prophet Muhammad said, “Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment.” Islam teaches that caring for others is not optional but a religious duty.

Islam is against any form of discrimination towards any one, and it teaches that differences in color, tribe, race, or tradition should not be taken as an excuse for unfair treatment. The Qur’an is against any form of racial discrimination, and it states, “O Mankind, we created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you into tribes and nations so that you may know each other (not that you despise each other). Verily, the most honored of you in the sight of God is he who is most righteous of you” (Al-Quran 49:13). Islam advocates for equality among all people as members of one human race.

The Qur’an teaches that all people were created by God, and it states in Surah 30:22 that, “of His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the diversity of your tongues and colors.” Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, also taught that all people are to be treated equally; in his last sermon, he stated that, “All mankind is descended from Adam and Eve, an Arab is not better than a non-Arab and a non-Arab is not better than an Arab; a white person is not better than a black person, nor is a black person better than a white person except by piety and good actions. Learn that every Muslim is the brother of every other Muslim and that Muslims form one brotherhood.” Muslims are encouraged to stand up and challenge racism and intolerance whenever they see the laws of God being broken.

Christianity

Christianity teaches that all wealth comes from God, and He is in complete ownership and control of all things. Deuteronomy 10:14 (New International Version) states, “Behold, to the Lord your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth with all that is in it.” Christianity holds the view that all the riches and wealth that man possess are a gift from God: “Moreover, when God gives someone wealth and possessions, and the ability to enjoy them, to accept their lot and be happy in their toil-this is a gift of God” (Ecclesiastes 5:19, New International version). Christianity acknowledges the fact that some people will be more economically able compared to others, but this should not make such individuals reject the most vulnerable members of society.

Christianity also teaches that people should care for the oppressed and the poor. Deuteronomy 15:7-8 (New International Version) states that, “If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites in any of the towns of the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them. Rather, be openhanded and freely lend them whatever they need.”

The apostle Paul teaches the Corinthians that there should be a fair balance so that a person does not have too much or too little. Christianity emphasizes that the immigrant and refugee crisis experienced so far could be solved by reducing economic inequality in the world.

 “Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At present your plenty will supply what they need so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. The goal is equality, as it is written: ‘The one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one who gathered little did not have too little’” (2 Corinthians 8:13-15, New International version). 

Christianity calls for its followers to show “agape” love, where individuals care for those in need. Agape love would reduce the negative attitudes towards members of other religions and races, and people would not practice discrimination or attack vulnerable groups.

The gap between the rich and the poor is increasing drastically in the world we live in. Jesus Christ discouraged the accumulation of wealth, and He gave the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 19:16-31, New International Version) to warn people against accumulating wealth without caring for those in need. Jesus also gave the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37, New International Version) who helped a stranger. Christianity extols individuals to care and welcome the vulnerable people in society.

Therefore, Christianity instills the values of love for one another and having compassion for another person. If individuals followed such values, practices like racism, intolerance, and violence against other people would end.

Judaism

According to Sauer & Sauer (2016), Judaism puts forward two axioms of the Jewish economic theory which have a significant effect on the matter of economic inequality. The first axiom is that God is the creator of the world (Genesis 1:1, New International Version) and man was created in God’s image. Man was then given the world and complete dominion over it, and he should help perfect it through the utilization of resources, work, and innovation (Sauer & Sauer 2016). The second axiom is that man is required and obligated to care for the needy, and the Torah has moral principles which should guide how a man treats others. The Torah, in Leviticus 25:10 (New International Version), states, “proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof,” and this means that foreigners, newcomers, and minorities were to be set free (Sacks, 2015).

The Torah imposed certain infringements on personal property which were designed to ensure that the gap between the economic classes was reduced, avoiding instances of extreme wealth or poverty (Sicker, 2001). There was the law of the sabbatical year, which required that the land should rest and lay fallow in the seventh year, letting the poor people eat (Exodus 23:10-11, New International Version). The law also required that all debts in the seventh year should be forgiven, and every creditor should release that which the neighbor owes. Such laws had a significant effect on reducing the economic inequalities between people.

Judaism removes the system of human and economic freedom from the hands of human legislators. The Torah states that, “Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves” (Leviticus 25:42, New International Version), and this means that personal liberty is not opened up for any political negotiations. Contemporary political and media discourses have made it difficult to integrate oppressed people, but Judaism promotes the values that will see such violence and intolerance reduced.

Judaism takes a positive approach towards all people and teaches that everyone is equal in the eyes of the Creator, and, therefore, all individuals should be treated well. Strangers, refugees, and foreigners are supposed to be treated fairly, as recorded in Leviticus 19:33-34 (New International Version) which states that, “When an alien lives with you in your land, do not ill-treat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.”

The three Abrahamic religions promote values that seek to address the issue of economic inequality and the effects of it, such as discrimination and rejection of vulnerable groups. The core values of the three Abrahamic religions are equality among all member of human family, because God is the creator of all; care for those in need; and the need to show love to vulnerable groups. Therefore, religion has a significant role to play at reducing economic inequality in society, and it is crucial that people take their religious values with more seriousness.

References

• Al-Quran 2:29, 57:7, 49:13,30:22
• Christopher, C. & Hayat, A. (2012). Equitable Distribution of Wealth: The Economic System of Islam. Inside Islam. Retrieved 14 September 2016, from http://insideislam.wisc.edu/2012/05/equitable-distribution-of-wealth-the-economic-system-of-islam/
• Deuteronomy (10:14, 15:7-8), Ecclesiastes 5:19, Leviticus (19:33-34, 25:10, 25:42), Genesis 1:1, Luke (10:25-37, Luke 19:16-31), 2 Corinthians 8:13-15 (New International Version).
• Di Matteo, L. (2014). All Equal in the Sight of God: Economic Inequality and Religion in the Early Twentieth Century. Lakehead University.
• Haq, G. (2013). Distribution of wealth and Income in Islam. South East Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, 2(2).
• Hume, T. (2016). “Austria passes tough new asylum laws.” CNN. Retrieved 18 September 2016, from http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/28/europe/austria-tough-migrant-laws/
• Michalopoulos, S., Naghavi, A., & Prarolo, G. (2014). Islam, Inequality, and Pre-Industrial Comparative Development. Harvard Business School.
• Sacks, J. (2015). Judaism Was First in Fight Against Income Inequality. Algemeiner.com. Retrieved 14 September 2016, from http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/05/07/judaism-was-first-in-fight-against-income-inequality/#
• Sahih Al-Bukhari (Volume 2 Book 24 Number 486, Volume 7 Book 54 Number 264).
• Sauer, C. & Sauer, R. (2016). Jewish Theology and Economic Theory. Journal Of Markets And Morality, 17(1). Retrieved from http://www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-17-number-1/jewish-theology-and-economic-theory
• Sicker, M. (2001). The Political Culture of Judaism (p. 99). Praeger Publishers.
• Wike, R., Stokes, B., & Simmons, K. (2016). Europeans Fear Wave of Refugees Will Mean More Terrorism, Fewer Jobs. Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. Retrieved 18 September 2016, from http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/07/11/europeans-fear-wave-of-refugees-will-mean-more-terrorism-fewer-jobs/

Grace is a very significant feature of the Prophet’s character. In fact, whichever characteristic of him we may consider, he was able to make the best out of them so that all of his efforts paid back many times as much. Grace relates to his benevolence, generosity, and unselfishness. While these terms are differentiated from each other by tiny nuances, they all indicate the same point. The Prophet was taught by God, thus his character developed with the morals of the Divine, which he practiced so well that He did not waste even an iota of it. Then, God Almighty returned the results of that divine morality, but with a multiplied amount. The Prophet, as being the Pride of Humanity requires, has surpassed all people – and even the angels.

