Thursday, December 21, 2017

The Birth Of Jesus Christ in Qur'anic Verses: Christmas


As known, Muslims don't celebrate Jesus' birth. There's even debate, whether Muhammad's birthday should be celebrated, but that's another topic in itself. Qur'anic verses 3:42-46 and 19:16-27 narrate Jesus' birth. These words '... Then (one) cried unto her from below her, saying: Grieve not! Thy Lord hath placed a rivulet beneath thee, And shake the trunk of the palm-tree toward thee, thou wilt cause ripe dates to fall upon thee. So eat and drink and be consoled...' may indicate, that Jesus was born in Summer. Indeed Jesus had no father, like the Biblical story. 'We made the Son of Mary and his mother a portent', says verse 23:50. The Qur'anic story about Jesus' miraculous birth is only short and largely confirms the Biblical story -- but for the season. Christianity celebrates Christmas at 24 and 25 December, or at 6 and 7 January -- in Winter. There's been much speculation, whether these dates are correct. Are they chosen only to correspond with ancient Midwinter celebrations? Astronomers and other scientists have tried to pinpoint the apparition of the symbolic Star of Bethlehem. This star is an important Christian symbol, meant to announce an important birth: The birth of the King of humanity, Jesus Christ. They didn't reach a unanimous answer, as illustrates this article in Daily Mail, or this article at Earth Sky, that the actual Birth might have taken place some six to four years earlier than current year 0 AD.

Verses 4:157-159 and 19:27-36 confirm the miracle, yet also emphatically deny Jesus divine qualities -- Jesus is a man without a father. He and his mother are important personalities in human history. They are sent to humanity as a warning for a day to come, Yawm al Qiyamah, when Jesus will testify for or against each human soul, and as witnesses of Divine kindness, providence and mercy. A Muslim is, therefore, asked to revere Jesus, but not worship him as God. And, therefore, see his birthday in a more modest perspective. Verses 29:46-47 exhort us to abstain from arguing with 'the People of the Scripture', unless they do wrong, because the Scripture was revealed to them and to us, and their God is our God.

Therefore, whoever you are: Merry Birthday of Christ. Enjoy @}}-

Thursday, December 7, 2017

Quranic Verses about Earth: Are They Scientifically True?

The Qur'an contains many verses about the universe, Earth, creation, and life. Many philosophers, scholars, and scientists have tried to use them to either propagate or discredit the book of Islam. The first aspect that should be noticed, is that some verses deal with Earth itself as a body; its solidity; its size, compared either with our point of view as small humans, or that others deal with Earth as only a small planet in the vastness of space. Two perspectives -- therefore, two perceptions.

Qur'anic verses are brief and seemingly simple. There's a lot more to Qur'anic verses, than that superficially meets the eye: The water circulation on Earth; salt and sweet water, hence referring to material particles giving water its taste, and minerals; the relatively unchanging solidity of Earth, wherein mountains have their role; the Earth being divided in parcels and lands, also referring to continents and tectonic plates and their movements. Reference is made to the unchanging laws of nature, that allow change within their limits, yet, also to the infinity of creation in the long run, where change, eventually, doesn't really exist.

There's also a lot we can't verify, or not yet ~ we know, Earth has a limited life, yet, don't know, what will come after that. Nor do we know, what the universe originally must have looked like, yet, apparently, the universe is infinitely present. The relevant verses, are aspects of the 'Unseen', those topics closed to human observation.

People are exhorted 'to travel the land' to see what nature on Earth in its original form looks like, but also, to see what has happened to those who lived on Earth before. Humans have a task on Earth: To be worthy vicegerents in Nature.

Qur'an has many verses about Earth and nature, each applicable on certain situations, or on specific topics. Some deal with the Earth as a celestial body; others with very specific details. Hence, the different approaches to topics as East and West and the paradoxes between verses. Translations differ slightly in verses 37:5 and 70:40, yet a clear truth appears: Easts, rising places, of planets or Sun, are never the same. They differ, depending where on Earth we stand, or depending the season. This may be interpreted as reference to Earth being spheric, and to Earth having a fixed rotation, causing its different climate zones. Yet, Earth's rotation as a planet, has a constant circle, and also an unchanging angle of its surface towards the Sun's light, deciding light's intensity and, hence, climate. Truth is also, there's really no East point anywhere on a ball, or, we should see it as infinite, when we look at the overall picture. -- Yet, at each fixed point on Earth, East and West don't change: Two Easts, and two Wests, and all the points inbetween, according the day of the year. This says something about the law of nature. It dictates orbits, days, nights, and seasons.

Many topics are only mentioned in general terminology. And, perspectives change per verse; sometimes even within a verse. Sometimes, a divine perspective is chosen; sometimes, a human perspective. A text as 'And the earth have We spread out, and have flung firm hills therein ...' (50:7) shows a divine, or longterm perspective. To humans, the emerge of hills and mountains, seems a slow geographical development. Humans are small creatures with a relatively short lifespan. Seventy years, is nothing, compared with Earth's lifespan of probably nine billion years -- or compared with eternity. Time, is a relative concept, changing according perspectives. This makes Qur'an a challenge to read. But, the texts can't be dismissed as untrue, in spite of their wording that perhaps isn't used by scientists. It's the wording of popular, everyday knowledge, such as: When water starts to bubble, it cooks -- a scientist might then mention its precise temperature. And, obviously, there's Earth the planet versus earth the matter from which living creatures are created. Living creatures contain the same elements that we find in Earth. The verses aim to invite people to gather knowledge about the topics and creatures mentioned, and through knowledge, come to worship of their Creator. This blog, is only a brief beginning of a topic that many commentators have written elaborate works about.

Some quotes:

'Was not Allah's earth spacious that ye could have migrated therein?' (4:97)

'And with Him are the keys of the Invisible. None but He knoweth them. And He knoweth what is in the land and the sea. Not a leaf falleth but He knoweth it, not a grain amid the darkness of the earth, naught of wet or dry but (it is noted) in a clear record. (59) He it is Who gathereth you at night and knoweth that which ye commit by day. Then He raiseth you again to life therein, that the term appointed (for you) may be accomplished. And afterward unto Him is your return. Then He will proclaim unto you what ye used to do.' (6:59,60)

'He it is Who hath placed you as viceroys of the earth and hath exalted some of you in rank above others, that He may try you by (the test of) that which He hath given you. Lo! Thy Lord is swift in prosecution, and Lo! He verily is Forgiving, Merciful.' (6:165)

'And in the Earth are neighbouring tracts, vineyards and ploughed lands, and date-palms, like and unlike, which are watered with one water. And we have made some of them to excel others in fruit. Lo! herein verily are portents for people who have sense. And if thou wonderest, then wondrous is their saying: When we are dust, are we then forsooth (to be raised) in a new creation?' (13:4)

'On the day when the earth will be changed to other than the earth, and the heavens (also will be changed) and they will come forth unto Allah, the One, the Almighty, ...' (14:48)

'And the cattle hath He created, whence ye have warm clothing and uses, and whereof ye eat; (5) And wherein is beauty for you, when ye bring them home, and when ye take them out to pasture. (6) And they bear your loads for you unto a land ye could not reach save with great trouble to yourselves. Lo! your Lord is Full of Pity, Merciful. (7) And horses and mules and asses (hath He created) that ye may ride them, and for ornament. And He createth that which ye know not.' (16:5-8)

'And He hath cast into the earth firm hills that it quake not with you, and streams and roads that ye may find a way. (15) And landmarks (too), and by the star they find a way.' (16:15)

'Who hath appointed the earth as a bed and hath threaded roads for you therein and hath sent down water from the sky and thereby We have brought forth divers kinds of vegetation, (53) (Saying): Eat ye and feed your cattle. Lo! herein verily are portents for men of thought. (54) Thereof We created you, and thereunto We return you, and thence We bring you forth a second time.' (20:53-55)

'Is not He (best) Who made the earth a fixed abode, and placed rivers in the folds thereof, and placed firm hills therein, and hath set a barrier between the two seas? Is there any God beside Allah? Nay, but most of them know not! (61) Is not He (best) Who answereth the wronged one when he crieth unto Him and removeth the evil, and hath made you viceroys of the earth? Is there any God beside Allah? Little do they reflect!' (27:60-62)

'Say (O Muhammad): Travel in the land and see how He originated creation, then Allah bringeth forth the later growth. Lo! Allah is Able to do all things.' (29:20)

'So set thy purpose (O Muhammad) for religion as a man by nature upright - the nature (framed) of Allah, in which He hath created man. There is no altering (the laws of) Allah's creation. That is the right religion, but most men know not -' (30:30)

'Corruption doth appear on land and sea because of (the evil) which men's hands have done, that He may make them taste a part of that which they have done, in order that they may return. (41) Say (O Muhammad, to the disbelievers): Travel in the land, and see the nature of the consequence for those who were before you! Most of them were idolaters.' (30:41,42)

'Lord of the heavens and of the earth and all that is between them, and Lord of the sun's risings.' (37:5) (Or: 'The Lord of the heavens and the earth, and whatever is between them both and the Lord of the Easts.')

