Existence is
One. All things in it are in interaction with each other directly or
indirectly. Human beings interact with the rest of the world at many levels and
with each other at a conscious as well as at sub-conscious and unconscious
levels. Verbal communication is a small part of this interaction. Much of the
time and effort of individuals and the community is spent in communication.
This takes the form of (1) instructions; (2) conveying information about
something objective; (3) conveying information about one’s own subjective
feelings, opinions, and states; (4) Questioning or eliciting information; (5) a
means of making friendly contact; (6) suggesting possibilities or stimulating
ideas; (7) expressing and relieving feelings (8) producing an effect, e.g.
insult, praise, encourage, discourage etc. (9) inducing experiences; (10)
arguing.
Verbal
communication is indirect in that it uses words or symbols that stand for
experiences or ideas which are abstractions from experiences. This gives verbal
communication great power. But these words or symbols may have different
meanings for different people according to the associations made in past
experiences or efforts at processing. Conversations are usually about
particular subjects or sub-divisions of these, what can be called Spheres of
Discourse. Subjects can be nature, various sciences, politics, commerce, art,
civics, engineering, architecture, Philosophy, Religion etc. The concepts used
in each system belong to a conceptual system such that there is interdependence
between them. The same word may have different meanings in different systems.
Verbal communication may take place at several different levels depending on
the level of abstraction. It is necessary to understand that there is a
difference between the thing (object, phenomena, event etc.) itself “O”, and
the experience of it “E”, and the verbal description “D”. The same “O” can be
experienced in many different ways because each experience is only a small part
of all the possible experiences owing to the limitations of the capacity of the
person to experience. But the same experience E can also be described verbally
in many different ways. The object “O” itself exists within a system of many
things with which it interacts and is inter-dependent. This constitutes its
context. It is what it is because of its position and function in the System
“X”, and ultimately with respect to Allah. The awareness of the
inter-relationships between the object and its context differs greatly between
individuals and grows as learning proceeds. This learning is proportional to
individual capacity, expanding experience and efforts made. These three are
also interdependent.
Two people in
conversation may, therefore, misunderstand each other because (a) differences
in amount and quality of the data of experiences. (b) Differences in the
meaning of the words they are using. (c) They may be mistaken about the subject
or sphere of Discourse. When speaking about religion, for instance, some people
might be thinking of the behaviour of a particular section people while others
might be thinking of the organization or institutions, and still others about
the spiritual teachings, or about the practices or laws. Others might be
thinking about Religion as a psychological, anthropological or social
phenomenon, or as an aspect of history or as a historical process, or a
philosophical entity and so on. (d) Differences in level of understanding. At
level 1, people, for instance, react to words by conditioned reflexes and use
slogans to produce such reactions. At level 2, they try to understand the
meaning of the words and speak or write in order to convey an idea. At level 3,
they try to get beyond the words in order to understand the system of
experiences to which the words refer. When they speak the motive is to induce
an experience rather than just an idea. What they say will then not have a
literal meaning, but the meaning will be in the experiences induced. At level
4, they may wish to experience the real situation that gives rise to the
experiences and alter those situations. Here actions, gestures or words may be
used, but the aim is to introduce influences, which causes transformation
within people or in the society or their environments. These effects will also
depend on the nature of the people, situation or social, cultural and physical
environments. People may or may not be conscious of these influences or their
effects. The Quran and other religious scriptures have this function.
Much of
communication, be it concerned with politics, religion, philosophy, art,
literature, commerce or science, consists of arguments but these are usually
based on misunderstandings and lead nowhere, except, perhaps to create or
relieve some tension.
Arguments can be
designed to convince others about something, or they may be put forward to make
a point, or to establish a position of superiority. Here we have to distinguish
between three things:- (a) the assumptions (b) the motives (c) the method used.
There is a
difference between (a) making statements, (b) discussion and (c) debate.
Statements are made to be accepted or examined. These have value, which may be
that of Truth, Beauty, Usefulness (or Power) or Goodness to various degrees.
Discussions consist of exchanges of ideas where each idea is put forward to
elicit ideas from others. The ideas may be about facts such objects, events,
laws, processes, characteristics, relationships, structures, conditions, or
about methods, principles, possibilities, suggestions, ideas, speculations or
pure inventions. A debate is a contest in which people take opposite positions
and have to defend one while attacking the other. The purpose is to win and not
to establish the truth, virtue, beauty or utility of things. Argumentation,
specially about religion, is forbidden in Islam.
