Talk is Cheap

I’m up to Chapter 7 of the Q’uran, but I haven’t done the “hot or not” exercise for a while. Probably because the hot-not score is currently tied at 5-5 and I don’t want to do anything more blasphemous to upset the balance. Partly also because I don’t want to make a further mockery of my inter-faith work – propagating co-existence but secretly disparaging a certain religion because of its effect on my own personal life. Still, I need something to get me through the book so perhaps I’ll just fast forward to the parts that talks about non-believers and inter-faith relations.

I sometimes wonder whether all these interfaith dialogues will ever make any difference. A lot of people can preach co-existence and spend hours in conversations, but I think that’s because their lives have never been touched personally by religious conflict.

Talk is cheap. It is hard to tell the Buddhist man who lost his daughter to her Muslim in-laws and whose relations with her remains estranged that “all religions are equal”. Also, as a country, the current generation have not been tested. I used to think that all religions can co-exist too, but that was before the vehement objections to my own inter-faith relationship. Now I wonder if its all wishful thinking.

A Catholic Father had once described to me that each religion as a treasure. If all religions are the same, then we don’t need religion. The thing is that each religion has irreconcilable differences, and that is what makes them priceless – because it offers different pathways to God. The man giving a talk on Hinduism yesterday reiterated the same point. He believes that humans are in a dark box, and God is outside in the light. Light streams in from outside to the sides of the box, casting rays into the box. The problem is that each man believes that the one stream of light that he sees is the only way out to the outside, when in fact there exists many other ways, had he bothered to look around. I thought it was a nice alternative to the over-exposed Blind Men and the Elephant story.

Will we ever evolve to the day that we are able to accept that all religions, or even a non-religious way of life, are equally valid?

Too Dumb and Not Picky Enough

How amazing that you follow a blog for almost a year thinking that someone is very similar to you in thoughts – and then you realise with one comment that it was overly presumptuous on your part. Despite the fact that you can probably agree on 99.9% of what had been written, it only takes one response to jolt you into thinking that another person is not so similar at all. The response to my comment is rather typical. Never mind the fact that some people prefer to place certain qualities in their mates as higher importance than attributes such as race and religion. Such interfaith couples are too dumb and not picky enough, and so deserve all the inconveniences that come along with it.

In essence, it is a micro example of relations between people of different faiths. Often you think, given similar circumstances (maybe oh, agreeing on types of music, ideas about politics, rampant consumerism etc) that people would be able to get along. 99.9% shared DNA notwithstanding, or even shared 99.9% of opinions, clearly the fact that two people believe in a different God remains deeply polarizing.

Another reason why I chose to respond on my own blog instead of replying to the response there was partly because of this article that landed in my inbox. To me, the issue is not so much religion as much as it is a case of ‘old-timers’ vs. ‘newcomers’. Some Swiss may still regard the Muslims as immigrants in their country and insist on the newcomers following the Swiss way of life and customs. On a micro scale, that seems to make sense – as they say, “when in Rome...”

But on a macro level, integration efforts are more likely to result in a win-win situation for both. The Swiss gets an injection of more people to contribute to their society (economically, civil sphere etc) and the Muslims are able to receive a better welcome in a new land they want to call home. It is hard to fault some of the Swiss for reacting in this way when they feel like their way of life is being threatened, just as hard as it to expect the Muslims to give up their own customs. Why shouldn’t there be co-existence?

If one values freedom of religion and diversity, the Swiss ban on minarets was indeed a shameful result. Perhaps they think, “This is my land and I have a right to my opinion. If you want to live on my land, you live under my rules”. It does portray a certain image of the people who voted for the ban.

Similarly, how a host treats or respond to their guests in the blogosphere says much about them. Some are more welcoming, while some do very little to advance understanding between different people. If on a micro level, a thoughtful response proves to be so hard for some hosts to manage, it is little wonder that the same plays out on a global scale.

Reflection vs Recitation

When I was young, I looked forward to English lessons when we would all sit together and listen to the teacher read The Big Book. I loved how she voices out her character, and I get a warm and fuzzy feeling repeating after her in unison with my other classmates. It's as if, for a period of time, I forgot my annoying classmate who took my eraser or that my palm got hit by a ruler by the teacher for forgetting to do my homework.