'And the earth have We spread out, and have flung firm hills therein, and have caused of every lovely kind to grow thereon, (7) A vision and a reminder for every penitent slave. (8) And We send down from the sky blessed water whereby We give growth unto gardens and the grain of crops, (9) And lofty date-palms with ranged clusters, (10) Provision (made) for men; and therewith We quicken a dead land. Even so will be the resurrection of the dead.' (50:7-11)

'Lord of the two Easts, and Lord of the two Wests!' (55:17)

'O company of jinn and men, if ye have power to penetrate (all) regions of the heavens and the earth, then penetrate (them)! Ye will never penetrate them save with (Our) sanction. (33) Which is it, of the favours of your Lord, that ye deny?' (55:33,34)

'Thou (Muhammad) canst see no fault in the Beneficent One's creation; then look again: Canst thou see any rifts?' (67:3)

'But nay! I swear by the Lord of the rising-places and the setting-places of the planets' or 'Yet no, I swear by The Lord of the Easts and the Wests' (70:40)

'Let man consider his food: (24) How We pour water in showers (25) Then split the earth in clefts (26) And cause the grain to grow therein (27) And grapes and green fodder (28) And olive-trees and palm-trees (29) And garden-closes of thick foliage (30) And fruits and grasses: (31) Provision for you and your cattle.' (80:25-32)

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

Ancient Greece and Philosophy of Nature












ontstaan-cosmos-vlgs-anaxagoras



The first Greek philosophers of nature, were Thales, Anaximander, his student Anaximenes (appr. 570 BC) and, in turn, the latter’s assumed students Anaxagoras (appr 500 – 428 BC) and Diogenes. They were the first to distance themselves from mythological thinking and enter theoretical thinking. They started the tradition of trying to explain the facts of the universe and general phenomena. Their school of thought is called the Miletan School.

Thales was, according to Aristotle, the first person to investigate the origin of substances from matter. His advice, "Know thyself," was engraved on the front facade of the Oracle of Apollo in Delphi. He was the first philosopher whose written texts were preserved -- as little as it was, though. Thales was the first philosopher to maintain immortality of the soul. Soul was the cause of all movement. Aristotle had commented on that, and, perhaps mistakenly, said, that, 'according to Thales', all objects and creatures possess a soul and a god, because they move. He probably was the founder of natural philosophy. Thales believed, that water had all the qualities necessary to change from water into any possible matter, and then back again. Water is the 'Primary Principle' to all else. Like a ship, the Earth must float on water, with certain buoyancy. Earth must have had a lighter substance, than water. Water causes earthquakes, too. Aristotle said, Thales must have observed evaporation and the nutritive qualities of mist. There's conflicting reports about Thales' further ideas about Earth; whether it was flat and round; a flat drum shape, or, indeed, a round, spherical shape. He was a reputed astronomer; could predict solar eclipses and fix the solstices. It's likely, Thales must have made series of observations of Sunrises around mid-winter and mid-summer. Flavius Philostratus had said, that '[Thales] observed the heavenly bodies . . . from [Mount] Mycale which was close by his home'. Seven centuries later, Ptolemy acknowledged difficulties of this issue, ie the Sun remains immobile during several days around June 21 and December 21. From Diogenes Laertius we have the report: '[Thales] is said to have discovered the seasons of the year and divided it into 365 days'. Thales may very well have understood, that a spherical Earth explains, why and how stars dissapear and reappear at the northern and southern horizons. Not many writings have been preserved. Thales may have written the 'Nautical Star Guide'. He believed in one material, water, being the first substance to everything else. Thales must have been one of the first to experiment with instruments to measure the size of Sun and Moon. He used a water-clock -- method which was rejected, later. Thales thought, there was a correlation between the Sun's and Moon's diameter and their respective orbit: The diameters must be one hundred 720th of their orbit. Probably, Thales must have learned from the Babylonians, a circle is made up of 360 slices. He doubled that number and thus thought to have arrived at the planet's orbit. But, also today, we use Thales' theorems for triangles and diameters. Thales was disciple of ancient Egyptian and Babylonian astronomy and math, and he probably traveled those countries.

Anaximander, probaby Anaximenes' teacher, believed in the infinite, boundlessness, apeiron, as the primary substance. This primary substance, which was a boundless matter, had a cylinder-shape, and Earth and the other celestial bodies, originated from it. Anaximander, assumed that the Earth had the shape of a flat barrel floating in space, and people live on top of this barrel. Delphi was the very center of the Earth; surrounded by the Mediterranean sea. Earth was divided in two by a line. The northern  half of Earth was called Europe; the southern half, Asia. The habitable world consisted of two rather small strips of land at the Mediterranean's northern and southern shores: respectively the Northern and Southern Mediterranean countries. 'Asia' included the Middle East with Persia and Arabia. Further to Earth's peripheries, live, respectively, mythical peoples in cold, nordic countries, and black, Sunburnt peoples.  A question must have arisen: Why doesn't the Earth fall? Aristotle probably quoted Anaximander's argument like this: "But there are some who say that it (namely, the Earth) stays where it is because of equality, such as among the ancients Anaximander. For that which is situated in the center and at equal distances from the extremes, has no inclination whatsoever to move up rather than down or sideways; and since it is impossible to move in opposite directions at the same time, it necessarily stays where it is." Anaximander actually believed in the cosmos as space, instead of a celestial vault, with celestial bodies projected or nailed on it. He believed, that celestial bodies move in circles around the Earth, each in it's own lane, also under the Earth, and Earth is center of the universe. Earth floats unsupported in heaven. Anaximander believed, that the celestial bodies lie behind each other: First the stars; then the Moon, and finally, the Sun. Celestial bodies are wheels, filled with fire, that roll their circle in space around the Earth. They occasionally open and close their inner with doors. Their fire then becomes visible to man on Earth, as stars, the Sun, or the Moon. When the Sun door closes, that can be observed on Earth as an eclipse. The Moon door opens and closes according its monthly cycle. Earth started in a fluid state; then, in the Sunlight, dried into solid state. During this process, first fish emerged from water, and from them, other species and man emerged, in an evolutionary process. Man's helpless, lengthy childhood proves, that man must have originated from simpler, other species.

Anaximenes
believed that air was the primary substance to everything in the cosmos. Air has divine attributes. Fire had to be thin air; water was thickened air. From a felting process, further thickening, earth emerged, and finally, earth must have become stone, like felt emerging from wool. This must have been a gradual, two way process, depending on dominance of cold or heat. Also the human soul, was made of air. Planet Earth must have come into existence the same fashion, as a flat, round disk, floating on air currents encircling her. The Sun would circle around Earth, as did the Moon. Earth, the Sun, and the Moon, and perhaps other celestial bodies too, rest on air cushions, floating in heaven. Some reports suggest, that Anaximenes believed, that heaven was a cap or ceiling, with the stars as nails to keep it in place. Change was an important element in Anaximenes' theory, and air played a big role in changing matter and objects from one creature into another, but there's no scientifice explanation. This theory may be called material monism. Anaximenes proclaimed ‘like our soul, consisting of air, keeping us together, thus breath and air keeps the entire world in place’. Similar condensations of air should have led to the birth of the Sun and stars. These bodies’ fiery nature would be caused by the speed of their motion. Planet Earth had to be centre of the cosmos, with the stars as its most remote objects. The Moon was Earth’s most proximate object, then came the Sun, then the other planets. The Sun would not circle around the Earth. The Sun would disappear every night behind the horizon and return every morning at the usual point of rising. Anaximenes thought that the Moon itself casts no light; it reflects light rays from the Sun.

