Pitchforks

Weird how the pictures on two of my recent posts were from The Bride of Frankenstein

This post is about cats. If you are interested in cats, this post is not for you. If you are not interested in cats, this post is still not for you. If you found this post, this post is definitely not for you to read. I am not saying this to apply some reverse psychology where something you forbid becomes more alluring. Unironically, unless I sent this to you specifically, you aren't allowed to acknowledge that you have read it. Actually that's not exactly true. I don't know.

Put your pitchforks away before you proceed. Make sure there is a healthy distance from coals and sticks before you continue ahead. Ensure that you aren't naïve or gullible as you go ahead. More importantly, when you finish reading it, correct me. Enlighten me. I want to be corrected, schooled and learn. I am willing to learn more and be more clear about things that do not feel clear in this post. Also be warned, this writing is going to feel ambiguous too.

Like all other posts on this blog.

Before I give up the writing bug I have got right now, let me get into the main body of this writing.

Again.

Put your pitchforks kilometers away from here on forwards. I am only being cautious.

I have been having a hard time reading any books this year so far. In a desperate attempt, I have started reading three/four books simultaneously hoping that one of them would stimulate me enough to get more interested in reading them. One of these books was 'Feline philosophy'. I don't know but something about this book made me feel like it was going to be humorous. It was not. It was about philosophy. And I have nothing against that. It looks interesting. But I am just not interested in reading it right now, because I just finished another philosophy book. Nevertheless I ended up reading, one chapter-ish from the book. And I found this interesting line in the book:

"Humans philosophize for the same reason they pray. They know that the meaning they have fashioned in their lives is fragile and live in dread of its breaking down. Death is the ultimate breakdown in meaning, since it marks the end of any story they have told themselves. So they imagine passing on to a life beyond the body in a world out of time, and the human story continuing in this other realm."

Religion=Philosophy, question mark.

Duh. The month of Ramadan just passed, and I figured, I would read the Book. You know what I am talking about: the big Q (or the K, depending on how you want to translate the phonetical sound from arabic). I will not be mentioning the name, because I do not want this writing getting tagged anywhere around on the search engines with those keywords.

That might be a useless strategy though, since the rest of this writing is going to be me just talking about various verses that I highlighted. And just talking about them I guess. The reason I did this is, because I felt it was only fair I read and treat it as I treat other philosophical books, while still being respectful of its sanctity. I am going to try to refrain from any theological debates anyway. Most of the verses are going to be things I found interesting, new or ethically conflictive maybe. I do not intend to give the notion that these are the only verses that are important. Or that I do not need to read it ever again. I am fully aware, like all good books, reading it again would only divulge more meanings to these verses and accentuate bits that I glossed over the last time I read it. Since Arabic isn't my mother tongue and I don't really know it, I am going to be using translations from Sahih International and the explanations from here (This site showed me ads of a travel agency who will take me to Machu Pichu. I am not responsible if it shows you ads that may not be of the same nature, maybe don't be a weirdo while searching, eh?). Welp. The rest of this is going to be pretty boring. So if you stick by, enlighten me and correct me. Tell me how I am wrong. I am not sounding arrogant, am I?

2:14

And when they meet those who believe, they say, "We believe"; but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say, "Indeed, we are with you; we were only mockers.

Hypocrisy is one of the vices that is grimaced on anywhere in the world, regardless of the school of thought. It is disliked. I will go on a limb and say that certain belief systems that work secretly might even consider such acts of hypocrisy, deceit and treason. I am sure we have all heard and seen examples from dystopian plotlines where even stating lack of belief in something like ‘capitalism’ can get you executed. 

2:102

And they followed [instead] what the devils had recited during the reign of Solomon. It was not Solomon who disbelieved, but the devils disbelieved, teaching people magic and that which was revealed to the two angels at Babylon, Hārūt and Mārūt. But they [i.e., the two angels] do not teach anyone unless they say, "We are a trial, so do not disbelieve [by practicing magic]."1 And [yet] they learn from them that by which they cause separation between a man and his wife. But they do not harm anyone through it except by permission of Allah. And they [i.e., people] learn what harms them and does not benefit them. But they [i.e., the Children of Israel] certainly knew that whoever purchased it [i.e., magic] would not have in the Hereafter any share. And wretched is that for which they sold themselves, if they only knew.

This one is kind of cool. It tells about the origins of magic. And how jinns/devils used to eavesdrop on unknown divine information and tell it to soothsayers. After a while when the soothsayers got too trusting, the devils started mixing in lies with the real information. This perverted knowledge apparently got compiled into a book which Prophet Solomon got buried under a throne. It was dug out after his death, conveniently by people led by a devil in the form of a human, who allowed that book of Magic and falsehood to perpetuate. Then it talks about Harut and Marut. There is considerable discourse here on their identity. What is established however is that Prophet Solomon did not teach magic to the people. Instead it was Harut and Marut. Some explainers say they were merely two men in Greece, who taught magic and thus exonerated Solomon from that blame. Others say they were angels. The fact that they were angels and did wrong, is compensated by the fact that they were exonerating Prophet Solomon, and moreover they were teaching people whilst telling them that if they learn it, they are following the evil path and are straying. Thus they too were a sort of test. Quaint.