In fact, this is not something reserved to him exclusively. That is, whatever someone grants on the way to God’s contentment shall return to him/her a multiplied amount. Many of the verses of the Qur’an state this fact very clearly: “Whoever comes to God with a good deed will have ten times as much” (6:160). Yes, if a person does a unit of goodness, God Almighty shall multiply that goodness by ten and return it to him/her. This is the least degree of divine favor. God Almighty sometimes multiplies by hundred or thousand. It depends to a certain extent on one’s depth of sincerity. He may multiply even by thousands, in accordance with the depth that that particular person subjectively loads on that particular practice of worship. Still, depending on the particularity of certain days and nights, or on the degree of altruism and unselfishness of that person, and on the firmness of his/her association with God, God Almighty may grant him/her a million times more. In sum, something like that may happen to every single person. However, the Prophet, we can confidently argue, benefited from this potential in full and made the best out of it to the last drop.

Grace is one’s being locked on or knotted around benevolence, or that one’s nature is completely engaged in doing favors to others. Actually, this emotion is shared to a particular extent by any human being. However, some people dull this emotion, whereas some others enhance it by a life-long process of practice. When they do this, the path of grace becomes the main road for them. By this way, they live their life always as a devotee radiating around pearls of grace, without straying in any other direction.

Due to the heavy mission he was loaded with, God favored the Prophet immensely from the very beginning. Parallel to the magnitude of this load, his nature was equipped with kernels that were able to shoulder this weighty task and responsibility. Nonetheless, he improved those kernels and extended them beyond expectations. By means of His all-covering divine knowledge, God Almighty had taken into consideration that the Prophet was going to give his willpower its due in the future, and bestowed him, at the very beginning, grandeur exceeding all other creatures.

Grace covers his character of benevolence as well as his capacity to be blessed with wonders – as he gave away in charity, God bestowed upon him His favors. As each of these incidents also served to endorse his messengership, they can certainly be considered miracles. Indeed, miracle is defined as something wonderful created by God through the hands of a prophet, particularly aimed at the confirmation of his prophethood. The Prophet’s nature, peace be upon him, was already prepared to welcome such wonders.

Grace and generosity have been among the key features of praise throughout history. It is reported in a story that Prophet Abraham owned a herd of livestock, and he had shepherds and dogs to attend them. When some angels, according to the story, could not reconcile his mission with this extensive wealth he owned, God told them to test Abraham. Angels visited Abraham in human form, and when they came close, they praised God, saying, “You are All-Glorified, All-Holy, the Lord of angels and the Spirit,” and they made sure Abraham could hear their prayer.

Each single one of these words were chosen precisely in the name of the glorification and sanctification of God. The true value of chosen words in a poem can be appreciated by true poets and experts of oratory; similarly, the very fine selection of these words would certainly be appreciated by Abraham, whose conscience was able to perceive the situation. Therefore, once he heard the angels verbalizing that utterance of glorification, he almost lost himself and said: “what a beautiful expression! Please say it once more; I will give you one fourth of this herd in front of me!” And when they did so, he offered them half of it for one more utterance. And when said it once more, he declared “I am a slave of yours, together with my shepherds!” As you see, if wealth is firmly connected with that kind of feeling, it becomes a vital support, instead of opposing the post of prophethood.

Prophet Muhammad, too, peace and blessings be upon him, was blessed with wealth through Khadijah, his beloved wife, who was a reputable businesswoman. Nevertheless, by the second or third year following the advent of his call, they had nothing to eat. That huge fortune had almost melted for the sake of mission, spent on banquets to win the hearts of people, or to decrease the tension of conflict. But at the end, that huge fortune was used up. It was consumed to the point that the Pride of Humanity started to bind stones on His belly in order to rid himself of his hunger. You see, this generosity and grace inherited from Abraham was not something unfamiliar to the people of Mecca. And, any member of this city used to have a share from this grace, in accordance with their personal position. However, no single soul was in a position to compete with the grace of the Prophet – even before his prophethood. Indeed, God’s Messenger was the final and the most inclusive fruit of the tree of Abraham. He inherited almost the whole grace of Abraham. This grace increased after the prophethood, and God’s Messenger became an embodiment of grace and generosity.

Especially during Ramadan, as Aisha stated, God’s Messenger was like winds of grace and abundance; he used to give away everything he could to the people around him. For God’s Messenger, accomplishing the exalted mission God Almighty had loaded upon his shoulders was a blessed ideal, even an ambition. God Almighty modified and consoled him in the Qur’an by saying, “Yet, it may be that you will torment yourself to death with grief” (18:6). However, he never gave away his wealth in vain; in contrast, he appreciated doing so on the way to God’s contentment. He scattered whatever he was endowed with like seeds scattered on soil, and every single grain he scattered became an everblooming flower.

The devotees of today, who are striving for the good of all humanity “so that others may live,” are in no different a situation, as they may be considered as inheritors of the prophetic mission. These inheritors should behave in exactly the same way as the Prophet, who revived the character of generosity and grace in His own era and elevated it to its zenith. Taking him as a role model, we can invest all the resources God has given us in education, without wasting a penny. Yes, our generosity has brought about, and will bring about, results that are vitally important for the future of humanity, and so valuable as to be worth all sacrifices.

Worship is essentially categorized into two sections: worship through financial/material means and physical/bodily worship. This categorization does not mean they are totally unrelated; in many ways, they are interconnected. For example, the daily prayers that we perform with our bodies certainly have material aspects, like time and place. As a matter of fact, the inner and outer conditions that are required for a proper prayer (like cleanliness, washing, dressing, etc.) are also related to the material world, too.

Alms is a kind of fiscal worship, but it also requires one to labor in a job or be physically present in the marketplace, so as to achieve a certain degree of wealth from which to give charity. The Hajj, the Muslim pilgrimage to the holy lands of Mecca and Medina, is a financial worship, in one aspect, and a physical form of worship, in another: a Muslim has to be financially able to afford the travel to the holy lands, where he or she has to endure physical difficulties, like the long trip and certain rituals, like circumambulation around the Ka’ba, standing vigil all day, etc. Fasting, too, may be considered within this frame. Four of the five essential principles of Islam have a considerable association with the material world as well as the spiritual one.

In today’s world, it is important to contribute to good religious services by alms, charity, and donations. But such financial contributions do not absolve one from other forms of worship and good work that need to be performed physically. For example, Abu Bakr had been among the well-to-do of Mecca when he met the Prophet. Bu he spent all his wealth for the sake of Islam and he had nothing to leave behind when he died. He also physically participated in the emigration to Medina and he also fought in many battles.

Financial worship may be more important at certain times. But, this is not an absolute truth. It varies depending on time, place, and the respective conditions of people.

We can assess the issue from two perspectives: 1) Giving less or more charity depending on wealth; 2) giving within certain parameters. There exists a distorted and incorrect understanding among some believers. They say: “My financial situation is not high enough, I do not own a fortune; so, I am not obliged to observe any financial worship.” No; this thought is absolutely wrong. Every single person is obliged to observe his or her responsibilities within the capacity bestowed upon him or her by God Almighty. However much or little one earns, believers should always seek God’s good pleasure by giving in charity as much as they can, for God considers sincerity, rather than the amount given. In the words of Bediuzzaman, “An ounce of sincere worship may sometimes be superior to the one that weighs pounds but is not practiced in sincerity.” As a consequence, every single person is obliged to mobilize on the divine path to God’s contentment.