Anaxagoras believed that everything is infinitely divisible and that even the smallest portion of matter contains some of each element. The differences in form result from different portions of the elements and their seemingly endless numbers of possible combinations. Unlike Democritus, he apparently did not believe in smallest particles, atoms, that form a material. Both the big and the small are infinite. Anaxagoras believed that the mind is the supreme ordering principle, it is infinite and self-controlling, it is mixed with nothing, and is itself by itself. Anaxagoras was the first philosopher to introduce an abstract philosophical concept: Nous. Nous is the thinking, omnipotent, but impersonal Spirit or Mind. Thanks to this mind a well-ordered cosmos arose from the original chaos. This Nous seems to have been a first mover that left the universe to its own devices after initial creation, in Anaxagoras’ view. In everything, there is a share of everything, except mind, and mind is present in some things too. Everything is in everything, all qualities are present in even the smallest core and this enables a smooth transition from one material into another and makes birth and destruction of matter just false appearance. Living creatures possess, unlike dead creatures, Nous. This same Nous gives men and animals their soul. Men seem superior to animals, because they have hands. Visible differences in intellect are consequence of physical differences. Being an astronomer, Anaxagoras observed vortexes and spiral phenomena in nature. He believed, that the universe was created through the rotary motion of a spiral, where initially all mass was united in the center and driven by a centrifugal force driven by ‘mind’, celestial bodies and other things came into being through seperation of mass. Today, some say, that if the mass of a galaxy was concentrated at its center, it would have created a black hole and gravitation would be too strong for anything to escape from it. Stars and the Sun are fiery stones, but we can’t feel the heat, because of their distance, according to Anaxagoras. The heavenly bodies were fiery masses of rock whirling around the earth in ether. He thought to recognize mountains and living creatures on the Moon and the Sun had to be bigger than the Peloponnesos. Anaxagoras proved, that air was no vacuum, but material substance by blowing up utters, and a pipet that enclosed air by water. He concluded that sound had to be movement of air. Anaxagoras was highly respected in Athens, not in the least by statesman Pericles. But, later Anaxagoras was accused of Persian sympathies and heresy, when he taught the Sun was a fiery stone and the Moon only earth, and denied both divinity. He was initially sentenced to death, but instead, he was exiled from Athens. He had to leave Athens, in spite of Pericles’ protection, and return to Asia Minor, Lapsakis (now Lapseki, Turkey). Other records state, that Anaxagoras' exile didn't stop him :) from starting another influential school, where he taught at least twenty more years. Anaxagoras has written one book, according Simplicius and Aristotle, that may have survived until as far as the sixth century EC.

Diogenes of Apollonia, born 500 BC, who was a doctor, believed as well that air was the source of all that exists, from which all substances can be produced; the only difference between air and other beings, is its thickness. Diogenes, however, accredited air intelligence, being the first matter. ‘The air swirling within him (the first Being, and living creatures) not only supported, but directed also. Air as source of all things is necessary as perpetual and indestructible matter, but as a soul it is also equipped with a conscience’. Air is the soul. Diogenes also believed in an indefinite number of worlds and supported the idea that the Earth is a round ball supported by air. Diogenes did not follow dualism (ie thinking there's a counterposition between, for instance, mind and matter, or between being and non-being.) Diogenes probably had atheist sympathies, which may be reason why he strongly lost popularity in Athens.

Fragments and quotes of the ancient philosophers’ works, nothing more, have been preserved and quoted by later authors, such as passages from Diogenes’ most important work ‘De natura’. Other works from his hand are possibly ‘Against the sophists’, ‘Against the philosophists of nature’, ‘On Meteorology’ and ‘On the nature of man’. Anaxagoras has written one book, of which quotes have been preserved by Simplicius. Pythagoras left us no writings. Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 – 43 BC) was the first author to use the name ‘Presocratic’ philosophy for the ancient Greek philosophers before Socrates. Orpheus' lyrics have been preserved, however, Aristotle denied their originality. Diogenes Laertius, 3rd Cent AD, wrote an extended biography on Greek philosophers. The work of these philosophers, however, meant a turning point from mythical and traditional religious thinking towards theoretical thinking and observation, even though many philosophers suffered disapproval or downright persecution in Athens. Not just devine explanations behind the universe were narrated and taught; from now on, thought was given to processes and characteristics in nature and man themselves.

Relevant to my study is, however, that these thinkers didn't agree among each other. They all had different philosophies about the origin of substance, and they weren't yet based on scientific tests. We musn't forget, ancient Greece didn't possess the equipment for scientific, empirical tests. They had no microscopes, nor telescopes. They really didn't know, what stars and other celestial bodies were, whether they were bodies at all, nor their size. Nor could the ancient Greeks know what matter was, or very small species, like bacteria. Is that good enough to serve as content for the holy Qur'an? Their philosophy, however, investigates causality, without copying mythological tradition. Some of their ideas reflect, perhaps, wishful thinking. Their ideas are quite creative and forward, and also today, largely still valid. I've read them with a smile and with admiration. Philosophers took big risks, too, since their ideas sometimes clearly contradicted compulsory religious worship. It led to their expulsion from Athens -- or worse. This has been good inspiration to scientists and thinkers in later days. But, not enough first hand writings has been preserved. It's not plausible to assume, that Rasullullah saws had copied them. Furthermore, the Quran stopped, where Greek philosophers started: They developed scholastic methods of causal thinking with its terminology and concepts, where Quran stuck to general first observations. This is especially valid for philosophy of nature. In the teachings of scepticism, we may find some more resemblances with Quran -- but, there's also many differences. All-in, we can say, Greek philosophy had two main branches: Metaphysics, and morality -- respectively philosophy of nature, and philosophy of virtue with the schools of scepticism and cynicism. My study will follow these two lines. Further, I won't spend too much time on Greek religion, as it doesn't involve this topic. Greek philosophers, however, frequently clashed with the temple, when their words were considered blasphemous.

Sources & Further Reading:
'From Orphism to Gnosticism'

Wikipedia.org 
The Philosophy of Anaxagoras http://www.iep.utm.edu/anaxagor/
Wolfram MathWorld
Anaximander http://www.iep.utm.edu/anaximan/
Anaximenes http://www.iep.utm.edu/anaximen/
Thales of Miletus http://www.iep.utm.edu/thales/
Anaxagoras http://www.iep.utm.edu/anaxagor/
'Beacon Lights of History' Volume I
Anaxagoras
Ancient Greek Religion

And thus comes a comparison with Qur'anic texts. And, then, a comparison with a man who was among the first to introduce religious skepticism, and who gained unrivaled status in philosophy when sophism was at its height of popularity: Socrates.

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

The Seven Sages, Orphism, Dionysianism, Epicurus, Scepticism, Cynicism

driehoeken-met-logische-paradox

Twenty-two philosophers have been mentioned as probable members of this legendary group of seven founders of Greek philosophy: Cleobulus (whose daughter Cleobulina was a well-known philosopher with a political cloud), Chilon, Periander, Miso, Aristodemus, Epimenides, Leophantus, Pythagoras, Anacharsis, Epicharmus, Acusilaus, Orpheus, Pisistratus, Pherecydes, Hermioneus, Lasus, Pamphilus and Anaxagoras. However, classical sources are unanimous about four thinkers: Thales from Milete, Bias from Priene, Solon from Athens and Pittakos from Mytilene. The latter three are known for their statesmanship, legislation and poetry. The Seven Sages had high status in their society. Wise maxims were, according to Plato criterium for admittance; they were selected from all over Greece. They probably assembled in Delphi. Some of the best known maxims were featured in Delphi to honor Apollo. Well-known, also today, are 'Know Thyself' (Thales) and 'Nothing Overmuch'. It's not sure, whether Plato's words are true. The dates make such gathering just about possible. The Seven Sages, all living in the 6th century BC, probably were:

Cleobulos of Lindos (the tyranical governor at the Isle of Rhodes); Solon of Athens (legislator and founder of democratic reform); Chilon of Sparta (military governor of Sparta); Bias of Priene (politician and legislator); Thales of Milete (the first famous philosopher, mathematician, astronomer); Pittacus of Mytilene (governor of Mytilene); Periander of Corinth (governor of Corinth.)