“And argue not with the people of
the Book, unless with better means; except with those who have done wrong
amongst them and say: We believe in what is sent down to us, and what has been
sent down to you; our God and your God is One, and unto Him we Surrender (as
Muslims)." 29:46
“When you see those who plunge deeply into vain
discussion of Our Signs (revelations), turn away from them until they discuss
another topic; It may be that Satan makes you forget, but sit not, after you
remember, with the congregation of the faithless (or unjust or wrong-doers).”
6:68
“Therefore, unto this (scripture) then go on
inviting, and be upright and steadfast as you are commanded, and follow not
their vain desires, and say: I believe in what Allah has revealed of the Book,
and I am commanded to do justice between you: Allah
is our Lord and your Lord; unto us our deeds and unto you your deeds; no
argument between us and you: Allah will gather us together, and to Him is our
final Goal (or return)." 42:15
“But had thy Lord willed, all who are in the
earth would have believed together. Would you force men to become believers? It
is not for any soul to believe save by the permission of Allah; He sets
uncleanness on those who have no sense.” 10:100-101
There are
several possible ways of dealing with things when faced with a statement or
argument.
(1) To react to
it in an unthinking manner by conditioned reflexes formed by previous
experiences, prejudices likes and dislikes.
(2) To put
attention on the words and argue in a formal logical manner about the concepts
and descriptions.
(3) To try to
understand what is being said and look at the thing described.
(4) To
understand the intention behind the statement.
(5) To focus
attention on the context, relationships, meaning, significance and value of
what is being said.
(6) To look at
the causes and effects behind the statement.
(7) To try to
experience the same experiences as those which gives rise to the statement or
assertion.
These things
have to be distinguished. Otherwise any two people may be speaking at different
levels and by pass each other completely.
It is generally
necessary to establish what the subject, its aspect and context really is.
(a) It is
possible for one person to speak about specific and particular things while
another is speaking about things in general. As particular things can belong to
classes which themselves belong to still higher classes, one can speak about
several levels of generality.
(b) It is
possible to speak about a thing, the experience of it, or its verbal
description.
(c) It is
possible to take things literally or as an example or as symbolism. Some things
are fiction but nevertheless true to life. A story or novel may create a
certain atmosphere or general condition.
(d) The subject
of conversation may itself consist of several aspects – shapes, colour,
consistency, structure, uses, value, cost etc.
(e) The object
may be seen in several different contexts. A human being, for instance is seen
differently by politician, economist, artist, psychologist, physiologist,
salesman, manufacturer, friend and so on. There are different spheres of
discourse.
(f) The same
thing can be said in many different ways and different words or combination of
words can be used to describe the same thing or to describe different aspects
of the same thing. But attachment to words may obscure the reality to which
they refer. Many experiments have been performed to show that many people are
unable to recognize a thing when the wording of the description is changed.
This fact is often used officially or by private individuals to change names or
descriptions in order to hide something or change attitudes. Different
religions are formulated in different ways, but attachment to words prevent
people from understanding what is being said and therefore, seeing that they
are saying the same thing.
(g) It is
possible to place different amounts of emphasis on different features of the
same thing, thereby giving the impression that they are different things. The
differences between religious doctrines are often of this type.
A great amount
of controversy between Muslims and people of other faiths and between different
sect and individuals within the same religion arises because of these factors.
The following will illustrate some points:-
Case 1
Someone wished
to know: Are Tattoos forbidden (Haraam) in Islam? If so, why? Does it actually
say explicitly anywhere that they are forbidden?
Answer:- There
is nothing in the Quran or Hadith about tattoos. But it is not difficult to see
that tattoos are useless and frivolous, and that the motives behind them, to
draw attention to oneself or to decorate oneself, thereby, increasing one's
illusory worth rather than cultivating real worth, can hardly be regarded as
virtuous.
So those people
who go by an understanding of the general instructions of the Quran, tattoos
may be regarded as forbidden. But for those people who have a literal and
legalistic mind and wish to confine themselves to explicitly stated instructions,
tattoos are not forbidden.