It is very difficult for a person to both give away in charity and maintain his or her sincerity. Those who can manage this will surely be rewarded beyond measure. If one can overcome the welfare and comfort that come with wealth, can avoid ostentation, and can keep their sincerity and connection with God strong, their rewards will surely be abundant in proportion to the difficulties they face.

The second aspect of the matter relates to the parameters and guidelines for such donations. There are certain minimum degrees for financial obligations in charity. In the case of Islam, for instance, it is compulsory for wealthy Muslims to give a minimum of 2.5 per cent of their annual wealth in charity. There are other rules for wealth in gold, silver, commercial goods, crops, etc.

But we have to remember that these are minimum figures and many lofty goals and good services cannot be attained through merely giving these minimums. Therefore, every single individual should work hard to donate beyond the minimum amount of obligatory alms. We wholeheartedly believe that whatever is given today in the name of God will be multiplied by the thousands in the next life. Yes, everybody is obliged to serve on the way to God with his or her self and goods. But there are no limiting criteria; everything is relative.

Even if we gave away all we own on the path to God, we should still see it as a very minor sacrifice when compared to the ideal we have been wishing to construct.

Come and see them in their graves.

Only a large shirt is their share

And even those, without sleeves

Dignitaries they had been

With servants standing before them

Now come and see, you can’t tell,

The late masters from their men

Every human being asks the question “why,” though at different levels, to explain the unexplained. It follows a pattern of questions, like “Why did the financial crisis in the U.S. happen in August 2008?” “Why did the space shuttle Challenger explode?” “Why did the terrorists commit the September 11 attacks?” In statistical terms, such unexpected events are named “outliers,” however, they are part of the system and among the components constituting the overall system’s complex behavior. Thus, they need to be part of the explanation in order for the explanation to be complete. We are naturally tempted to come up with universal explanations of the complexity behind these major events so that we can be ready when a similar thing happens again. Though simple mathematical equations or relationships relate to us better and provide a universal explanation, they are typically practical only when the outliers are excluded from the system behavior. Statistics help us greatly in quantifying and characterizing the outliers, especially in the form of probabilistic expressions, such as “there is a 30% chance of a hurricane next week.”

Understanding the complexity around us involves the development of a model that is simple enough for us to comprehend but yet universal enough to capture most of the dynamics of the complexity. The simpler and the more universal the model, the more powerful it is. The universality of a model, however, is hindered by the potential inability to capture something unexpected. The tradeoff between simplicity and universality exists in all modeling efforts; and the models finding the delicate balance in this tradeoff are the most effective ones. A simple mathematical relationship known as “the power law” has been used extensively to characterize and model various natural and social phenomena.

What is the Power Law?

The “power law” does not refer to a misconception that “whoever has power will rule,” but rather it refers to a particular way of characterizing dependency between two quantities. When the number or frequency of an object or event varies as a power of some attribute of that object (e.g., its size), the number or frequency is said to follow a power law. In more general terms, there exists a power law relationship between x and y if y is growing or reducing polynomially when x is growing linearly (y _͌ x^–α). Mathematically speaking, this means that the relationship between y and x is mainly characterized by the exponent -a. An exponent is simply shorthand for multiplying that number of identical factors. So, 4³ is the same as 4x4x4; that is three identical factors of 4. As shown in Figure 1, a quantity with an exponent has three components: the base, the exponent, and the coefficient. So, for 4³, the base is 4, the exponent is 3, and the coefficient is an implicit 1.

Figure 1: Description of an exponent in a power law relationship.

Figure 2: Sample power law relationships between x and y, where y = x^–α.

The power law relationships are traditionally expressed with a negative exponent, which simply means the inverse of the quantity. That is, y _͌ x^–α is equivalent to y _͌ 1/x^α. For example, when a is 2, y will reduce from 1/4 (i.e. 0.25) to 1/9 (i.e. ~0.11) if x grows from 2 to 3. Likewise, when a is 0.5, y will reduce from 1/2 (i.e. 0.5) to 1/3 (i.e. 0.33) if x grows from 4 to 9. For those who enjoy graphs, Figure 2 illustrates these mathematical relationships in linear and logarithmic scales.

Power law on different scales: Atoms to planets

To start with, gravitation, acoustics, electrostatics, and light and electromagnetic radiation, all exhibit a form of power law in that physical quantity or strength that is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, which corresponds to a power exponent of 2. [1] Gravitational force between two particles, the electrostatic force of attraction between two electrically charged particles, the intensity of sound signals coming from a source, and finally the intensity of light or electromagnetic field coming from a source all follow a power law with respect to the distance.

What makes the power law relationships more interesting is their independence from scale or size of the measures being related to each other. This is why we sometimes call power law relationships as “scale-free” relationships or “scale-invariance.” For example, the gravitational force between two spherical particles decays with a power exponent of 2 regardless of the sizes of the particles though the actual force is certainly dependent on the particle sizes. So, the particles can be at nano scales (e.g. a group of atoms) or macro scales (e.g. a planet), but the relationship stays the same!

Power law in frequency: Wealth, terror, and earthquakes

A common usage of power law relationships has been to model and understand frequency of a varying measure. A power law typically very well represents the distribution of wealth in a society. [2] According to a recent study, the distribution of wealth in China during the years 2003–2005 follows a power law with an exponent ranging from 1.758 to 2.285. If we consider an average exponent of 2 for Chinese wealth distribution, this means that if there are 1 million Chinese people who owned $1000 there were 1000 that owned $1M. Thus, the power law essentially expresses how skewed the distribution of a frequency is (see Figure 2). The larger the power exponent, the more skewed the distribution. In this case, a larger power exponent means a more imbalanced wealth distribution while a power exponent of 1 refers to an evenly distributed wealth.

Many other social patterns exhibit power law. A recent study showed that it exists even in terror events! The number of casualties per insurgent event and the number of insurgent events per day follow a power law. [3] Historical data for the last two centuries show further that the number of casualties per war or a terror attack follows a power law distribution. What is even more interesting is that the number of casualties and the number of attacks within an insurgent conflict both follow power law. That is, when only a particular conflict between two countries or ethnic groups is considered, the number of casualties per insurgent event and the number of insurgent events per day follow the power law. This suggests a “self-similar” pattern. Likewise, traffic measurements for many systems show power law distributions of size. For instance, if one observes the data traffic on an Internet connection and counts the number of bytes being transmitted per hour over that connection, a power law distribution of the count of bytes will emerge. Further, if this counting is done per minute instead of per hour, a similar distribution will still emerge – again showing a self-similar pattern. [4]

The power law has been observed in several natural phenomena as well. The frequency of earthquake magnitudes follows a power law. [5] This refers to the intuitive notion that the number of earthquakes with small magnitudes (which humans do not even feel) is much larger than the number of earthquakes with large magnitudes, (which can kill many humans). Small earthquakes are the norm while large ones the outliers. However, without the outliers, there is no power law distribution! Thus, the power law distribution of a quantity comes with an interesting observation: If a quantity is indeed following a power law distribution, then the likelihood of an outlier event increases as the time goes by without an outlier event. This is why geoscientists would make comments like “The region X is due for a major earthquake!” indicating that the region X has not been receiving a major earthquake (i.e. an outlier) for several years. The issue, though, is determining the threshold for an outlier is typically ambiguous and may require many years of measurements and data, which may be impractical.