Prince Orpheus, probably son of a Thracian king, early 6th century BC, gained a mythical status for his singing and poetic skills; he was said to be a son of the Greek god Apollo. Even lions laid down at his feet to listen to his voice, according to tradition. Orpheus’ philosophical teachings, Orphism, had little influence on mainstream beliefs, but he appears to have had a great influence on later philosophers as Pythagoras, Heraclitus and Plato; even on Christianity. Orphism emphasized human nature in man, and his immortality and continuance after death. Postmortem punishment may be expected. Therefore, a proper life and sobriety are necessary: An ascetic, sternly disciplined way of life. Orphism believed in re-incarnation and, according tradition, Orpheus had released the mysteries of Egypt to the Greeks. In the 6th century BC, Orphism separated from an even older mystic cult: Dionysianism. Religion in ancient Greece was polytheistic, and Dionysianism mainly revolved around the illusive god of wine, madness, theater, and vegetation: Dionysos. Both mystic movements are anti-dogmatic, esoteric, strongly personalized and, last but not least, festive. Some groups knew violent rites, some others sexual and transcendental rituals. Dionysianism believed, contrary to Orphism, in one Cosmos, without dualism or ranking. Female figures were important in Dionysianism. Orphism had a rational, speculative nature and was more popular among philosophers; Pythagoras modified it into a form of Logical Mysticism. The Orphic theories of Cosmic Law, Harmony and Sympathy can be traced in Pythagorism. Pythagorism never became a proper or mainstream Orphic sect.

Greek mysticism has ancient roots, perhaps in the Bronze Age, and is influenced by ancient Buddhist thinkers in India, Thracian and Minoan traditions. Judaism and Nazareanism also left their strong traces on Orphism, also in the later Roman Mystery tradition. Various deities from different creeds appear in Orphism: the Egyptian gods Sakla (of the Dead), Ptah, Seraph, and even the Jewish deity Iao (Yah) and Kabbalistic concepts like Jehovah Tzabaoth. It was a complicated and heterogeneous mixture of concepts and characters. Empedocles, an Orphic philosopher may have held concepts resembling those of Tantric Bodhisattva with its reincarnation concept of ‘conscious incarnation of the illuminated’. He also thought, that matter consisted of four elements, or 'roots': Fire, water, earth, and air, which can't change, nor come into or dissapear from existence. Empedocles said he had passed through successive incarnations from fish to man into a living god. To prove his immortality, Empedocles jumped into Mount Etna, never to be seen again. The final stage of Orphism was Platonic, from the 4th Cent BC, with two main currents; one being libertarian, spiritual and moderately hedonistic; the other unworldly mystical, logical, paternalistically authoritarian, and ascetic. Orphism remained intelligent, ethical, and progressive, until its final phase, when corruption and elitism entered. This corrupt elitism led to the successful rise of the modern Judeo-Christian current. The Roman Empire made an end to the mainstream Millennium of Mystery cults, though Orphism was one of the last of the ‘Pagan’ Mysteries to survive in the West until the late 5th Cent AD, as were Mithracism, Iseanism, Serapeanism and some others. It had its influence on especially the isolated Celtic cultures on the British islands. Some say, that Pauline Christianity was a rewriting of later Orphism, and that Gnosticism was even more so. In Asia Minor, sects existed around the 3rd, 2nd Cent AD, that combine Orphic and Christian imagery.

Logic was an important focus of ancient Greek philosophy. An example is Epimenides’ Paradox, Epimenides of Knossos being Cretan, 6th Cent BC: ‘All Cretans are liars… One of their own poets has said so’. This is not a true paradox, since the poet may know, that at least one Cretan is honest and so be lying, when he says that all Cretans are liars. There may, therefore, be no contradiction in a possibly false statement by a lying person. Epimenides was a poet and was considered a prophet. He was, perhaps, of Central Asian shamanic descent. In ancient Greece, this kind of philosophic reasoning brought respected status in the public debate. It shows, that a thinker understands, how certain relations may be stronger interconnected, in several ways, than that meets the eye. And, that deductive thinking leads to the proper solution to a puzzle or problem with unusual or unexpected starting positions. The liar paradox disappeared from the public eye, until the twelfth century AD, when its variations were studied under the name of insolubilia.

Anacharsis, early 6th Cent BC, Scythian philosopher to be become the first ‘foreigner’ to receive Athens citizenship, is seen by some as the very first Sceptic and Cynic. Not many writings of his hand have been preserved; mainly colorful and humorist anecdotes have been recorded by Plutarch. An impression of Anarcharsis' philosophy appears, however. He must have had a combination of Atomist and Sceptical views: He believed in many worlds, yet, as humans, we see them as nothing but particles, grains, objects, like paintbrush on even the most skillfull paintings. Therefore, no matter at all, can ever have a moral value, or be a source of truth. Standards of right and wrong are merely conventional. Perception and observation are all we have, but both are imperfect and are no more or less than projections of objects; never objects themselves. Truth is, therefore, not only non-existent and indistinguishable -- it's irrelevant -- because truth is highly personalized. Atomist and Scepticist views had great influence on later Western philosophists, such as Descartes.

Scepticism as a school of thought, was founded by Pyrrho -- not to be confused with Greek general and statesman Pyrrhus. Pyrrho founded a new school in which he taught fallibilism, namely that every object of human knowledge involves uncertainty. Thus, he argued, it is impossible ever to arrive at the knowledge of truth. Pyrrho founded his school as a reply to the Dogmatists, who claimed to possess knowledge. Pyrrho was a highly respected scholast in Greece. But, he left no writings. His disciple Timon of Plius, left quotations, among which this one: 'The proper course of the sage, is to ask himself three questions. Firstly we must ask what things are and how they are constituted. Secondly, we ask how we are related to these things. Thirdly, we ask what ought to be our attitude towards them. As to what things are, we can only answer that we know nothing. We only know how things appear to us, but of their inner substance we are ignorant. The same thing appears differently to different people, and therefore it is impossible to know which opinion is right. The diversity of opinion among the wise, as well as among the vulgar, proves this. To every assertion the contradictory assertion can be opposed with equally good grounds, and whatever my opinion, the contrary opinion is believed by somebody else who is quite as clever and competent to judge as I am. Opinion we may have, but certainty and knowledge are impossible. Hence our attitude to things (the third question), ought to be complete suspense of judgment. ... ', attitude we should practice for both practical and theoretical matters. Hence: Nothing is in itself true or false. It only appears so. In the same way, nothing is in itself good or evil. It is only opinion, custom, law, which makes it so. When the sage realizes this, he will cease to prefer one course of action to another, and the result will be apathy (ataraxia). All action is the result of preference, and preference is the belief that one thing is better than another. If I go to the north, it is because, for one reason or another, I believe that it is better than going to the south. Suppress this belief, learn that the one is not in reality better than the other, but only appears so, and one would go in no direction at all. Complete suppression of opinion would mean complete suppression of action. Therefore, Pyrrho aimed for suppression of opinion. Scepticism, is about abstinence of opinions. Having opinions, would lead to preference and loss of objectivity. All of this, would lead to apathy, but, apathy is the best way for a sage. Having no preference, means having no greed and no preference and struggle for matters, that in themselves hold no value to us, to begin with. Another leading personality in Greek skepticism, was Diogenes of Sinope ( appr 400 BC). He must have led an extreme, colorful life; even have lived in slavery, as a home teacher. He was a strong opponent of Sophism and conventionalism. He was a disciple of Socrates. Diogenes' main belief was: If a behavior is appropriate in private, it's also appropriate in public, even if convention says otherwise. In this line of thought, Diogenes rejected the convention of eating in the market place. He ate at the marktet place, because coming there, made him feel hungry, and there's nothing wrong with eating to begin with.

Philosophical skepticism is searching wheather one may find truth from one’s own convictions. Scientific skepticism is searching wheather other people’s sayings have a scientific value that is falsifiable and reliable, based on hypotheses and critical thinking. Philosophical skepticism says, the human mind is naturally uncapable of certain knowledge. Scientific skepticism is part of empirism: it says, observation leads to forming and testing a theoretical model. No theory can have a truth claim without systematic observation.