When we repeat after her, what was central was not the plot of the story, but how we enunciate or how well we follow after her.

Similarly, my relationship with the Q'uran prior to this was always how to pronounce words I never understood in a language I don't speak, to be read in a melodious tone. Reciting was very important and encouraged in the hadith.

Perhaps it is time to stop reciting blindly. A melodious sound is not enough to touch the heart. For the heart to be stirred, and the mind to be convinced, deep reflection is needed. And with reflection, a chance to evaluate.

After all, my favourite part of the Read-Aloud session comes at the end where I hear the melodious words from the teacher saying, "So, what do you all think of the story?"

Fighting for What's Right

I've been accused of vacillating in my decisions a lot. Do I get a new job? Should I get this spanking new bag? Or even - what should I eat today? So I admire people who have a sense of conviction and stick to their guns.

Or at least, to the extent til their stick-with-it-ness impact me personally. For I can't imagine anything worse than talking to someone whose mind is not only absolutely set, but who barely listens to alternative points of view and doesn't allow you to get a word in. A person whose idea of a conversation is a merely launchpad to conversion of others to his/ her worldview.

That's how I feel reading the Q'uran. It seems almost a one-sided pounding of the same point, again and again. The One God is absolute.

One theme I have read so far touches on why Jews and Christians should be the first to embrace Islam, because the Word of God had been corrupted and they should absolutely be delighted that version 3.0, the real deal, has descended. What if I like Windows XP and don't want to upgrade to Vista? Is it always better just because I'm told it's better? There is no attempt to appeal to reason, the Book seems to convince mainly through fear of the Fire in the after life or social exclusion in this life.

This sense of conviction that any religion is the right religion is disturbing to me. The same case with the certainty that there is no God. How would anyone know? Is it that difficult to keep an open mind and maintain an attitude of uncertainty?

People in the ancient world used to worship the Sun before they knew better. We used to think Pluto was a Planet. We don't know enough now to know we are right.

People only fight over something when they feel they are right. Feeling that we are right makes us smug and we run the problem of hubris, whether religious or scientific. Arrogance turns to superiority. Superiority leads to a tendency to want to conquer.

Maybe it's time we be honest and say that we don't really know what is right. No one has possibly gone down a path of all possible religions (or lack of religion) in the world to know what is right. To assert what is right is also to miss the point - the world is diverse and the sheer variety is something to be celebrated, not stamped out. Why don't we preach the values of uncertainty more and be willing to listen to others, suspending the need to prove others wrong? But with a dose of skepticism to some extent, of course. After all,

"Keeping an open mind is a virtue - but not so open that your brains fall out."

Don't Tell me Science Doesn't Require Faith

There are some people who, knowing where I stand on my views, feel that my reading of the Quran is a waste of time. Others are encouraging it, maybe hoping that I will change my mind about my non-belief.

But what is the process of changing one's mind? Is it an appeal to logic? Or to emotions? Either way, I feel that (certain) facts and faith are not so opposite sometimes.

Take evolution. It is seen as a fact based on theory that had been proven. I am more inclined to believe in the evolution theory, as opposed to the fact that God created the world. But is because of my education that makes me predisposed to the scientific ideas?

I've read Lee Stroebel's The Case for a Creator, a book where he criticises the evolution theory. Not being myself a biologist - the explanation he offers, some using DNA terminology, are not something I can easily follow. Lee Stroebel didn't manage to convince me - "yes, there must be a God then!" But perhaps his job was done - it did impress me enough to think, "Yeah, maybe there are holes in the evolutionary theory." That's the first step. And that's all you need for now. Water doesn't erode a rock in one day, but given time, it will.

No one knows everything. Some of us rely on scientists for discoveries, whose work is then established as facts. Take the nitrogen cycle. It is presented as facts to me. But the truth of why I accept it is that because of my faith in the education system. I feel safe to take it at face value that it is true. Then again, who's to say the education system is free from bias or propaganda masquerading as truth?

