"WE SHOULD TURN TO THE ABRAHAM'S RELİGİON"

The Arab Prophet had learned that some of the Arabs in Syria had already rediscovered the 'authentic religion of Abram/Abraham.' Abraham was alive before either Torah or the Gospels. Therefore he was neither a Jew nor a Christian. This was very important for the specific purpose of the Arab Prophet. There were serious problems between Jews and Christians. Arabs were not obliged to choose the one or the other. The Arab Prophet thought it would be logical to think that the 'oral tradition' of the Rabbis and the Trinity of the Christians had made additions and amendments to hanifiyyah, the 'pure' and true belief system of Abraham. On top of that, the Old Testament told them that Jews had deviated many many times from the Mosaic belief system. This meant that they acted against the original revelation. Mohamed called upon Jews to join him. Jews, finding out that the revelation given to Mohamed was not different from theirs, rejected him and left him alone. Mohamed answered by introducing his belief system, which he claimed would turn the distorted Abrahamic belief system to its original. The Arab Prophet, Mohamed, claimed that Prophet Abraham and his son Ishmael built Qaba together. In short, Abraham was the forefather of Arabs, and the Arabs were the progeny of Abraham. With this solution Arabs were raised to the level of Jews, maybe higher. Because they were re-introducing the original of the belief system which was distorted by the Jews. Moslems were turning to the original belief system of Abraham. Abraham was the one who built the 'house of God,' thus the first Moslem (meaning the 'one who surrendered to God'). So Abraham's religion seemed as an appropriate faith to choose. Arabs must have thought that this choice would give them an extra opportunity to pull the Jews and Christians to their side, because Abraham was their Patriarch.

Before the call of the Arab Prophet, four well-known members of the Quraysh tribe decided to seek the hanifiyyah, the true religion of Abraham. Then one day that momentous event happened and the Arab Prophet received the first revelation on Mount Hira (don't forget mountains were thought to be one of the places for gods since animism, and paganism). An angel appeared to the Arab Prophet and gave him the command: "Recite!" (iqra!) We are told that the Arab Prophet had acted as it was usual for the prophets of the region, especially the Hebrew prophets, who were reluctant to utter the Word of God. The Arab Prophet refused, protesting that he is neither a reciter nor a kahin (the origin of the word is Hebrew, kohanim - a Jewish priest) - one of the ecstatic soothsayers of Arabia who claimed to recite inspired oracles. The Angel embraced him three times and the Arab Prophet found himself reciting the new scripture. This was the first time this God was revealing His word in Arabic, following the previous occasions when He did it in Aramaic, Syriac, Egyptian, and Hebrew, and in many other local languages and dialects.

A 'NADHIR' : ONE WHO WARNS, ONE WHO REMINDS

If one goes by the style of Qoran, the duty of the Arab Prophet, in reality, seems to have been to 'warn' only; in other words he is considered to be only a nadhir ('one who warnes') in Mecca. His duty was thought to be to warn the Qurayshis on what would happen if they did not heed the orders of God. This nadhir was in no obligation to prove to Quraysh the existence of God, because all of them believed tacitly in al-Lah who was the creator of the sky and earth, and the majority of them knew that this God was the One worshipped by the Jews and the Christians. Which meant that, introducing a new belief system on the existing foundation by using traditional elements and values was very easy. Al-Lah's existence was not questioned. From this angle, the unbelievers mentioned in Qoran, should not be understood as atheists, but as the persons who knew that they owed everything to God, but still were ungrateful to Him. This shows that Qoran was not in a position to teach Quraysh anything new. This Book was just the 'reminder' of the things already known. No wonder Qoran asks every now and then: 'Have you not seen?'; 'Have you not considered?'; 'Have you not known?'

The Arab 'messenger' has taken over directly the essence of monotheism. The God should be 'lived' as a moral obligation. Al-Lah (El-Lah has become Allah in Qoran), anthropomorphically, is farther away than YHWH. He does not have the compassion and passion of YHWH. Mankind can only perceive the God's existence through the signs around us in nature, and this God is so transcendent that we can only speak about him in parables. Qoran's central idea is that mankind should see the world as a manifestation of God. Mankind should try continuously to force their imaginations to understand the transcendent reality. Moslems should develop a symbolic approach. Qoran stresses constantly that reason is necessary to understand the messages and signs of God. Moslems should not push their reason to second place, but study the world with curiosity and attention. The researches done on the nature show us that this God has a transcendent dimension and source which only enables us to speak symbolically about his manifestations. Furthermore the stories about prophets, the revelations on the judgement day, and even the beauties of the paradise should not be understood in their literal meanings, but as the parables of reality which is more exalted and inexpressible with words. Israel's transformation to monotheism took about 800 years, but the Arab Prophet achieved the transformation of Arabs to monotheism in only 23 years. Of course, as explained earlier the already existing ground in the pre-Islamic Arab society was of tremendous help in this process.