Cynicism appeared only after Socrates and was, probably, founded by one of his students and closest friends, Antisthenes, teacher to Diogenes of Sinope. It taught, that virtue; a life in accord with nature; freedom; reason; ascetism and denial of luxury and property were the only way towards true wisdom. In cynics' eyes, theoretical philosophy wasn't only unnecessary for happiness and virtue; it was useless. Cynicism denies convention and law as a necessary way to virtue. In cynic's eye, it isn't wrong either to have a bad reputation in the public's eye, because convention is only molded by the political and temple establishment, with all their corruption and hunger for power. Nature itself; self-reliance (autarkeia); ascetism; and the proper spouse and companions, lead to virtue and, hence, to wisdom. Genuine love, is part of that. As did Socrates, Antisthenes thought, that virtue is equal for men and women. Virtue can be taught, too. All in, cynicism is a moral philosophy rather than a knowledge, science or theory oriented philosophy. It persisted until late in the Roman period. Within political philosophy, cynicism may be seen as origin of Anarchism.

Influenced by and resembling Socrates, Aristotle, Epicurianism, and Cynicism, around 300 BC, Stoicism appeared, founded, in Athens, probably, by Zeno of Citium (Cyprus). Stoicism was influential on Roman emperors; Marcus Aurelius was one of them who attempted to live by it. It even influenced Christianity, as well as a number of major philosophical figures throughout the ages (for example, Thomas More, Descartes, Spinoza), and in the early 21st century saw a revival as a practical philosophy associated with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and similar approaches. Rome became main center for the Stoic school of thought under emperor Augustus, around 88 BC. Stoicism has had, both in Greece and in Rome, several rivalrous schools. Other big Greek names among Stoicism, are Epicurus, Epictetus, ... Stoicism is a type of eudaimonic virtue ethics, asserting that the practice of virtue is both necessary and sufficient to achieve happiness (in the eudaimonic sense). However, the Stoics also recognized the existence of “indifferents” (to eudaimonia) that could nevertheless be preferred (for example, health, wealth, education) or dispreferred (for example, sickness, poverty, ignorance), because they had (respectively, positive or negative) planning value with respect to the ability to practice virtue. Stoicism was very much a philosophy meant to be applied to everyday living, focused on ethics (understood as the study of how to live one’s life), which was in turn informed by what the Stoics called “physics” (nowadays, a combination of natural science and metaphysics) and what they called “logic” (a combination of modern logic, epistemology, philosophy of language, and cognitive science). There was strong debate among philosophers and school on how many virtues were needed to achieve happiness. Socrates thought, that we need only four key virtues: wisdom, courage, justice, and temperance. Aristotle listed at least twelve virtues, but added to effort also a bit of luck, such as good health, education and even good looks.

There was strong rivalty, also, between Epicurus and Stoics guided by Epictetus. Epicurians said, that pleasure and pain on the human body have important impact on tranquillity of mind (ataraxia). Epicurus is one of the major philosophers in the Hellenistic period, the three centuries following the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C.E. (and of Aristotle in 322 B.C.E.). Epicurus developed an unsparingly materialistic metaphysics, empiricist epistemology, and hedonistic ethics. Epicurus taught that the basic constituents of the world are atoms, uncuttable bits of matter, flying through empty space, and he tried to explain all natural phenomena in atomic terms. Epicurus rejected the existence of Platonic forms and an immaterial soul, and he said that the gods have no influence on our lives. Epicurus also thought skepticism was untenable, and that we could gain knowledge of the world relying upon the senses. He taught that the point of all one's actions was to attain pleasure (conceived of as tranquility) for oneself, and that this could be done by limiting one's desires and by banishing the fear of the gods and of death. Epicurus' gospel of freedom from fear proved to be quite popular, and communities of Epicureans flourished for centuries after his death. Epictetus attacked this view in strong polemics and said, that pleasure and pain cannot in themselves lead to a virtuous life, and thus to happiness; also moral choices are needed.

Generally, philosophers were free to debate among each other and as competing academies, but they could, and did, run into serious trouble with established powers of temple and political leadership. Blasphemy charges did lead to persecution or exile of philosophers. Until approximately 88 BC, Athens was Europe's main center of philosophy; from then, it moved to Rome and elsewhere in the Mediterranean area, after political developments.

Sources and further reading:
Cosmic Sympathy 
Thales and the Seven Sages
Anaxagoras
Anacharsis
Pyrrho
Antisthenes
Cynicism
Stoicism
Epicurus
Diogenes of Sinope

Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Reputed Names of Greek Scientists and Philosophers Known in the Prophet’s Era

griekse-filosofie-versimpeld-neergezet

The realms of knowledge and science necessary to understand Islam, are not only traditional and historic knowledge. In my view, philosophy, law, linguistics and natural science are perhaps more important. History and tradition are the background to the rise of Islam; philosophy, law, linguistics and natural science, deal with the content of the message itself. First three aspects are more important than the latter, natural science, to everyday worhip. But, in the modern era, scientific findings on natural phenomena have been successfully used to prove the truthfulness of Islam. The message of Islam covers many fields. For a better understanding, it's helpful, to have at least some knowledge of philosophy, law, linguistics, and science.

The very first Greek philosophers

Greece was an early starter in scientific development. Thales, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle are leading names. Natural science was approached through the perspective of philosophy and its deductive methods. However, Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) introduced induction in the sense of observation of visible reality. Experimentation played no role yet; also Aristotle’s approach remained within the boundaries of philosophy. Thales (624 – 546 BC) was perhaps the first and founding Greek philosopher. He was interested in water and could predict sun eclipses by calculation. In his view, water was the most elementary principle of the universe and everything originates from water. Thales was famous for his arithmetic skills. According to Greek tradition, he had visited Egypt and re-taught the Egyptians to calculate the height of their pyramids by the size of their shadows. Other big names are Anaximandros (585 – 525 BC) who thought of the indefinite (apeiron), the one elementary substance out of which everything has come forth, without beginning, end or time and producing hot and cold, dry, humid and any other polarity or contradistinction; and Demokritos (app. 460 – 380/370 BC). Demokritos who was the first to think of a theory on atomic particles in which a fabric’s structure was determined by differences in ranking, shape and size of these atoms. His theory is named Atomism: The theory that says, that all materials are made of innumerable indivisable particles: a-tomos (‘indivisable’). Indian Buddhists have largely contributed to Atomism. They thought, that atoms flash into and out of existence; teachings that seem to be confirmed in western science (Heisenberg’s probability principle). An important axiom in atomism is metaphysical nihilism: If only atoms exist, discriminate objects don’t really exist, or they are not vital. Everything is one coherent set of particles. Therefore, objects themselves don't interact with us; we only observe their effects on us. We perceive honey as sweet, but sweetness itself, doesn't exis, and our senses aren't reliable enough to genuinely and objectively observe sweetness. Democritus said: 'By convention sweet, by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention color: in reality atoms and the void.'

Atomism, has a natural and a philosophical dimension. In those days, like in the Prophet’s era, the philosophical aspect was the focus of interest. Topics that may be of interest to science were part of religious considerations. But, experiments in the realm of natural science were not yet practised. Cosmology was perhaps the most important focus of interest during the Antiquity. Trying to explain the mechanism of the cosmos was to be done through reason mainly. However, observation also played a big role to some thinkers. Observation of celestial bodies had led to outstanding knowledge on astronomy in several parts of the known world, and this knowledge had become a solid fundament to many religious practices.

These first Greek philosophers defined many of our present notions on being and motion. The Elea-School, Eleatism, developed the idea of reality as 'being in space': nothing cannot be; any substance or idea exists in feasible, tangible space. Its main representant was Parmenides (540 or 515 BC – ca 450 BC?); his main axiom was ‘For never shall this prevail, that things that are not, are’, meaning that the opposite between being and non-being is non-existent. There is no nothingness and everything exists in the spatial sphere, even ideas originate from tangible substance. Even thinking is part of being and Parmenides said ‘thinking and being are one and the same’. Another school of thought was the theory that ‘everything streams and nothing lasts’, ‘panta rhei kai ouden menei’. The Eleatists believed in a permanent static being, Heraclitus believed more or less the opposite; he believed in perpetual change and movement. ‘The world is the same for everyone, it was not created by men or gods, it is and will be an everlasting fire, flaming up or damping down. Heraclitus saw fire as the basic element, Parmenides water, Anaximenes air and Xenophanes earth and water.