Power law in growth: Rich get richer

Growth of systems also exhibit power law in various ways. Social growth follows power law due to the well-known “rich get richer” rule, which refers to the intuition that “important” people in the society attract more of the attention of newcomers. This dynamic situation is observed, for example, in the growth of the Internet. Several studies [6] showed that the connections between Internet Service Providers (ISPs) (e.g., AOL, Yahoo!, AT&T, Sprint) follow a power law distribution in that the number of connections per ISP (which shows how well an ISP is connected to the rest of the world) is represented by power law. In other words, there are few ISPs with many connections to other ISPs while most ISPs have a few connections to the others. This is believed to be due to the “rich get richer” rule since an existing ISP with many connections is more likely to gain the business of a new ISP who is joining to the Internet. So, it is somewhat an economic pattern too.

If economics (or the money) is taken out of the picture, social growth still exhibits power law. Online social networks such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Flickr are clearly following a power law distribution. It is found that the power exponents are in the range of 2.5 to 3.7, indicating a highly imbalanced social growth pattern where few people are at the “center” of the social network with hundreds or thousands of friends, and many people have only one or two friends. [7] Again, the typical explanation for this growth pattern has been the “rich get richer” rule, but “richness” refers to the number of existing friends in this context rather than money.

Physical growth shows power law too in many ways. For instance, roughness of a growing surface as time goes by follows a power law distribution with an exponent ranging between 0 and 1 where an exponent of 0 refers to a smooth growth and 1 refers to a stiff growth. The surface roughness is measured by the variance of heights of surface locations. [8]

Does it really exist? Why does it exist?

Verifying existence of a power law distribution is not easy and requires enough number of samples to show the “tail” of the distribution. The tail of the distribution refers to the samples with large (or rare) values. For example, for the power law distributions in Figure 2, the portion of the distribution when x is greater than 10 (i.e. x>10) roughly corresponds to the “tail.” The tail corresponds to the rare samples. Though statistical theory calls those rare samples “outliers,” the distribution will not be a power law distribution without them. They are strictly parts of pieces that constitute a power law relationship, and observing them typically requires long periods or large numbers of measurements. Due to this difficulty, the existence of the power law is questioned for many real systems. Most of the time, claims of the existence of the power law typically come with an error factor indicating the confidence of the claim. The bottom-line is to observe trends in the samples and thus establish sufficient confidence (e.g., more than 95%) that the power law distribution does exist in the samples.

For those systems with clear exhibition of power law, the root causes of it have been of high interest. The “rich get richer” rule is intuitively one of the root causes, and it is intuitively a natural dynamic to get attracted by a rich member rather than a poor one. Growth certainly naturally follows the “rich get richer” rule, but we have system components slowing their growth, flattening, and then deteriorating. So, not everything is growing, and actually, we have as many things deteriorating as growing. For instance, participants join or leave the Internet or the social networks, and likewise, people join (i.e. birth) or leave (i.e. death) society. How does the power law stay in such systems then?

Due to the “rich get richer” intuition, the power law is considered to be the signature of “self-organization.” The fact that so many natural or synthetic systems are exhibiting this signature deserves the question: “Is it really self-organization?” Maintaining a global power law distribution for a system requires either (i) every member joining or leaving the system according to the “rich get richer” rule and having global knowledge of the whole system or (ii) somebody who knows everything about the system and gives explicit direct orders to each member when they are joining or leaving. Which one is more likely?

Murat Yuksel is an Assistant Professor at the CSE Department of The University of Nevada – Reno (UNR), Reno, NV.

References

[1] Wikipedia, “Inverse-square law,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law

[2] M. A. Santos, R. Coelho, G. Hegyi, Z. Néda, and J. Ramasco. 2007. “Wealth distribution in modern and medieval societies,” The European Physical Journal, Volume 143, Number 1, pages 81-85.

[3] J. C. Bohorquez, S. Gourley, A. R. Dixon, M. Spagat, and N. F. Johnson. 2009. “Common ecology quantifies human insurgency,” Nature, Volume 462, December, pages 911-914.

[4] T. Karagiannis, M. Molle, and M. Faloutsos. 2004. “Long-Range Dependence: Ten Years of Internet Traffic Modeling,” IEEE Internet Computing, September/October, pages 57-64.

[5] T. Lay and T. Wallace. 1995. Modern Global Seismology, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.

[6] M. Faloutsos, P. Faloutsos, and C. Faloutsos. 1999. “On power-law relationships of the Internet topology,” ACM Computer Communication Review, Volume 29, Issue 4.

[7] R. Kumar, J. Novak, and A. Tomkins. 2006. “Structure and evolution of online social networks,” Proceedings of ACM SIGKDD, pages 611-617.

[8] A. L. Barabasi and H. E. Stanley. 1995. Fractal Concepts in Surface Growth, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

“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.

Selflessness is when one relinquishes oneself from certain personal desires and aspirations, forgoing certain goals associated with property or wealth, and even values associated with one’s self-honor and dignity, all for the sake of lofty aims and noble goals. When a person is able to actualize such renouncements in their life, then that person can be considered to be a selfless person.

For example, when one, either through individual or collective efforts, relentlessly endeavors to exalt faith and spirituality, and in their pursuit builds centers and institutes for learning, establishes schools, or when dormitories and youth centers are built to cater to the needs and demands of the younger generations, when all these are enabled, either through financial support or through one’s own voluntary work, then such acts are considered to be sacrifices. Given that the intent behind is purely to serve an exalted aim that is greater than the self, then the only criteria is to make the doer of these acts a selfless person, or a person of sacrifice.

A closer examination will reveal that there is no contradiction between selflessness and reason. In other words, selflessness, or sacrifice, is not a mere emotional expression that is incongruent to reason. In fact, not only does reason justify selflessness, arguably it necessitates it. At an immediate and rather superficial glance, a contradiction between the two may be observed. Let us take, for example the numbers of selfless people who, while working tirelessly in educational institutes and campaigns, make great self sacrifices, although fully aware that none of the fruits of their genuine labor will show immediate results. Yet they devote their entire lives and health to these campaigns. It is as if God has bestowed on them special favors, for their work becomes far more efficient and productive then reason would allow. The cycle continues, as they in turn use these favors for furthering their efforts.

For those onlookers who may view the matter with little reflection, such attitudes can be considered to be apparent contradictions to reason. To selflessly strive for some cause and sacrifice thousands of other truths for the sake of one truth may appear to them to be a sacrifice that unnecessarily conflicts with reason.

However, if the heart has attained enlightenment beyond the discernment of the inner workings of the universe, then the depth in appreciation takes on a different aspect. If one realizes that everything in creation flows towards the Hereafter and if the compelling beauty of The Most Beautiful One is felt within one’s conscience, then thousands of years of happiness in this world cannot equate a single minute of life in Paradise and thousands of years of life in Paradise cannot equal a moment’s view of the beauty of Almighty God; here then the tradeoff between the fleeting pleasure of this world to that of the unending Hereafter will not be even as precious as the wing of a small insect. A person with such depth and foresight can perfectly exercise reason and will willingly make apparent sacrifices for real returns that will be attained from the transcendent realms.

In our time we have sent out rockets to explore the speculative possibilities of cities in space. Let us take this as a reality and for a moment imagine that such a source of comfort, which is beyond both the sight and hearing of human beings, has actually been discovered; here, life does not resemble our way of living and is beyond our comprehension. Large amounts of funds are spent to transport humanity there. In this process, there is a good probability that some will fail to perceive the possibility and may question the motives for such a prospect; this is because they are unfamiliar with these worlds and the goal may sound unfathomable to them. Objections may be raised with arguments like: “Many people are dying of hunger in Africa, but you are traveling to outer space with shuttles for the sake of adventure and are wasting large amounts of money.”