2: 169

He only orders you to evil and immorality and to say about Allah what you do not know.

This is said of Satan. I feel like this is just a good reference to come back to while discussing other verses. Also, this kind of implies that in themselves humans are good and were it not for the workings of Satan we would all be going to Heaven. Makes you think what Lutheranism and Catholicism have got going, huh?

2: 173

He has only forbidden to you dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah. But whoever is forced [by necessity], neither desiring [it] nor transgressing [its limit], there is no sin upon him. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

Does this imply everything else is Halal? Not really, if you read the tafseer and corroborate this verse with others of such nature. But it really puts in perspective how a lot of things we do not even consider food, like seagulls, are actually Halal. My palate yearns for all those exotic tastes. Vegetarians minus one, heedless consumers plus one. No, but also maybe if we expanded our taste horizons we would stop abusing poor chickens by eating them so voraciously. Then again. Look what happened to the Dodo bird.

2:222

And they ask you about menstruation. Say, "It is harm, so keep away from wives during menstruation. And do not approach them until they are pure. And when they have purified themselves, then come to them from where Allah has ordained for you. Indeed, Allah loves those who are constantly repentant and loves those who purify themselves.”

I just don’t like the implication and the words that I have seen in almost all translations, that they are not pure. Why haven’t the translators used the word, clean? Same meaning but it makes the outlook so much better. Maybe I am just being nitpicky. A bleeding Muslim soldier in war would never be categorised as impure. 

2: 235

There is no blame upon you for that to which you [indirectly] allude concerning a proposal to women or for what you conceal within yourselves. Allah knows that you will have them in mind. But do not promise them secretly except for saying a proper saying. And do not determine to undertake a marriage contract until the decreed period1 reaches its end. And know that Allah knows what is within yourselves, so beware of Him. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing.

This one might be a stretch of an explanation and inference on my part. I know this one is specifically talking about women who are in ‘Iddat’ but, could this verse also be used to enable love? And yearning? Like is it trying to tell me that it is okay if I love a woman and desire her enough to marry her? I feel like this shouldn’t even be up for discussion. Nowhere in the big Q and no reasonable belief system would shun loving. It is only the vices that stem from excess of love like lust and greed or wrath etc that are not liked. Why then the stigma over loving? And why then are we supposed to hide our love for someone like a seed buried deep in our heart, waiting for it to be caressed by the constant ache there and watered by the circulation of our blood only for it to eventually be chopped down ruthlessly.

2:286

Allah does not charge a soul except [with that within] its capacity. It will have [the consequence of] what [good] it has gained, and it will bear [the consequence of] what [evil] it has earned. "Our Lord, do not impose blame upon us if we have forgotten or erred. Our Lord, and lay not upon us a burden like that which You laid upon those before us. Our Lord, and burden us not with that which we have no ability to bear. And pardon us; and forgive us; and have mercy upon us. You are our protector, so give us victory over the disbelieving people."

The ‘dua’ in the quotation marks is so powerful.

3:90

Indeed, those who disbelieve [i.e., reject the message] after their belief and then increase in disbelief - never will their [claimed] repentance be accepted, and they are the ones astray.

This speaks to me about so many people. But the real takeaway and the optimistic approach for me after reading this verse is that as long as you end your life on belief, you should be relatively fine. Take into account then, that no matter what belief system you were born in, you can spend your entire life in hunt for knowledge and trying to find the truth. And if you strive hard enough, the truth will eventually present itself to you. It cannot be the truth if it takes too long and is too hard to be discovered. And if this is the truth, the only condition for not ending up like the state in this verse is, to be in the pursuit of truth forever.

3:154

Then after distress, He sent down upon you security [in the form of] drowsiness, overcoming a faction of you, while another faction worried about themselves, thinking of Allah other than the truth - the thought of ignorance, saying, "Is there anything for us [to have done] in this matter?" Say, "Indeed, the matter belongs completely to Allah." They conceal within themselves what they will not reveal to you. They say, "If there was anything we could have done in the matter, we [i.e., some of us] would not have been killed right here." Say, "Even if you had been inside your houses, those decreed to be killed would have come out to their death beds." [It was] so that Allah might test what is in your breasts and purify what is in your hearts. And Allah is Knowing of that within the breasts.

This presents a classic example of destiny and what not paradox. I am surprised it is not quoted more often. I want to believe that this verse tells me that my fate is sealed. It is however up to me on how I reach that fate, and what kind of moral choices I make to reach it. Which is fine. I think.

Perhaps more on this later.

4:34

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them [lightly].4 But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand

Strong oof. This is so blatant. I dont know if there is a way for anyone to finesse their way out of this and justify the slight misogyny here. Regardless, enlighten me if you think there’s more to this verse than meets the eye.