A third important school of philosophy was Sophism. The sophists were the first professional philosophers; they made philosophy a paid teaching job, trying to teach others the art of argumentation and discussion. Every person has his own opinions, no one can decide which opinion is true, there are no absolute fundamentals in the universe that can be found or discovered, and the effort to do so, is basically waste of time. Knowledge comes to us through observation, and worldly success and satifaction are the best achievement human beings may reach -- not truth.

A famous fourth school of thought, inspiration to philosophers as Parmenides, Empedocles, Philolaus and Plato, was Pythagorism. Pythagoras was a mystic thinker and a mathematician, but left no writings. Pythagoras and his companions were a small and close knit community with their own way of life, which even fell victim to persecution. Their theory was, says Aristoteles, ‘that numbers constitute the true nature of things and numbers have borders, the same way as objects have. Emptiness is the border between things or numbers. Emptiness exists and pervades heaven from an indefinite breath – it breathes, as it were, into the emptiness. Emptiness differentiates the nature of things; it differentiates and distinguishes successive names and terminology in a series. This, firstly, happens for numbers, as emptiness distinguishes their nature’. Emptiness, ‘apeiron‘, is indefinite and perpetual and inspires reality: The definite and finite, ‘peiron‘, the cosmos, its nature and distinguishes it from other definites and finites, other objects, forms, ‘things’. This inspiration of apeiron into peiron, makes the world a mathematical place. Purely in a mathematical way, the continuum of numbers and the domain of reality, the cosmos, are a play of form and emptiness and its rules are, that it must happen in a harmonious fashion. This harmony-principle distinguishes Pythagorism from the older theory by Anaximandros and the Elea School. Pythagoras has also, in the same line of thinking, commented on sound and tone height. Pythagoras is famous for his calculation method of triangle line lengths, the Pythagoras axiom, which some say was derived from ancient Egyptian calculations used for the construction of their pyramids, but no proof of such do we have. Others say, he may have derive his theorem on right-angled triangles, a2+b2=c2, from the Indian mathematician Baudhayana (800 BC). One of Pythagoras’ students, Alcmaeon, a philosopher and medical thinker, said that ‘we don’t think with our blood, the air or fire -- it is our brain that enables us to think, smell and see. From there, we form our thinking and opinion, and then our knowledge. As long as the brain isn’t damaged, man has his senses and herewith, I confirm that it is our brain that makes the mind speak’.

Even the evolution theory had its predecessor in ancient Greece: Empedocles (ca 492 BC – ca 432 BC). Empedocles was, among others, a doctor, poet, teacher in philosophy, and statesman, born in Sicily. He held the strong belief, that everything has emerged from the four elements earth, air, water and fire, through the two opposing elemental powers he called love and hatred, in a random perpetual flow of mixture and seperation, like mixing colors of paint. Love is the building power and hatred the destructive power. Only the strongest combinations could survive. Empedocles also believed, like Parmenides, that the cosmos is eternal; has always been present, and that no material goes missing. Empedocles called God ‘a circle the middle of which is everywhere and its periphery nowhere’. Aristotle later adopted most of Empedocles’ theory.

Sources and further reading:
Anacharsis, Demokritos, Scepticism, Atomism

Friday, November 3, 2017

Jesus and Trinity

Many of the World's religions, have, at least, some kind of monotheistic view on God, but it's a complicated multiplicity. God may have several personifications or manifestations, even when only one and the same god and creator is referred to. People have tried it, but haven't found out, whether their definition or concept was right. I'll try to give some kind of comparative parable and start with Christianity.

The Bible defines God as one true god, made up of three individuals: God the Father, the Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Here's a compilation of relevant Biblical verses: Genesis 1:1-2; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 2 Corinthians 13:14; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Colossians 1:15-17; Colossians 2:9; Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 44:6; John 1:14; John 10:30; John 10:30-36; John 14:9-11; John 14:16-17;  1 John 5:7-8; Luke 1:35; Luke 3:21-22; Matthew 1:23; Matthew 3:16-17; Matthew 28:19; Romans 14:17-18; 1 Peter 1:1-2; Ephesians 4:4-6; and Philippians 2:5-8. God the Son, the Lord Jesus, wasn't just Prophet Jesus during his lifetime. The Bible says, there's 'one God, the Father from whom all things came and for whom we live', and there's 'one Lord, Jesus Christ, from whom all things came and for whom we live':

'For there are three that testify, the Spirit, the water, and the blood, and the three are in agreement.'
(1 John 5:7-8)

'I and the Father are one.' (John 10:30)

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” 33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[a]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?' (John 10:30-36)

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. (Colossians 1:15-17)

According Christianity, Jesus now sits at God the Father's right hand, next to His throne:

And he led them out as far as Bethany, and lifting up his hands he blessed them. While he blessed them, he parted from them and was carried up into heaven. (Luke 24:50-51)

(He) who has gone into heaven and xis at the right hand of God, ywith angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. (Peter: 3:22)

If I may take some liberty, while avoiding dogmatism ~ I'd say, Christian Trinity may best be explained as the devine force, the devine wisdom, and the devine creation, if we see devine creation as perpetual matter, and God as living and working within creation, with His wisdom. In this case, it's impossible to separate God, devine force, and devine creation from each other. The Son, the Father, and the holy Spirit are the same and forever. Also Jesus is forever, and, also today, very much alive. For me, it makes sense to see Jesus as creation as a whole, the universe. Then, also Eucharist makes sense, because the bread and the wine are part of Jesus, as much as is the rest of creation.

Jesus will return, says the Bible, and at His arrival, Resurrection starts:

'For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.' (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17)

'... and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.' (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10)

Islam doesn't recognize Trinity. Islam sees God as the perpetual creative force behind creation and the holy Spirit. This, because creation is a systematic structure of separate items, each with a temporary lifespan; they all are, directly or indirectly, made by God, even if people, or other creatures, function as productive intermediaries. They are God's protected property. God doesn't resemble creation in any way imaginable. To humans, and other creatures, creation and the holy spirit are tools, and a tool has to answer to God the same way as that humans have to.  Qur'an looks at creation as Allah SWT's immediate property, directly linked to Him. Thus, it's not possible to worship creation. Creatures are created to serve, not worship, each other. Reality is, that people are inclined to worship one item, or a person in creation, as a God, or manifestation of God. This would injustly favor one creature over other creatures, or a human-made concept, and that would create chaos, unjustified competition that's bound to be lost by the human-made god figure, or distortion. It would cause a wound to it all. Jesus was elavated alive, towards Allah, in heaven, without being crucified. Note well, that Jesus, Isa, is the only living prophet, now. The Holy Spirit is God's wisdom, which is revealed in the scriptures, including Qur'an; to the prophets, including Mohammad; and to the faithful. Qur'an al Kerim says:

'Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive, the Eternal. Neither slumber nor sleep overtaketh Him. Unto Him belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that intercedeth with Him save by His leave? He knoweth that which is in front of them and that which is behind them, while they encompass nothing of His knowledge save what He will. His throne includeth the heavens and the earth, and He is never weary of preserving them. He is the Sublime, the Tremendous.' (2:255)

'And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. But Allah took him up unto Himself. Allah was ever Mighty, Wise. There is not one of the People of the Scripture but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them -' (4:157-159)

'O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One God. Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender. The Messiah will never scorn to be a slave unto Allah, nor will the favoured angels. Whoso scorneth His service and is proud, all such will He assemble unto Him; ...' (4:171-172)

'They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers. They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no God save the One God. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve. Will they not rather turn unto Allah and seek forgiveness of Him? For Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away! Say: Serve ye in place of Allah that which possesseth for you neither hurt nor use? Allah it is Who is the Hearer, the Knower. Say: O People of the Scripture! Stress not in your religion other than the truth, and follow not the vain desires of folk who erred of old and led many astray, and erred from a plain road.' (5:72-77)

'Say: The holy Spirit hath revealed it from thy Lord with truth, that it may confirm (the faith of) those who believe, and as guidance and good tidings for those who have surrendered (to Allah). (102) And We know well that they say: Only a man teacheth him. The speech of him at whom they falsely hint is outlandish, and this is clear Arabic speech.' (16:102-103)