The basis of the Qoranic morality was the understanding and acceptance of the existence of only one God. Moslems should grasp the fact that El-Lah/Al-Lah was the greatest and the sole 'reality.' Qoran 112: "Say to them: He is Allah. The only one. He is Allah. Free from everything; The only might, all the needs, intentions, praise, and prayers turn to. He does not beget and He is not begotten. He has no equal." This was how the pre-Islamic Arab believers of El-Lah also described their supreme being. Qoran turned back to the Semitic doctrine of divine oneness, and rejected the idea that God can have a son. There is no othed God but El-Lah who created the sky and the earth, and mankind's salvation is through Him only. Only by accepting that this God was the uncaused cause of all the created (es-Samed) Moslems could address a dimension of reality unbound by time and space, and prevent the tribal fragmentation of the Arab society. The Arab Prophet knew that monotheism was the enemy of tribalism, and that a sole God, the aim of all the worship would establish the togetherness among the individuals and in the society.

HE 'WISHED TO BE KNOWN'

According to an early tradition, the incomprehensible God of Islam wished to be 'known.' The related hadith has God say to the Arab Prophet, "I was a secret treasure and wished to be known, and I created the world so that I would be known." Islam continues with the traditional approach which claims that mankind could 'see' God in his acts. Through His activities God makes Himself known, thus presenting His inexpressible being to the limited understanding of the mankind. Islam wants Moslems to develop a perpetual consciousness (taqwa) of the 'Face' or 'Self' of God that surrounds them on all sides. Islam is in parallel with the Christian Fathers in seeing God as the Absolute, who alone has true existence. So, we are back to square one. Nothing has been explained. We are still faced with 'something' inexpressible, unseen, incomprehensible, and beyond the intellectual capacity of the mankind.

Let us gon on without getting bogged down in endless and fruitless debate. Islam had its own Gnostics: The Mutazilah sect or the Mutazilis/Mutazilites. These are the ones who tried to apply rational arguments systematically to Qoran. The Mutazilites defended free will in order to safeguard the ethical nature of humanity. Moslems who believed that God was above the human notions of right or wrong were disparaging his justice. According to Mutazilites, a God who violated all decent principles and got away simply because he was God, would be a monster, no better than a tyrannical caliph. The Mutazilites declared that justice was the essence of God. He could not wrong anybody. He could not demand anything contrary to reason. Traditionists claimed that by making man the author and creator of his own fate, the Mutazilites were insulting the omnipotence of God. Traditionists maintained the doctrine of predestination in order to emphasize God's essential incomprehensibility. (Who decided on His incomprehensibility? Human beings!) If mankind claim to understand God, God could not be God but a mere human projection, the Traditionists say. (The concept of God is a human projection. So if this concept is incomprehensible mankind should ask themselves, and seek the answers to how they managed to invent such an idea). The Traditionists also came up with the idea which was also used by the Jews and Christians: God's essence and God's activities were separate. Another criticism levelled at the Mutazilites was related to the interpretation of the anthropomorphic terms like God 'speaks', 'sees', 'sits upon his throne.' Ibn Hanbal insisted that these terms should be interpreted literally but 'without asking how.' But Ibn Hanbal was himself criticised because of his approach: Qoran constantly emphasises the importance of reason and understanding. Therefore Ibn Hanbal's position was just simple-mindedness. According to many Moslems, his position was perverse and opposing the spread of knowledge. This 'knowledge' is very very important. It was not a knowledge as we understand today. It was a knowledge about the 'unknowable', about the supernatural, about the life after death, about the destiny, about the paradise and hell, about the creation etc. These are all matters out of this world, which has no relevance to our lives. Aren't you happy that human beings realized that the real knowledge is not this, but the one in the universe, in the nature itself? Otherwise we would have been still in 'darkness' seeking the immortality - Godly existence - through our prayers, sacrifices, rituals etc. Whereas today we are seeking the extension of life through medicine, in the form of prevention and treatment of diseases; through the research in genetics and science in general. Isn't this better?

This undending and fruitless debate went on and on. Moslems tried to find out whether they could speak about God like they did on other subjects. Greeks, earlier, had decided that they could not do that, therefore silence was the solution. The majority of the Moslems decided to do the same in the end.

