April 07, 2008
Posted under Voice of the West
Of Human Bondage
Qur’an on the Subject of Human Slavery to God
I found strong support in the Qur’an for the concept of human slavery to God.
“Slave” seems to be the closest translation to the expression “‘Abd” that the Qur’an uses frequently to define the role of humans in relation to God Almighty. Both etymologically, which means analyzing the roots and origins of words, as well as contextually, by which I mean the specific context in which the Qur’an uses that expression, I am quite satisfied by that rendering. I mean the rendering of the Qur’anic expression “Abd” in English as “slave.”
God, on the other hand, is Rabb – Master. He is the maker. And everyone else is a fully owned “slave.”
Cherisher, nourisher, sustainer, provider, keeper, maintainer and every other description of that kind follows from that basic premise.
But the bottom line is that God is the sole master and proprietor and humanity is the fully owned slave. The relationship, therefore, is one of master and slave.
Simple Logic of God’s Ownership of Humanity and the World
The logic of divine ownership of the world and all that it contains is a most simple one. God Almighty is the owner and master of the world and everything in it by right of invention, creation, concept, design, manufacture, patent, management, maintenance, claim, repair, recall and the rest.
If someone has got time, and is serious, these things can be fairly sustainably discussed at greater length, provided intentions are pure on both sides, and provided an attempt is made on all sides not to waste time or hide behind tired clichés, and provided no side is after scoring cheap points at the expense of the other.
The overall argument of limited human potency and capability for self-sustenance is a fairly strong one.
“Abdan Mamlookan,” is how the Qur’an describes a fully owned slave.
“Laa Yaqdiru ‘Alaa Shaiy,” is how the Qur’an describes the total inability of such a wholly owned slave to do anything by himself, without help from his master.
These are empirical statements whose validity is clearly and easily demonstrable. It is simple science and logic.
God, Chance or Fate: It Is Your Call
I am not saying you can put God in a laboratory. All I am saying is that human inability to invent itself, or to sustain itself indefinitely, or to totally transcend the limitations of time and space as well as the vagaries of circumstance and situation, including the working of the natural forces that operate in the universe, is not a matter of dispute or speculation, it is a self-evident fact.
No human being lives a 1000 years. No one can fly in the air without appropriate gadgetry and instrumentation. No one can breathe underwater.
It is God Almighty who makes all things possible for humans to live their life on earth. Atheists and unbelievers can call it Chance. They have every right to do that. But what they have no ability to do is to be able to show or prove that there is no God.
That means if the believers cannot show there is a God the unbelievers also cannot show there is no God. It is thus a perfectly level playing field, on which both sides are evenly matched. And that is exactly the way God wants it.
As a result, what no one in the world can dispute or question is the utter and absolute dependence of humanity on something beyond itself. That is what the believers call God and the unbelievers refer to as Chance.
Or Fate if you will.
Thus, God, Fate or Chance, ultimately it is your call. And the outcome of the game of life for you – both in this world and the next world – and for a lot of others around you, depends on the call you make.
Inherent Human Helplessness
Forgive me for saying this, but anyone with any sense can see the degree to which utter helplessness is inherent in the human condition.
How much evidence and how much logic, support and argument do we need to prove this most obvious and self-evident of facts?
If Shakespeare had had time, or if he had known Islam and Muslims better than he quite probably did, he would have said something like: “Humanity, Thy Name Is Frailty and Helplessness!”
I am saying “he quite probably did,” because how else did he come up with the title or story of Othello, the Moor?
Moor, indeed!
The British had to hedge on the question of Islam and Muslims, didn’t they, even though they got rich not only plundering Muslim lands and treasures but also selling Muslims as slaves for generations.
And how could Shakespeare have built Venice, the European gateway to the Muslim world, into his plays the way he did and not be aware of what lay beyond the gates of Europe?