'They will ask thee concerning the Spirit. Say: The Spirit is by command of my Lord, and of knowledge ye have been vouchsafed but little. (85) And if We willed We could withdraw that which We have revealed unto thee, then wouldst thou find no guardian for thee against Us in respect thereof. (86) (It is naught) save mercy from thy Lord. Lo! His kindness unto thee was ever great. (87) Say: Verily, though mankind and the jinn should assemble to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof though they were helpers one of another.' (17:85-90)
'And she (Maryam) who was chaste, therefor We breathed into her (something) of Our Spirit and made her and her son a token for (all) peoples.' (21:91)

Allah hath not chosen any son, nor is there any God along with Him; else would each God have assuredly championed that which he created, and some of them would assuredly have overcome others. Glorified be Allah above all that they allege. Knower of the Invisible and the Visible! and Exalted be He over all that they ascribe as partners (unto Him)! (23:90-91)

Lo! Allah is the Knower of the Unseen of the heavens and the earth. Lo! He is Aware of the secret of (men's) breasts. He it is Who hath made you regents in the earth; so he who disbelieveth, his disbelief be on his own head. Their disbelief increaseth for the disbelievers, in their Lord's sight, naught save abhorrence. Their disbelief increaseth for the disbelievers naught save loss. Say: Have ye seen your partner-gods to whom ye pray beside Allah? Show me what they created of the earth! Or have they any portion in the heavens? Or have We given them a scripture so they act on clear proof therefrom? Nay, the evil-doers promise one another only to deceive. Lo! Allah graspeth the heavens and the earth that they deviate not, and if they were to deviate there is not one that could grasp them after Him. Lo! He is ever Clement, Forgiving. (35:38-41)

'When thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to create a mortal out of mire, (71) And when I have fashioned him and breathed into him of My Spirit, then fall down before him prostrate,' (38:72)

'The Exalter of Ranks, the Lord of the Throne. He casteth the Spirit of His command upon whom He will of His slaves, that He may warn of the Day of Meeting, ...' (40:15)

'And thus have We inspired in thee (Muhammad) a Spirit of Our command. Thou knewest not what the Scripture was, nor what the Faith. But We have made it a light whereby We guide whom We will of Our bondmen. And lo! thou verily dost guide unto a right path, (52) The path of Allah, unto Whom belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Do not all things reach Allah at last.' (42:52-53)

'Were We then worn out by the first creation? Yet they are in doubt about a new creation. We verily created man and We know what his soul whispereth to him, and We are nearer to him than his jugular vein. When the two Receivers receive (him), seated on the right hand and on the left, He uttereth no word but there is with him an observer ready.' (50:15-18)

'Thou wilt not find folk who believe in Allah and the Last Day loving those who oppose Allah and His messenger, even though they be their fathers or their sons or their brethren or their clan. As for such, He hath written faith upon their hearts and hath strengthened them with a Spirit from Him, and He will bring them into Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide. Allah is well pleased with them, and they are well pleased with Him. They are Allah's party. Lo! is it not Allah's party who are the successful?' (58:22)

'On the day when the angels and the Spirit stand arrayed, they speak not, saving him whom the Beneficent alloweth and who speaketh right. That is the True Day. So whoso will should seek recourse unto his Lord.' (78:38-39)

'Say: He is Allah, the One! Allah, the eternally Besought of all! He begetteth not nor was begotten. And there is none comparable unto Him.' (112:1-4)

There is a disclaimer ~ Thank God, it's not up to us, to decide whether the difference between Bible and Quran is only words and naming, or whether there's a genuine difference in meaning. I'd say, Qur'an and Bible describe God and His creation as one cluster, created in wisdom, but the Bible gives a bigger place to Jesus, 'Isa. There's no compulsion in religion, because we can't picture or perceive God. Allah SWT knows, and we don't. We can let loose reason on the unseen, but miss observation to back up our reasoning. This isn't always necessary, when logic is used properly. But in this case, our logic can't reach far enough to get to the truth. And, it's better to live and let live, instead of trying to falsify religious teachings about their very core. Nevertheless, what's my conclusion? Islam, accepts only one, unambiguous God. God has defined creation, but not the other way round.

Both the Bible and Qur'an say, Jesus is alive and in heaven now and, at the Day of Resurrection, Jesus will testify for, or against, each one of us. Jesus' present and future role matters, to those who believe. Qur'an and Bible resemble, and should be taken at heart, though we may question Trinity.

Sources:
Bible Study Tools https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/bible-verses-about-the-trinity/
Quran Explorer http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran/
GotQuestions.org https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-in-Heaven.html
BibleInfo.com http://www.bibleinfo.com/en/topics/second-coming-jesus#when
BibleGateway.com https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Thessalonians+1%3A7-10




Saturday, October 28, 2017

Quatras Politicas, A Muslim suggestion on how the West can end its debt crisis

What is it, Westerners should let go of, in order to become a less indebted society? That would be the fear of self-reliance; the exaggerated specialization; the fear of individualism; the fear of small-scale; the fear of humble labor. Is there a thing as humble labor, anyway. They should let go any glorification of co-operation and doing things 'together'. All-in: Developing a more positive, proud concept of human nature, and their own populations, in general. Many, many nations on this Earth, have survived with small governments that don't plan an entire economy and have less bureaucracy, though their people have had to rely on their own capcacity to take care of their families and property. This is possible, because individual citizens are allowed ownership more than food, cloths, furniture, books, and decorations only. They can inherit their family home, or family business, and the land on which it is built, without having to pay huge taxes. They are allowed to build their own home and business, even if it's only as simple as a tent of a shed. They are allowed to be self-reliant and humble, in other words. Let's remember, that a humble start, even more so with family or neighborhood support, may very well grow and develop into sophistication. The West should, really, abandon centralized housing and real estate. It's former colonies, such as countries in the Islamic world; Africa; Latin America; Asia, have carried out landreforms, in many cases. They dismantled large landownership and gave the land back to those who live and work on it: The average citizens. It's true, that this hasn't always been a peaceful process. Zimbabwe is example of a country that made the right choice at great cost and with much bloodshed. They should have allowed white landowners a reasonable patch of land for themselves, like everybody else, and others could have put their expertise to good use. This is a valid question to ask. Yet, Zimbabwe made the right choice, towards genuine independence, in spite of the difficult transition it no doubt had to go through.

Arriving at sophistication, starts with hard work and building experience, and it can't always be delegated to others. The fashion industry is a good example. It's for a reason, that some Asian peoples are the world's clothes manufacturers: They realize, good clothes come with a price, which is hard labor and gaining skill, in small-scale business. In the West, many people receive several years of education to become a fashion designer, but what happens, after they finally get their degree...? Usually, they haven't got a clue, how to produce and sell the cloths and other fabrics they design. And end up doing something, they weren't educated for. Such a pity! This is, because actual production, is an overlooked aspect in all those years of education. The West should arrive at a better balance between education and gaining skills in work. This needn't be cruel or abusive. More manual work and more trading skills, would be needed in this example. Humility, is overlooked.

What kind of society and governance, will land reform lead to? 

It will lead to a society with more personal freedoms. That, is sure. But, also, with more personal responsibility. One may choose between producing themselves, or buying. It will create markets with many participants, both suppliers and buyers. Prices will lower. There's more space for competition. There will be healthy chaos: The chaos of an active and roaming population. This can be an envigorating force in society. People are allowed to develop themselves freely and keep more benefits to themselves. And because they don't have to pay half their earnings to the state, or more, they can also affort to not work. Those who own a  modest estate, can afford to reduce their work efforts. This is beneficial in times of illness, and may lead to more modest spending. Or, if they want to spend time and effort on another business, job, or hobby, as well. This, is good. It may lead to less stress -- whereas Westerners can't easily take a break from work, because they live in debt.

A society with small-scale ownership, needn't be a society wholly without regulating or protecting government, but government can be smaller. Also in a society with less difference between those who own nearly everything and those who own nothing but debt, Satan is still roaming. There still is crime and abuse. And, there may be threat from abroad. So, a government is still needed. Government exists to make sure, that existing legislation for economic life, is carried out. That those who enherit, buy, own, sell, initiate, produce, etc, indeed get what they are entitled to. That truthful standards are maintained. For instance, that people indeed sell the product they say it is, in quality and in quantity, and that sanctions exist to those who transgress. A product can be an apple, but also a complete college education. Government is there for those jobs that can't have owners: Communal tasks, such as infrastructure, the military, protection of the environment, geographical planning. And, government is needed for those tasks, where the private sector cannot always step in. It needs to take care of those vulnerable people (and other creatures) who have nobody to take care of them. It's good, that state education and health care exist. But, is it necessary to keep all education and health care in state hands? I'd say, it isn't. Quality of institutions, isn't always a matter of size or finance, nor of private versus public. So, a society with small-scale ownership, will still need taxes and bureaucracy, but considerably less than in the West. Not the entire people, needs to be kept hostage by the sheer thought, that there's always a small group of truly vulnerable people who need protection. That thought, is neglected in the West.