This approach is the outcome of superficial reasoning. What if, indeed, such a world was discovered? What would happen if one day a happier world outside this contaminated and muddled earthly life was to be found and somehow we could all be moved there, where our lives-with God’s grace-could continue happily for years to come? That is, a time will come when everyone will realize that this service has good and valuable implications for all of humanity and is certainly compatible with reason.

The innate ability to fathom far-reaching and multi-dimensional reasoning surely surpasses the limits of our logic; yet, it is clearly conceivable on a logical basis, beyond the influence of five sensory shackles, that every act of sacrifice made to this end is necessary. Therefore, endeavors to achieve greater future benefits cannot be considered to be illogical.

Similarly, a believer’s quest can be likened to the above. In order to attain a life of genuine happiness in Paradise and the privilege of meeting with the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and in order to be mesmerized by the beauty of Almighty God Himself, all efforts or selfless acts made in the process only confirm the need for such a logical investment.

Most of the time, the criticisms that are hurled at those people of sacrifice come from no deeper an analysis than the above; they are usually based on shallow reasoning. In fact, such criticisms stem from two streams of different perspectives of the world. Hasan al-Basri once touched on this difference when he profoundly remarked: “If you had seen the Companions of the holy Prophet, you would call them ‘mad.’ … and if they had seen you, they would hesitate and ask, ‘are they believers?’”

Today is no different; some people may regard those who are engaged in sacrificial services as “mad” and question “why should you work so hard without any material gain?” This perception is revealing and delineates those who contemplate personal return and benefit in every act. In other words, for those mindsets who carry the proverbial attitude: “what’s in it for me?” it is not possible to understand why an elderly or infirm person would want to continue working just like an ordinary person, for example in the construction of a building or campaigning for donations for their good work, or for that matter, allocate all their physical and/or mental efforts towards a cause. Indeed, such mindsets cannot conceive the possibility of making all these sacrifices just to please God. As a result of their failure to grasp this, they will continue with their misguided considerations and false accusations of such selfless work.

On the other hand, for those of us with the insight to see beyond the materiality of things, selfless acts are perfectly normal and the most intelligent person is the one who is prepared to give up everything they own to serve God by serving humanity. If a person with such breadth and depth of heart is not seen to sacrifice all of their wealth all at once, then chances are high that they are most probably cherishing the noble thought: “Let me hold back part of my wealth so that I can invest it to earn more therefore continue to spend in the path to God.”

To sum up, it is clear there is no essential contradiction between selflessness and logic. I can safely and confidently assert that logic entails sacrifice. Whoever can grasp this fine point will use their logic to make more profound sacrifices.

The availability of CNN worldwide (media), the growth in international organizations (political), and McDonald’s (economic and cultural) illustrate the diverse factors driving globalization. In addition, it is important to recognize that globalization, as an issue, is linked to capitalism’s triumph in the Cold War. The United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, pointed out that its opponents see globalization as “an ideology of predatory capitalism.”²

Hardt and Negri: Empire

Michael Hardt is a professor of literature at Duke University, and Antonio Negri is currently an inmate at Rebibbia Prison, Rome.³ Their book Empire, a post-Marxist attempt to analyze capitalism/globalism proposes the following simple thesis: “Globalization is a symptom of the new Empire. The new Empire is a result of the demise of the sovereignty of the nation state. However, ‘throughout the contemporary transformations, political controls, state functions, and regulatory mechanisms have continued to rule the realm of economic and social production and exchange. Our basic hypothesis is that sovereignty has taken a new form, composed of a series of national and supranational organisms united under a single logic of rule. This new global form of sovereignty is what we call Empire’…⁴ As national sovereignty declines, however, ‘Empire’ emerges. Empire, or globalization, is the latest strategy of the wealthy and powerful to control the weak and powerless. It has a number of advantages over the traditional nation state that it has displaced. First, it has no boundaries. Second, it is attempting to create this myth that it is simply the logical expression of certain economic laws. Third, it wants to shape every aspect of human life. And finally, it shelters behind the rhetoric of peace.”⁵

The study makes much of the decline of state sovereignty. It documents, with some care, the distinctive set of historical and social conditions that gave birth to the idea that a particular people within a particular boundary are sovereign over their actions. It notes that this was often a device that protected tyranny, and that the European Enlightenment had strong tendencies toward racism and colonialism.

Where traditional national sovereignty was grounded in a “transcendent” ruler (e.g., the king over his people), the Empire uses capital to operate on the plane of immanence “through relays and networks of relationships of domination, without reliance on a transcendent center of power…. In the passage of sovereignty toward the plane of immanence, the collapse of boundaries has taken place within each national context and on a global scale.”⁶ Capitalism is not simply about power over resources; it is also about the relationship of religion and ethics to economic life.

The danger in this debate about globalization is that we confine our reflections to the political left (i.e., those with socialist sympathies) and the political right (i.e., those with capitalist sympathies). To prevent this, we turn to Said Nursi. If I am right in stressing the religious factors at the heart of capitalism and globalization, we should expect to learn something from Nursi.

Four Themes in Said Nursi

It is dangerous to apply the ideas of great thinkers to problems that they did not experience. Said Nursi (1877-1960) experienced the concluding years of the Ottoman Caliphate, the First World War, and the establishment of the aggressively secular Republic of Turkey (1923). He responded to modernity’s challenge to belief with the Risale-i Nur (the Treatise of Light).

Although he does not mention globalization, his work contains four relevant themes. The first of these is that it is appropriate to build bridges between Western scientific culture and the Islamic world. Nursi believed that the best of modernity is compatible with and anticipated in Islamic thought. For example, he writes: “Things like the airplane, electricity, railways, and the telegraph have come into existence as wonders of science and technology as the result of humanity’s progress in science and industry. Surely the All-Wise Qur’an, which addresses all of humanity, does not neglect these. Indeed, it has not neglected them.”⁷

He argues that the Qur’an anticipates such technological advances. This enthusiasm for scientific achievement underpins his “natural theology” (i.e., the world itself provides good and decisive arguments for God’s Existence). After discussing various scientific disciplines, he concludes: “Through the certain testimony of hundreds of sciences like these, the universe has been adorned with innumerable instances of wisdom, purposes, and beneficial things within a faultless, perfect order. And the order and wisdom given through that wondrous, all-encompassing wisdom to the totality of the universe have been included in small measure in seeds and in the tiniest living creatures. It is clear and self-evident that aims, purposes, in-stances of wisdom, and benefits can only be followed through choice, will, intention, and volition, not through any other way. Just as they could not be the work of unconscious causes and Nature, which lack will, choice, and purpose, so too they could not interfere in them.”⁸

Nursi saw science as part of God’s intended purpose for humanity: “The miracles of the other prophets all indicate a wonder of human art or craft, and Adam’s miracle indicates in concise form, besides the fundamentals of those crafts, the index of the sciences and branches of knowl-edge, and of the wonders and perfections, and urges humanity toward them.”⁹

His confidence that Islam endorses modern-ity’s technological dynamic, a major feature of globalization, is reflected in this vision of the future. Writing about Nursi, one author states: “Indeed, as we shall see when examining the [Damascus] Sermon, Bediuzzaman [Nursi] predicted that, according to all the signs, Islam and Islamic–or, true–civilization would prevail in the future, and that the majority of mankind would accept and join the religion of Islam. He said: ‘In the future when reason, science and technology hold sway, that will surely be the time the Qur’an will gain ascendancy, which relies on rational proofs and makes the reason confirm its pronouncements.’”¹⁰ In other words, the truth of the Qur’an will be recognized when reason, science, and technology hold sway in the world.