The same
considerations apply to all other questions of vice and virtue, Haraam and
Halal. Is it, for example, forbidden to torture people with electricity. The
answer is:- No. Is it forbidden to harm people. The answer is, Yes.
Case 2
Critic:- History
shows that Religion legitimizes barbarism. Civilized people should avoid it.
Answer:- How do
you define barbarism? And why do you assume it is a vice? What makes you think
Civilization is a virtue?
If human beings
had no ideals to strive for they would have remained in the same state as they
were in the jungles. A study of Religion shows that it is they which provide
the ideals and, therefore, produce much of that which some people understand by
the term "civilization". But this term also covers a great amount
which people wish to ignore - the cruelty, prejudices, atrocities, psychopathy,
criminality, depravities, sophisticated forms of persecution, torture, war and
extermination. These things are done much more efficiently by the so called
civilized peoples and by people not restrained by religious values though some
may profess them.
Case 3.
Critic: Islam is
a violent religion.
Answer.-
Firstly, you are implying that violence is necessarily evil. In fact, nothing
has any ethical value in itself but is judged by a purpose. All things
including violence are good or evil according to their beneficial or harmful
effect. Good and evil can be defined objectively as that which Allah (the
ultimate Reality) instructs and forbids.
Secondly, you
are confusing Islam, which is a teaching with Muslims who are a people.
Thirdly, you are attributing a general characteristic of people to a section
only, thereby giving a false impression. There have been two vicious world
wars. There have been oppressors such as Hitler, Stalin, and several dictators
in South America who tortured and kills
millions. There have been civil wars in France,
Spain, England, USA,
Russia and many religious
wars in Europe. Europeans have oppressed and
killed million of Indian in North and South America, Negroes in Africa, many
people in Asia and Australia.
There have religious wars between Christian sects in Europe,
Crusades against Muslims in the past and more recently Christians have mounted
“Ethnic Cleansing” campaigns. There have been wars in Vietnam, Africa
and many other places in the World. There are so called terrorists in South America, Germany,
USA, Japan, and Ceylon etc. None of
these things were done by Muslims. But do the Newspapers say that these things
were done by Christians? Sensible people know that violence is a human
characteristic. But narrow minded bigots want to put the blame on whatever they
happen to acquire an antipathy to - Jews, Muslims, Catholic, Negroes, Whites,
Germans, people with blond hair and blue eyes, Aryans, Semites, short people,
people with long hair and all kind of other irrelevancies.
Case 4.
Critic:- Some of
the verses in the Quran do not make any sense. It would make better sense if
they were altered or translated as follows......
Answer:- Who is
it to whom they do not make sense? What are the assumptions in the mind of the
critic with respect to which they make no sense? Has the critic determined the
assumptions of the translator who understood the verses the way he did?
The verses of
the Quran tend to have multiple meanings which could be extracted through
meditation. Why is it necessary to narrow down the meaning of the verses to
particular ones only? Why does the critic expect logical analysis to reveal the
truth?
It is well known
fact that a positive receptive attitude is required in order to learn and
understand things. And that a negative, hostile attitude closes the mind or
distorts perception. It is necessary to look at things as they are and try to
understand them. To alter them according to whim or prejudice makes them into
something else.
Case 5.
Critic:- Islam
is like an Onion. The various layers in it are borrowed from other religions.
If you take away these layers you are left with nothing.
Answer:- Islam
is like an Onion which has grown. Various layers are the different teachings of
the genuine Prophets and Messengers sent by Allah to different people
throughout the ages, but it also contains a layer which is unique to the
teaching brought by the Prophet Muhammad (saw). It is also a re-interpretation
of the teachings of the religions for a new age. The whole of the Onion is
Islam and the core of it is Allah.
Case 6.
Sectarian:- The
following verse refers to Ali and his descendants:- “O ye who believe! Obey
Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority; and if ye
have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye
are (in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is better and more
seemly in the end.” 4:59
Answer:- The
verse tells us about authorities in general. It does not specify anyone in
particular or what kind of authority he has. Nor does it tell us that they have
the right to decide in a dispute. They are required only to follow the
instructions of Allah and the Messenger. Obedience to them can, therefore, be
regarded as an administrative matter ensuring unity of action.
No doubt
reader who observe and think will come across many examples of the various
errors mentioned in this article.