If I accept the words in the Quran, it is because of faith in Islam. But if I accept the scientific method, isn't that also due to my faith in the rigors of the scientific community that they will not feed me with lies? Because I cannot possibly test all the facts myself to verify it for sure - it will take more than several lifetimes. And scientists are also human, subject to their own agendas (smoking does not give you a risk of developing cancer, anyone?)

Life is complicated.

Perhaps that's why so many people turn to words that are unchanging and immortalised in books passed down for thousands of years. It's much simpler not to have to navigate through a muddle of confusion like that.

Perhaps one day, I'd be proven wrong to put my faith in science. Hell, established facts of long along are disproved all the time (case in point, Pluto)! But at the very least, it was a path I had chosen, and a choice I bear responsibility for.

I don't want a simplistic explanation based on a book that never undergoes a revision despite the fact that the world continues to change. I don't want a world that is ready-made for me, with norms of thousands of years ago imposed on me.

Give me choice, give me the wonder of discovery. I have faith that muddling through all the complexity of life, my life will be richer for it.

Sura 2: The Cow Verses 1-136

“8. Of the people there are some who say: "We believe in Allah and the Last Day;" but they do not (really) believe.

9. Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realise (it) not!”

10. In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).

The commentary to the above verse says “We now come to a 3^rd class of people, the hypocrites.”

Oops. That would be me. Still, better a hypocrite than an apostate, I thought.

A version of what heaven means.

25. But give glad tidings to those who believe and work righteousness, that their portion is Gardens, beneath which rivers flow. (an extract)

I love it. Very environmentally conscious. I’d choose to be at the Getty for a ‘heavenly’ day (nerd!), but I suppose Gardens and rivers will do too. HOT.

26. Allah disdains not to use the similitude of things, lowest as well as highest.

The commentary to that says “To Allah all His Creations has some special meaning appropriate to itself, and some of what we consider the lowest creatures have wonderful aptitudes”. Excellent. Woo hoo! No species-ism. Equality for all! HOT.

30. Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not."

According the commentary, angels had no independent will of their own. Man do. I’ve never been convinced by how ustazs tried to convince me that we have free will but yet Allah has dominion over our lives and much is already fated, but it’s nice to actually read a verse that says we do have free will. HOT.

34. And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: He was of those who reject Faith.

Okay, so. The angels bow to Adam because they acknowledge Allah knows what they do not. But why demonise (no pun intended) the Devil just because he is not convinced of the worthiness of Adam? I hate it when I am told to do something, without being given a proper rationale to quell my doubts. Surely, God should have done a better job to convince Iblis. Disagreements are healthy. Blind obedience isn’t. NOT

Hell, even I don’t think Man is worthy, with all the damage we cause to the planet and all the greed (see Wall Street vs Main Street). Maybe the Fall wasn’t such a bad thing after all. Better to trash the planet than to trash Heaven, right?

49. They set you hard tasks and punishments, slaughtered your sons and let your women-folk live; therein was a tremendous trial from your Lord.

He’s obviously talking to the men-folk. He’s not even talking to me as a woman – so why do I have to live under rules directed at men? NOT

If I infer correctly, the verses in Section 7 deals with the story of Moses (I’ve wiped out my ustaz’s version from my mind but bits of the Prince of Egypt Disney version are floating around somewhere). I just realised that it difficult for me to follow since the verses are allusions to the story, but the narrative is missing. Rather convenient then, for other people to reconstruct the story and sell me their interpretation.

62. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Here I recall one of Karen Armstrong’s book that asserted that some of the Christians and Jews had given shelter to Muhammad and his ummah (at Medina?) when he was persecuted by his own kind in Mecca. Hah, so it means that D, being a Christian, won’t be going to hell after all. HOT.

Unfortunately, by questioning my religion, I will. NOT.

65. And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."

Wonder what they would feel if told that sometime in the future, many people would think that we all descended from apes anyway!

68. (extract) Now do what ye are commanded!"

Gee. Being talked to like that would surely me what to do whatever the prophet wanted, now, wouldn’t it?

74. Thenceforth were your hearts hardened: They became like a rock and even worse in hardness.

What’s wrong with rocks? I’d love a diamond, me.

79. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

Touche. I actually want to know how the Quran came about. Wasn’t it also a compilation of writings of certain followers – years after the Prophet died? Rather than being scribed by someone who was there when Prophet was giving his sermons?

81. Nay, those who seek gain in evil…

Sigh. What is evil anyway? How’s trying to kill someone for drawing a cartoon commentary that you just happen to find distasteful – is that type of evil condoned though?

83. Treat with kindness your parents and kindred, and orphans and those in need; speak fair to the people; be steadfast in prayer; and practise regular charity.

Now, one can’t go wrong following the above advice. HOT

89. And when there comes to them a Book from Allah, confirming what is with them,- although from of old they had prayed for victory against those without Faith,- when there comes to them that which they (should) have recognised, they refuse to believe in it but the curse of Allah is on those without Faith.

I might have understood my Baha’i friend’s explanation mistakenly, but even Baha’is claim that their religion is a continuation of the Eternal truth (my words) and the Prophets from the past are true Prophets, each suited to their own Time and milieu. I used to think that the main religions are so similar, that they must have come from the same source. Only lately do I realise that new religions always try to incorporate aspects of the incumbent or existing religions – usually to create legitimacy and ensure a sense of continuity and familiarity.

101. And when there came to them an apostle from Allah, confirming what was with them, a party of the people of the Book threw away the Book of Allah behind their backs, as if (it had been something) they did not know!

It was interesting that the commentary wrote that “the book of Allah here is meant not be Quran, but the book which the People of the Book had been given, the previous Revelations. Ironic then, the furore Muslims feel over the use of the word Allah and their need to have monopoly over it. For, then, the word existed long before Muslims themselves come about! Referring to Wikipedia, “While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, in reference to "God". The term was also used by pagan Meccans as a reference to the creator-god, possibly the supreme deity in pre-Islamic Arabia^”

102. … They learned from them the means to sow discord between man and wife.

You don’t need magic, the Arts, or Science to “sow discord between man and wife”. Marrying a second, third, or fourth wife would do that just fine.

111. And they say: "None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."

Oh, so I guess there’s still a chance I’ll run into X in hell then.

114. And who is more unjust than he who forbids that in places for the worship of Allah, Allah.s name should be celebrated?

This verse is referring to how Muslims had been turned away from the Ka’abah by the Pagan Arabs who also call it the House of Allah – inferring to the Pagan Arab’s intolerance of the new and rising religion of Islam. Yet, much of the Quran I have been reading so far seems to look down upon the other faiths! NOT

122. O Children of Israel! call to mind the special favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others (for My Message).

Hey! What happened to equality? (see 26.) NOT

Score:

HOT= 5 NOT=4

Okay, that's about all I can take for the day.

I am quite dismayed at my reading and thoughts reading the Quran. The point of the exercise was to find the good and bad (hence, the HOT and NOT), but it pretty much degenerated into cynicism.

I was told that I do not see the beauty of the message because I was not reading it in the right spirit (“You cannot use logic to understand that Quran” - I quote). Those in the Club of Allah will exhort the glory of the book, lack of logic notwithstanding. Those who stand outside the Islamic circle, on the hand, can try but will ultimately not be able to put it up on the same high pedestal, which 1/6 of the world’s population had done. I can try reading the book, I can try to understand what other Muslims see in the book – but ultimately, I still will not reach the same conclusion that yes, this is THE religion to be in. THE religion to follow.

So where is the middle ground? How can you stay true to the Quran and yet accept others who have different beliefs from you, as being equally valid?How can you treat others as an equal human being, if you smoulder with the pride that your brethren is the chosen one? How do I, as an agnostic, understand why I should follow archaic rules that governs my life but clashes with my own value system?

Preface

I was hoping to start with a ‘HOT’ (you know how we are supposed to give praise before we criticise?) but the preface talked about how the contents contains the foundations for an entire system of life.

Wait a minute.

What happened to finding your own path? I can’t stand it when a boss tries to micromanage my work, let alone have someone (even God!) micromanage my life! NOT

Score:
HOT = 0 NOT= 1