Many who are sympathetic to religion tend to see modernity, as well as the growth of technology and globalization, as evils to be opposed. However, Nursi argues that the achievements of science, modernity, communication, and globalization need to be recognized as representing the best of the human spirit and humanity’s creativity. In addition, they are made possible by the God-designed order of the universe.

Themes two to four are far more critical. The second theme is that society must accommodate in a just way the inequalities of wealth. While Nursi assumes that some inequality is inevitable, he maintains the need for balance:

“. . . just as the source of mankind’s revolutions is one phrase, so another phrase is the origin of all immorality. First Phrase: ‘So long as I’m full, what is it to me if others die of hunger.’ Second Phrase: ‘You work so that I can eat.’ Yes, the upper and lower classes in human society, that is, the rich and the poor, live at peace when in equilibrium. The basis of that equilibrium is compassion and kindness in the upper classes, and respect and obedience in the lower classes. Now, the first phrase has incited the upper classes to practice oppression, immorality, and mercilessness. And just as the second has driven the lower classes to hatred, envy, and to contend the upper classes, and has negated human tranquility for several centuries, so too this century, as the result of the struggle between capital and labor, it has been the cause of the momentous events of Europe well-known by all. Thus, together with all its societies for good works, all its establishments for the teaching of ethics, all its severe discipline and regulations, it could not reconcile these two classes of humanity, nor could it heal the two fearsome wounds in human life. The Qur’an, how-ever, eradicates the first phrase with its injunction to pay zakat, and heals it. While it uproots the second phrase with its prohibition on usury and interest, and cures that. Indeed, the Qur’anic verse stands at the door of the world and declares usury and interest to be forbidden. It reads out its decree to mankind, saying: ‘In order to close the door of strife, close the door of usury and interest!’ It forbids its students to enter it.”¹¹

There are two strategies for balancing inequal-ity: obligatory charity, which falls heavier on the rich, and forbidding usury. Implied in this is the fact that economic globalization becomes problematic when inequality is not managed. Some nations are fortunate and benefit from globalization, while others struggle with it. Nursi’s proposal has much to commend it: fortunate nations are obliged to help unfortunate ones, and IMF loans should not require a prohibitive repayment schedule. Also, debt cancellation is appropriate, given the detrimental contracts negotiated in the mid-1970s by Western financial institutions. The overall point is that inequality needs to be managed with considerable care.

The third theme is that all wealth and property ultimately should be entrusted to God. Nursi speaks of a king with two subjects. One allows the king to hold the property in trust; the other insists on sole ownership. The first subject experiences positive results; the second one eventually becomes an object of pity. According to Nursi: “Transient property becomes everlasting. For this waning life, when given to the Eternal and Self-Subsistent Lord of Glory and spent for His sake, it will be transmuted into eternity. It will yield eternal fruits. The moments of one’s life will apparently vanish and rot like kernels and seeds. But then the flowers of blessedness and auspiciousness will open and bloom in the realm of eternity, and each will also present a luminous and reassuring aspect in the Intermediate Realm.”¹²

This fundamental religious insight should shape our view of globalization. As life is transitory, we can see possessions as ends in themselves or as a means to serve God’s purposes. In the latter case, we seek to make globalization feed the hungry, educate the ignorant, bring hope to the hopeless, and so on by entrusting what we have to God.

The fourth theme is that not all of the West’s achievements should be seen as part of the march of progress. He has harsh words for uncritical supporters of European progress, especially when it is at the cost of religion: “O miserable pseudo-patriot who fervently encourages Muslims to embrace this world and forcibly drives them to European industry and progress! Beware, do not let the bonds with which certain members of this nation are tied to religion be broken! If thus, foolishly, blindly imitating and crushed under foot, their bonds with religion are broken those irreligious people will become as harmful for the life of society as fatal poison.”¹³ The meaning is clear: Together with the third theme, globalization should not become the goal in itself, but rather should serve a vision of social organization that allows humanity’s spiritual dimension to grow and develop.

Concluding Reflections

Unlike the entrenched positions of Hardt and Negri, Nursi offers a far more nuanced approach. To interpret capitalism simply as the tool of the powerful to retain control of as much wealth as possible distorts reality. Capitalism has its roots in certain religious dispositions and has generated vast wealth. It offers many dangers as well as many possibilities.

This is also true of globalization. Nursi certainly would recognize globalization’s technological and scientific underpinning as good. However, he also would want to make sure that globalization works for the good by creating strong safeguards against the vast inequality engendered by so much wealth. I believe that he would have strongly supported the debt-cancellation campaign and agreed that the world’s economic life is intended to serve humanity’s spiritual vision. Generating wealth for itself is madness; generating wealth so that all people can live full God-directed lives is a vision. Globalization might make the latter possible, and all of us should work toward that end.

* Ian Markham is Dean of Hartford Seminary, Hartford, Connecticut.

Footnotes

1. Robertson, R., “Globalization and the Future of ‘Traditional Religion,” in God and Globalization, eds. Max L. Stackhouse with Peter J. Paris, Harrisburg, PA, Trinity Press International: 2000, Vol. I, pp. 53-54.
2. As quoted in ibid., Vol. I, p. 5.
3. A writer, professor at the University of Padua and Marxist political activist, Negri was arrested on 7 April 1979 on the charge of “armed insurrection against the powers of the State.” Acquitted and released after 4 years in jail, he fled to France to avoid re-imprisonment. He returned to Italy in 1997, turned himself in, and received a 13-year sentence. (http://www.notbored.org/negri.html.)
4. Hardt, M., Negri, A., Empire, Harvard University Press: 2000, p. xii.
5. Ibid., pp. xiv-xv.
6. Ibid., pp. 326-32.
7. Nursi, S., The Second Station of the Twentieth Word, The Words, Sozler Publications, Istanbul: 2002
8. Ibid., 3:408.
9. Ibid., 1:272.
10. Sukran Vahide, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, Sozler Publications, Istanbul: 1992, p. 90.
11. Nursi, S., The Words, Sozler Publications, Istanbul: 2002, p.421.
12. Ibid., 1:38.
13. Ibid., 3:168.

Enron in only the poster boy for the type of greed running rampant in today’s multinational corporate world. Despite the rhetoric spilling over the airwaves of the world media, the truth cannot stay hidden for very long in this age of information. The world’s current level of violence is tied directly to the greed of such corporations and so-called leaders who care nothing for the people’s general welfare. They have sold their souls, as the cliché goes, joined hands with Satan, and are ready to ride off into the sunset.

I am not referring to any particular country, people or hemisphere. The greed that we see today exists among all races, religions, and nations. Granted, some may be guiltier than others, especially in light of current world events, but the evil force of greed does not discriminate. Satan has used greed to dupe many people, even Muslims. As Abdullah Yusuf Ali comments in his Qur’anic translation: What an evil choice he makes in committing treason against his own Benefactor (Allah) by going after the petty baubles of this world’s wealth of fleeting gains. How eloquent and true. Greed is nothing but selling our fate in the akhirah (the Hereafter) for this world’s temporary cheap thrills “ often at a tremendous expense to others.