Faylasufs (the 'wisdom seekers'; philosophers), instead of seeing God as a mystery, believed that he was the intellect. Faylasufs tried to merge their views with the main Islamic belief and ended up with the revolutionary thought inspired by the Greeks. Faylasufs' God would be discovered in the debates of logic, not in the special revelations coming to individuals. They did not see any fundamental contradiction between science and revelation and between rationalism and faith. Al-Kindi believed that there should have been an Unmoved Mover to start it all. The First Principle was Being itself, unchangeable, perfect and indestructible. When it was time to deal with creation he maintaned that Action can be defined as the bringing of something out of nothing. The ex nihilo principle. Al-Kindi maintained that this was God's prerogative. God was the only Being who can truly act in this sense and it is He who is the real cause of all the activity. But Falsafah (philosophy) came to reject creation ex nihilo later on. So in that sense Al-Kindi cannot be described as a true Faylasuf. But he was the first one who tried to harmonise religious truth with systematic metaphysics.

Ar-Razi said that only reason and philosophy could save us. Ar-Razi was not a monotheist really. He was the first free-thinker to find the concept of God incompatible with a scientific outlook.

THIS IS THE CREED

Ibn Rushd (Averroes) believed that there was no contradiction between religion and intellect. Both had different explanations for the same reality. Both were addressing the same God. But not everyone had the ability to think philosophically. Falsafah (philosophy) was only for the intellectual elite. The same Falsafah may lead to confusion among the masses and cause mistakes which would jeopardize their eternal salvation. Therefore these dangerous doctrines should be kept away from those who are not suitably fitted (Esoteric tradition in Judaism and Christianity has identical approach). Only Faylasufs were the chief authorities on doctrine. Only they were capable of interpreting the scriptures. Faylasufs were said to be the people described in Qoran as 'deeply rooted in knowledge.' Everybody should take Qoran at face value and read it literally, without any questions on why's, how's, when's etc. Only Faylasuf could attempt a symbolic exegesis. But even a Faylasuf had to subscribe to the 'creed' of obligatory doctrines. What were those doctrines? Here they are as Ibn Rushd listed:

1. The existence of God as Creator and sustainer of the World.

2. The Unity of God

3. The attributes of knowledge, power, will, hearing, seeing and speech, which are given to God throughout the Qoran.

4. The uniqueness and incomparability of God.

5. The creation of the world by God.

6. The validity of prophecy.

7. The justice of God.

8. The resurrection of the body on the judgement day.

All of these doctrines must be accepted. Averroes (Ibn Rushd) says that the world was created by God. But he does not say how or whether it was created at a specific time. Because either there is nothing on this point or if there is something it does not suit the needs of the writers of Qoran.

THIS IS ANOTHER CREED

Moses ben Maimonides (Jewish theologian) believed that Falsafah was the most advanced form of religious knowledge and the royal road to God which should not be revealed to masses but should remain the preserve of a philosophical elite. Maimonides announced a list of creed comprised of thirteen articles:

1. The existence of God.

2. The unity of God.

3. The incorporeality of God.

4. The eternity of God.

5. The prohibition of idolatry.

6. The validity of prophecy.

7. Moses was the greatest of the prophets.

8. The divine origin of truth.

9. The eternal validity of the Torah.

10. God knows the deeds of men.

11. He judges them accordingly.

12. He will send a Messiah.

13. The resurrection of he dead.

Some people put forth a doctrine which went on like this: We know that God cannot be compared to anything in existence. Therefore using a negative terminology while trying to define God is better; like rejecting the idea that he does not exist, instead of saying that God exists. This negative style will help us understand God's transcendence. If God was not deficient his acts should be perfect.

Thomas Aquinas lists five 'proofs'(!) for God's existence:

1. Aristotle's argument for a Prime Mover.

2. There cannot be an infinite series of causes: there must have been a beginning.

3 The argument from contingency, propounded by Ibn Sina (Avicenna), which demands the existence of a 'Necessary Being'.

4. Aristotle's argument from the Philosophy that the hierarchy of excellence in this world implies a Perfection that is the best of all.

5. The argument from design, which maintains that the order and purpose that we see in the universe cannot simply be the result of chance.

THIS IS ANOTHER JEWISH SUPREME BEING: EN SOF

While mysticism was progressing in Islam, Jews developed Kabbalah. The name of the God of the Jewish Mystics is En Sof. En Sof and YHWH are separate and different gods. En Sof does not have a specific name, it would be right to call En Sof 'He'. Imagine! Monotheist Jews, who are ordered by YHWH to believe only in Him (YHWH), inventing En Sof as their God. This alone reminds us again that there is no universal concept of God. Every single person has his own God.