There will be a sharper separation between public and private tasks. Also that, is a good thing. Montesquieu invented trias politicas: A separation between legislation, governance, and justice. This plan isn't completed, yet. Montesquieu was child of a feudal society. Not even the French Revolution, has ended the feudality, for the French and other Westerners. Let's introduce something else: Quatras Politicas. Legislation, Governance, and Justice belong to the State, and Business, Residence, and Production belong to the Citizens :) @}}- A sharper separation between citizens and state in economic life, will lead to bringing back tasks to those where they naturally belong: The direct users and producers. It will lead to market balance, because monopolies and oligopolies will be broken. Markets will have many participating suppliers and buyers. Prices will lower; choice will multiple; there will be freedom of choice. And, specialization needn't end. Those who are trained for the job, will have success in their efforts. So at the individual's level, specialization will continue. But, it may also be easier, to have other, extra activity. There will be more separation between public and private money flows. The advantage of this is, that public debt has smaller impact on the private sector. State money creation stays within a smaller circle. Now, Westerners have lost sight of everything that matters to them, because there's huge conflict of interest between public and private tasks. And high taxes, make state money creation indispensable. The state would swallow its own citizens, otherwise.  Government is everything, does everything, either directly, or through privatized institutions, that have one owner only: Government. Noted should be, that not all Western nations are full feudalities, or welfare states. South European nations have much small-scale ownership and business, have a smaller welfare state, and lower taxes.

Also in democratic systems, government needs to go back where it belongs: In the ivory tower. Let it be three ivory towers, the smaller angles of the green, brown, yellow and blue cube of life and nature.

Western Economics Are Based On Fear, And Fear Creates Debt

What are economics, at all?

Economics aren't so much about the fact, that humans need to satisfy their survival needs at all, nor about how much it is they need. Those questions, can be answered by natural sciences. Economics answer, in the first place, HOW to satisfy survival needs. It's about humans working with figures, but it's also about behavior -- as an individual and as a group. Economics have three components: Granting and taking opportunities, and setting boundaries. Economics are, in the very first place, and in every sense of the word, a question of balancing duality. Secondly, economics naturally never stand still, and, thirdly, difference without judgment, is perhaps key component.

To name a few of the many examples of economic dualism that like to be balanced:

Full Stomach - Empty Stomach
Much - Little
Complex - Simple
Intelligent - Stupid ...?
Large company - Small Business
Macro - Micro
National - Local
Altruism - Individualism (Selfishness?)
You - Me
They - Us
Hunter - Prey
Receiving - Paying
Giving - Accepting
Group - Individual
Debt - Claim
Movement - Stillness
Global - National
Debit - Credit
Male - Female
Old - New
Risk - Security
Dynamism - Stability
Mind - Body
Mind - Heart
Thought - Feeling
Capability - Shortcoming
Self-reliance - Co-operation
Eating - Being Eaten
Solidarity - Individualism
Birth - Death
Blue - Yellow
Competition - Cooperation

All these, are natural dimensions of life. They all deserve their own merit. Westerners, however, ran into huge trouble, when they started classifying natural dimensions into a moral classification, and then try to fit in humans -- when it should be the other way round. Moral classifications of economics are only justified, when there aren't any conflicting interests -- not only between people, but also between people and any other creatures, and even objects. This is a situation, where no difference exists -- which isn't possible. And, if choices existed. But, nothing is more complex than life and the universe. 'Good <--> Bad' isn't a conclusion we should, each and every time, draw from difference. It's about eating and being eaten. Each creature is programmed in a certain way, with a certain role attached to that. A cat catches a mouse, but never vice versa. That, isn't possible. Does that make the cat a bad creature? And, is the mouse really a victim? What is a victim, at all? The concept 'victim', excludes any thought of a future. Who knows, whether the mouse, or its soul, is better off, being eaten? 'Work' isn't necessarily worse or better than 'not work', if no one gets hurt on its way. Same goes for the difference between rich and poor. Maybe, the poorer person is thankful, being deprived of the stress of large property and responsibilities. What is poor, in the first place, as long as people are able to fulfill their, and their family's, needs. Yet, the average Westerner, is brought up to think, that certain economic situations are better than others. Not being affluent, in this view, is intolerable. It's compulsory to function in a big, formal environment and be organized, whereas an informal environment may yield better result. Economics don't answer or judge questions like which activity is superior. Yet, Westerners strongly believe in an ideal, large-scale, economic structure with ideal jobs, designed into detail by a government or representative. People have to fit into this model, also when they can't, and if they can't, they must change themselves. The ideal person, reinvents him- or herself, or is rejected and stays at the sideline.

The second problem, Westerners created for themselves, as a group, is their low appreciation of the individual person. How does this effect average people? 'An ordinary person isn't able to take respondibility for his, and more so, her own life.' 'Only extrodinary people can take responsibility for fullfilling the people's needs'. 'Competition causes unemployment'. 'Only cooperation leads to secure improvement'. These thoughts, or rather, fears, led to economic specialization, as I said in my previous economics-blog: A work- and society concept, where people fill their daily task with only one, same assignment. If they want something else, be it a job or a product, they must outsource, against payment. The hope is, that everyone doing the best they can in their specific job, leads to a perfected group performance as a society. It leads, however, also to a society, where people need a lot of cash to fulfill almost all their personal needs, because they can't, or aren't allowed, to self-produce those items that don't belong to their job description. A society based on patronage, has thus emerged. Specialization and patronage, are main components of a feudality, because specialization isn't restricted to work only, but also to ownership. Only a few people own a nation's real estate, and the mass of the people and businesses, must rent their residence from this small group of owners. The deal is, that these owners have the specialist knowledge to maintain and improve the estate. And the problem is, one or two ordinary persons, take decisions for thousands of people. These thousands of people are perfectly capable of taking decisions for themselves, and these one or two leaders, are usually ordinary people with average character flaws. Sometimes, those flaws make them loose, or run off with, large quantities of money or property. The whole group is left empty handed, then. They must take decisions for too many people. In many cases, that's above their league. This structure has had great consequences for the West itself, but also for other parts of the world, as I said in my previous economics-blog.

Truth is, the average Westerner, has very little property. A Westerner, firstly, in many cases, is unable to continue an inherited family business. It must be sold, because inheritance tax must be paid first. The 'poor' and the huge state bureaucracy that takes care of the citizens, must be paid, after all. Same applies to many other investments, Westerners face this problem in many of their decisions, in order to lead a regular, natural life. A big example, is buying a house. The price of that house is huge, because of the taxations that come on top of it. And, because construction real estate is often government monopoly, or in the hands of large landownership. And, usually, because less than half the nation's land is available to small-scale, individual, private owners. So, a Westerner, usually, has to start his or her working life from scratch, without much help from a family estate. And, in many cases, then fails. Result is, that Westerners must receive back from the state, what they had to pay for: A rent house; social security money; a state-created job; food handouts. This is, how redevision of wealth works. People are forced to buy or rent at a price, and, if they can't afford it, they must receive state income support. Those in good health, or those who finish their education well, may very well succeed in finding a job or income source, and, thus, sufficient income, but those who fail, end up under financial state protection. Truth is, that latter group is economically bankrupt. And, this is a big group -- not a small group. It may very well be half the population, if we are honest enough to really face reality. The problem isn't limited to individual cases. Because many thousands of people rely on only a few employers, or on the state, they end up in serious financial debt, should the employer, or the state, suffer loss of income -- which is part of economic reality. So, in Western economy, times of decreased income, lead to severe crisis of the entire economy. In the West, recession is a disaster.

The West's third problem, is that economics are perhaps the only field of human activity, where it thinks, it can't learn from foreign systems and cultures. Call it a last remnant of superiority-ideas. Or, difficulty to identify with outlandish philosophy. So, those who want to make suggestions, should also use names from Western culture.