Some facts you should know

So just how bad has it gotten? To what degree has greed enveloped the entire world? The following provides a shocking glimpse:

– In a statement by the Institute for Policy Studies, the group said that 497 billionaires registered a whopping collective wealth of 1.54 trillion dollars. This is way above the combined gross national products of all the nations of sub-Saharan Africa, which stands at only 929.3 billion dollars, or those of the oil-rich regions of the Middle East and North Africa 1.34 trillion dollars.1

– This collective wealth of the 497 is also greater than the combined incomes of the poorest half of humanity, says IPS.2

– Last week, the U.S. government announced that it was building the biggest-ever war machine. Military spending will rise to $379 billion, of which $50 billion will pay for its ˜war on terrorism.’3

– The wealth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans grew an average $1.44 billion each from 1997-2000, for an average daily increase in wealth of $1,920,000 per person ($240,000 per hour, or 46,602 times the U.S. minimum wage).4

– Funds in the hands of U.S. money managers grew from $1.9 trillion in 1980 to $17 trillion in 2000. While those funds were under the control of fiduciaries (half the funds are due to tax incentives), the pay gap between top executives and production workers in the 362 largest U.S. companies soared from 42:1 in 1980 to 475:1 in 1999.5

– The financial wealth of the top one percent of U.S. households now exceeds the combined household financial wealth of the bottom 95 percent.6

– The top fifth of U.S. households claims 49.2 percent of national income while the bottom fifth gets by on 3.6 percent.7

Of course, these all refer to the U.S. However, the U.S. and the western world are not alone in being the culprits of such distorted wealth distribution and inequality. For example,

– In Indonesia, 61.7 percent of the stock market’s value is held by that nation’s fifteen richest families. The comparable figure for the Philippines is 55.1 percent and 55.3 percent for Thailand.8

The impact of such greed is devastating for the rest of the world. Consider these facts:9

– Eighty countries have per capita incomes lower than a decade ago. Sixty countries have grown steadily poorer since 1980.

– In 1960, the income gap between the fifth of the world’s people living in the richest countries and the fifth in the poorest countries was 30:1. By 1990, the gap had widened to 60:1. By 1998, it had surged to 74:1.

– From 1995 to 1999, the world’s 200 wealthiest people doubled their net worth to $1,000 billion.

– Three billion people presently live on $2 or less per day, while 1.3 billion of those get by on $1 or less per day. With the global population expanding by 80 million each year, World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn cautions that unless we address the challenge of inclusion, 30 years hence we may have 5 billion people living on $2 or less per day.

– Two billion people suffer from malnutrition, including 55 million in industrial countries. Thus, in 3 decades, neoliberal-style globalization could create a world where 3.7 billion people suffer from malnutrition.

– The UNDP’s assessment: Development that perpetuates today’s inequalities is neither sustainable nor worth sustaining.

Although the above facts offer just a glimpse of the big picture, it is quite clear that the current policies of nations and their corporate entities are destructive, oppressive, and barriers to peace and justice. Such policies are making a select few rich beyond comprehension while the vast majority either barely survives or literally starves. This is our world’s hard and cold reality “ a reality that goes largely unchecked even among the educated masses of the developed world. Unfortunately, those same educated masses seem content to be brainwashed by a corporate-controlled media that tells them next to nothing about the world’s true condition. According to those who control information, people are on a need-to-know basis, and most of what is truly important the people simply do not need to know!

A worldwide epidemic

This is truly a worldwide epidemic, for it can be found in the third world as much as (if not more than) the developed world. It is a problem, however, that can be addressed only at its roots. While living in both the U.S. and Southeast Asia, I have learned that these problems all stem from the same place. The appearances (e.g., people, cultures, and religions) may be different, but ultimately everything that ails us has the same root causes, as mentioned in the Qur’an. Greed is greed, whether it is that of Enron or some other corrupt entity somewhere else. It may look different and the people may speak a different language, but the ailment is the same, because underlying it all are the same diseases of the heart. This is precisely why the Qur’an is for humanity “ because we have so many fundamentals in common with our fellow human beings.

All of us are capable of harboring some of these booby traps of the soul (e.g., greed, injustice, envy, and hatred). This is why we cannot point fingers at one nation, person, or corporation. The diseases of the heart are killers, and they are killing, starving, and oppressing millions of innocent people. Thus we have to deal with the sickness’ cause, not just its symptoms. More war and destruction may eliminate some of the culprits, but it certainly will not rid the world of the problem, which is, ultimately, sickened human hearts feeding on ignorance.

Globalization

We must be wise at such times and seek out wisdom, not just information as to how the world works. Globalization, which is actually just a fancy innocuous-sounding term for the westernization and materialization of the entire planet, is not in most people’s best interests. In fact, some less well-known world leaders have been brave enough to acknowledge this. Malaysian prime minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamed has consistently spoken out against the dangers of globalization in its current guise. He considers it to be nothing more than the developed nations leveraging its huge capital advantages in order to exploit developing and underdeveloped nations.

By lining the pockets of weak, corrupt government leaders, multinational corporations are free to wreak havoc on the people, economies, and lands of weaker nations. Dr. Mahathir has said that capital must be equalized first if the current form of globalization is to have a truly equalizing effect on all nations’ economies. Developing countries must be protected and their own economies nurtured until they can compete on an even playing field. However, this is far from the case today. Thus, globalization in its current form allows developed nations to strip developing nations of their resources while spreading a culture of consumerism and materialism through their huge multinational corporate media and advertising machines.

A Qur’anic perspective

To further understand greed from a Qur’anic perspective, we should understand why God banned usury: Those who devour usury will not stand, except as stands one whom the Evil One has driven to madness by his touch (2:275). When referring to this verse in his Tafsir al-Qur’an, Daryabi says: According to the socialist writers of today, money is lent by them who have abundance and returns to them to increase that abundance, the increase being the unpaid dues of labor, which is the only source of wealth “ the rich are thus made richer and the poor poorer, by every fresh act of taking interest, and the stability of social organism is disturbed. This analysis is perfectly consistent with the world economy today. Look around “ interest is everywhere, wealth is in the hands of a few, and the gap between rich and poor is growing ever wider. The result? The social organism is grossly disturbed.

This is why the Book is called Al-Qur’an al-Hakim (the wise Qur’an). It is a book full of wisdom. The evils of usury, greed, and their ugly companions are forces that have destroyed entire peoples throughout history. They are problems that humanity cannot shake, especially when we turn away from the Creator’s wisdom and guidance.

Our world’s current course, with the haves and the have nots growing apart at an exponential rate, cannot be sustained. Somewhere, somehow, and at some point there will be a monumental adjustment. A world economic system that is so unequal, so unjust, and so divisive cannot last for long. The powers-that-be currently controlling the world economy are deluded if they think that they can continue their corrupt policies while 95 percent of the world sits back and does nothing. Sooner or later, it will come to a crashing halt.

Islam provides a straightforward solution to this problem. Yet history has proven that until humanity can tackle the evil that lies within each person, we will never address the evils around us effectively. The solution is called fairness (justice) and cooperation. In our present capitalist-dominated world, such terms seem utopian. Unbridled competition is the name of the game and, moreover, there is no indication that this will change any time soon. Such over-competitiveness seeps into every aspect of life until entire societies distrust one another, become antisocial, and are completely dysfunctional from a social perspective. This is already the case in much of the western world.

Conclusion

Islam encourages people to come together, rely on one another, and commune. It already has the built-in, well-formulated systems to do it in an inclusive way one that is neither elitist nor harsh. Islam says that when people unite to build and do good works out of a desire to achieve goodness for all and His approval, they will earn His pleasure. When humanity is granted God’s succor, the sky is the limit in terms of what can be accomplished. The glorious history of Islamic civilization proves this.

This is how the Prophet erected the perfect society in seventh-century Madinah. In that society, people worked, lived, and worshipped together. Muslims, non-Muslims, and different peoples and tribes co-existed peacefully, all agreeing to live under one leader in a perfectly just system. That leader was a man who desired nothing for himself and only the best for his fellow believers and neighbors. Until those with envy and hatred in their hearts spoiled the peace, Madinah showed the world how belief in God, cooperation, and living for the common good are the keys to peaceful coexistence. This can never happen again until humanity is willing and able to fight the sicknesses lying deep within each person’s heart.