BLAISE PASCAL : 'BELIEF IN GOD IS A PERSONAL CHOICE'

Contrary to many of his contemporaries Blaise Pascal believed that there was no way to prove the existence of God. He was unable to find any proof of the existence of God when he discussed the matter with a non-believer. This was the first move toward reason in the history of monotheism. No one dared until that day to question the existence of God. Pascal was the first person to announce that the belief in God was a matter of personal choice. Pascal has insisted that faith should be a reaosanable acceptance resting on common sense. Proving the existence of God was impossible, but rejecting God's existence with reason is also impossible. Neither the never ending debate of hundreds of years, nor reason, or accepting what the Church tradition has taught was succesful in leading mankind over the 'gulf' to the faraway God.

DESCARTES : 'THERE IS NO GOD IN THE COSMOS. IT IS IN HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS'

René Descartes insisted that the intellect alone could provide us with the certainty he sought. Faith told us nothing that could not be demonstrated rationally: Apostle Paul himself had asserted as much in the first chapter of his epistle to the Romans: 'For what can be known about God is perfectly plain to (mankind) since God himself has made it plain. Ever since God created the world his everlasting power and deity -however invisible- have been there for the mind to see in the things that he has made.' Descartes argued that God could be known more easily and certainly than any of the other things in existence. Descartes attempted to establish an equally analytical demonstration of God's existence, but he found no God in cosmos. There was no design in nature. Universe was chaotic and there was not a single sign of design, or intelligent planning. Descartes found evidence of God in human consciousness; even doubt proved the existence of the doubter! We cannot be certain of anything in the external world, but we can be certain of our own inner experience... We could not arrive at the idea of 'imperfection' if we did not have a prior conception of 'perfection.' A perfection that did not exist would be a contradiction in terms. Our experience of doubt, therefore, tells us that a supreme and perfect being - God - must exist. Descartes' God is the God of the Faylasufs, who did not interfere with the worldly affairs. This God made known of himself not through miracles, but in the eternal laws He decreed.

EVIDENCE ACCORDING TO NEWTON : 'DISTANCES BETWEEN THE CELESTIAL BODIES'

Isaac Newton found the proof of God's existence. Why don't the bodies in the universe become a single mass despite the force of gravity? Because they are scattered through the universe with sufficent distances in between. This was only possible with a powerful divine administrator.

DIDEROT : 'NO NEED FOR A CREATOR.. NOTHING BUT MATTER EXISTS'

According to Diderot there was no need for a creator. Matter was not passive and an ignoble thing as imagined by Newton and the Protestants. It has its own dynamic. What is responsible for what we see today is the law of matter. Nothing but matter exists.

HOLBACH : 'BELIEF IN GOD IS DISHONEST AND A DENIAL OF TRUE EXPERIENCE'

According to Holbach there was no supernatural alternative to nature, but an immense chain of causes and effects which unceasingly flow from one to another. To believe in a God was dishonest and a denial of our true experience. It was also an act of despair. Religion created Gods because people could not find any other explanation to console them for the tragedy of life in this world (That is only one of the reasons).

BACK TO SQUARE ONE

This is the summary of the concept of God. As Spenta Mainyu had told earlier the story does not follow a progression, it presents only instances from the never ending story of God. That's all! The story of man and his 'invented' God started side by side sharing the same environment. The human intellect was in its infancy. It was an era where the lack of knowledge, ignorance, and an assortment of human frailties had prevailed. Myths and legends tell us that in those days both Gods and mankind were happy(!) about sharing the same environment, there were no problems. But when humanity started leaving the age of myths and legends problems started. This supposedly existing God was nowhere to be seen. He wasn't heard. He supposedly had different shapes and forms, and sometimes no shape and form at all. As if this was not enough to create a confusion, some thinkers appeared claiming that God was 'nothingness,' Some even went as far as claiming that God did not exist - at least as we understand the existence. The human mind decided that this God must move to its befitting place in the sky. Another possible solution seemed to be separating the essence and the manifestation of God. Essence was beyond the reach of human intellect, but manifestations which are within the capacity of the human mind did show His existence. Existence? Where? Up there in the sky? All around the universe in a diffused form? Since He created the universe, shouldn't He be outside this universe? Does he have a shape or form, or is He just pure thought, a projection of the human aspirations? Is He within the human beings? If He is, where? In the heart? In the head? In the brain? In the mind, in the shape of personal thoughts?