Footnotes

1. Steve Smith, World Billionaires Still Richer than Half of Humanity. Online at Islamonline.net, 2002.
2. Ibid., 2002
3. John Pilger, The Colder War, The Mirror 20 (30 January 2002).
4. Online at www.forbes.com.
5. Business Week (7 April 2000), 100.
6. Edward N. Wolff, Recent Trends in Wealth Ownership (paper for the Benefits and Mechanisms for Spreading Asset Ownership in the United States conference, New York University, December 10-12, 1998.)
7. Online at www.census.gov [Table H-2].
8. Stijn Claessens, Simeon Djankov, and Larry H. P. Lang, Who Controls East Asian Corporations? (Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1999).
9. Jeff Gates, Modern Fashion or Global Fascism, Tikkun: A Bi-Monthly Jewish Critique of Politics, Culture, and Society (Jan.-Feb. 2002).

Greed shows its evil consequences wherever there are animate beings. In contrast, seeking one’s provision while trusting in God is a means to tranquillity and displays its good effects everywhere. For example, fruit trees and plants need provision and yet remain stationary, “contentedly trusting in God and showing no impatience.” And so their provision hastens to them and they reproduce more vigorously than animals. Animals attain only an insufficient provision after great effort, since they pursue it with impatience.

Only young animals, who “demonstrate their trust in God through their weakness and impotence,” receive in full measure their rightful and delicious provision from Divine Compassion’s treasury. On the other hand, wild beasts that leap greedily at their provision obtain “illicit” and coarse food at the cost of great effort. These examples show that greed causes deprivation, while trusting God and contentment are the means to Divine mercy.

Contented and greedy people can be likened to two people entering a great one’s audience. One thinks: “It is enough that he admits me so that I can escape from the cold outside. Even if he seats me in the lowest position, it will be a favor.” The second person arrogantly hopes for the highest position, as if he had some right to it and as if everyone were obliged to respect him. He enters with greed and, fixing his gaze upon the highest position, attempts to advance toward it. But the owner turns him back and seats him in a lower position. Instead of thanking the owner, the man is angered and criticizes him, thereby annoying the owner. The first one enters most humbly and shows his willingness to be seated even in the lowest position. His modesty pleases the owner, who invites him to sit in a higher position and thereby causes his gratitude to increase.

This world is like the Most Merciful One’s audience hall. Earth’s surface is like a banquet laid out by Divine Compassion, with the different degrees of provision and grades of bounty corresponding to the seating positions.

Everyone can experience the evil effects of greed. For example, you are offended by a beggar who importunes greedily and are inclined to refuse the request, whereas you give to the peaceable one out of pity. Or you may fall asleep quickly if you do not think about sleeping, instead of trying to fall asleep immediately. If you are impatient, you might lose your whole night’s sleep. Or, if you impatiently wait for someone and complain continually, finally you will lose patience and leave. But a minute later the person will come, and so your purpose will remain frustrated.

The reason for this is as follows: A loaf of bread is produced only after cultivating the field, harvesting the crop, taking the grain to a mill, and baking the loaf. Similarly, Divine Wisdom arranges everything according to a certain deliberation. If you do not comply with this deliberation and neglect to follow all the arranged steps, you cannot achieve the desired result.

I had a true, highly interesting, dream during the fifth year of WWI. In it, I was asked the reason for this hunger, financial loss, and bodily trial afflicting the Muslims. I replied:

From the wealth He grants to us, God Almighty requires, as zakat, either a tenth or a fortieth so that we may benefit from the poor people’s grateful prayers and avoid their rancor and envy.(3) As our greed did not allow us to pay, God Almighty removed its accumulated amount: three-fourths where a fortieth was owed, and four-fifths where a tenth was owed.

He asks us to fast for a month each year so that we may benefit from as many as 70 beneficial purposes. But we pitied ourselves and did not fast. And so God Almighty compelled us to fast for 5 years with a hunger that combines almost 70 kinds of afflictions.

God requires believers to spend no more than one hour out of 24 in prayer, a pleasing and lofty, illuminating and beneficial form of Divine training. But we were too lazy to observe the five daily prayers and so wasted all 24 hours. In return, God Almighty chastened us by making us undergo a form of training and physical exertion for 5 years.

I awoke after this and, pondering over it, realized a very important truth. As The Twenty-fifth Word indicates, by comparing modern civilization’s principles to the Qur’an’s commands, all immorality and disturbances in human social life proceed from two sources and two attitudes: “Once my stomach is full, what do I care if others die of hunger?” and “You work and I will eat.”

These attitudes are perpetuated by the prevalence of usury and the abandonment of zakat. The only remedy is to implement zakat as a universal principle and duty and then ban usury. Zakat is a most essential pillar for individuals, particular communities, and humanity to live a happy life. Humanity usually comprises two classes: the elite and the masses.(4) Only zakat can arouse the elite’s compassion and generosity toward the asses, and the masses’ respect and obedience toward the elite. Without zakat, the elite cruelly oppresses the masses and thereby often engenders revolt. Such a development gives rise to a constant struggle and position, finally resulting in labor and capital confronting each other, as in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century.

O people of nobility and fairness, of munificence and liberality! If you do not act generously in the name of zakat, your acts are useless and potentially harmful. If you do not give in God’s name, you make poor people feel obliged to you and so deprive yourself of their prayers, which are acceptable in God’s sight. Also, your subsequent belief that you own your wealth shows great ingratitude.

But if you give zakat, you are rewarded for giving for His sake and thank Him for the bounties received. What is more, its recipients will not feel obliged to flatter or fawn, and thus damage their self-respect. Moreover, their prayers for you will be accepted.

See the vast difference between giving to earn fame and impose obligation, and giving as zakat to fulfill your religious duty, gain a reward, be sincere, and have poor peoples’ prayers for you accepted.

Glory be to You, we have no knowledge save what You have taught us. You are All-Knowing, All-Wise. O God, bestow blessings and peace on our master Muhammad, who said: “Believers stand together like a firm building, one part of which supports the other” and: “Contentment is a treasure that will never be exhausted,” and on his Family and Companions. And all praise be to God, Lord of the Worlds.

Footnotes

1. The Qur’an says: Ignominy shall be their portion wherever they are, unless they (seize) a rope from God or a rope from people (3:112). This means that those nations can make progress when they begin to obey God’s commands or are backed by some powers, as is the case today. Otherwise, ignominy shall follow them. Regardless of their current status, when compared with their long history of ignominy, they still live in constant fear, insecurity, and uncertainty about their future. (Tr.)
2. Zakat: This word literally means purification and growth, for Muslims believe that it purifies their possessions. For most purposes, it consists of setting aside 2.5 percent of one’s capital, provided that this capital reaches a certain minimum amount after its owner’s needs have been met, to help those who qualify for it and to benefit the local community in general. Zakat is considered so important that those who ignore it are not considered part of the Muslim community. (Ed.)
3. A tenth of wealth that annually yields a new crop; a fortieth of whatever yields a financial surplus during the year, or of at least 40 pasturing animals (e.g., sheep or goats). (Tr.)
4. Said Nursi uses elite for those who can give zakat, and the masses for those eligible to receive it. These designations are relative, for they depend upon local standard of wealth. As Islam does not allow a deep socioeconomic gap to form between Muslims, the gap between these groups is not very great. In many Muslim societies today, members of both groups can be found within the middle class. As the main purpose for zakat is for the poor to receive enough money to provide for their families, we should consider the living standard envisaged by Islam when considering zakat. (Tr.)