4:147

What would Allah do with [i.e., gain from] your punishment if you are grateful and believe? And ever is Allah Appreciative and Knowing.

This is perhaps one of my favorite verses. There’s no mention of any nuances or forms of worship or anything. It makes everything look so simple. All you need to do is believe and be grateful. That’s it. And if you ask me, gratitude should come automatically with belief. “And ever is Allah Appreciative and Knowing” just makes it so much better.

4:148

Allah does not like the public mention of evil except by one who has been wronged. And ever is Allah Hearing and Knowing.

The idea of reciprocity is very strong in le Book. You are only allowed to say bad things about someone if they have wronged you. You are only allowed to hurt someone back if they have hurt you. And I am sure in both cases, it is even better if you forgive or hold your tongue. This is in strong contrast to Epicureanism, where you are supposed to be indifferent to all abuse.

6:92

Not going to write the verse, but it mentions Mecca as the ‘Mother of Cities’ which is something I had not heard before. So I felt like this was worth mentioning.

7:22

Allah does not like the public mention of evil except by one who has been wronged. And ever is Allah Hearing and Knowing.

Why were there ‘private parts’ hidden by light in the first place? That’s just weird. If you say it is to make sure they don’t engage in lustful activities then may I remind you they were in heaven and they cannot technically sin there, you know, that’s the whole point. And if you say it is because they didn’t really need them. Ok, well, yes, you have a point, but also why are those ‘parts’ associated with pleasure centers in our brain? Were they not allowed to have that pleasure in heaven? Does heaven gate-keep pleasure despite being...heaven? Or was the evolution of ‘private parts’ (This is so childish) linked to pleasure centers somewhere afterwards during evolution when they were sent on Earth? Evolution proved inferentially, question mark.

7:175

And recite to them, [O Muḥammad], the news of him to whom We gave [knowledge of] Our signs, but he detached himself from them; so Satan pursued him, and he became of the deviators.

This is another story that I had never heard before from the Quran. Apparently when Prophet Moses came to Jerusalem, the people there asked a man named Bal’am to pray to Allah to send Prophet Moses away or not let him take over Jerusalem. They knew Bal’am was close to Allah but he told them that if I pray against Moses I would lose my standing with Allah in this Life and Hereafter. But the tyrants of that city kept on luring him till he buckled to their pressure and prayed against Moses, thus dooming himself. 

7:188

Say, "I hold not for myself [the power of] benefit or harm, except what Allah has willed. And if I knew the unseen, I could have acquired much wealth, and no harm would have touched me. I am not except a warner and a bringer of good tidings to a people who believe."

I will come back to the theme in this verse again. But really the important idea that I felt was worth mentioning here and countless times else is that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was nothing but a warner. A news bearer. That’s it.

Surah 9: Al- Taubah

This surah is often quoted a lot by Non-Muslims because it talks about how Muslims should deal with the Non-Believers. I didn’t highlight any specific verse from this Surah, simply because I didn’t find any worth talking about. It is only when I finished it and started the next one, did I realise that I didn’t read ‘Bismillah’ before the last surah. So does my apathy and disinclination to find it remarkable mean that this is a low-effort writing? Or am I already conditioned in the Jihadist way and you are merely reading my transition into a full-fledged extremist? You pick whatever feels likely.

10:12

And when affliction touches man, he calls upon Us, whether lying on his side or sitting or standing; but when We remove from him his affliction, he continues [in disobedience] as if he had never called upon Us to [remove] an affliction that touched him. Thus is made pleasing to the transgressors that which they have been doing.

This is just Allah saying straight up facts, and calling us all out openly like that. Take this moment to be grateful and thank Him for all the times you got out of a bind. 22:11 does the job too.

10:88

This is Prophet Moses praying against OR cursing the Pharaoh which is interesting, because I didn’t think the Prophets were supposed to do that. Apparently even Propeht Noah does it in 71:26-27. What is even more interesting is their curses getting accepted/okayed by the Higher Power. Really makes you think about all the stuff they could have changed with their words.

11:118

And if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community; but they will not cease to differ,

Why not?

I think there is a verse where there is talk about how even the Muslims will be divided into numerous factions by the Day of Judgement. Why is that? Surely it cannot be because the Guidance you sent is ambiguous. It is not, there is no argument over it’s interpretation (right?). Then is it because of man’s own search for power and the need to form smaller factions to gain power and autonomy over a group of people and fraternise with them? Maybe. I don’t know. You tell me.

12:31

So when she heard of their scheming, she sent for them and prepared for them a banquet and gave each one of them a knife and said [to Joseph], "Come out before them." And when they saw him, they greatly admired him and cut their hands  and said, "Perfect is Allah! This is not a man; this is none but a noble angel."

This verse is so (I used a f-word here in my thoughts but I’ll omit it from here for divinity’s sake) powerful. It is such a strong example/anecdote, or whatever you want to call it. I am definitely going to talk more about this and other such examples later in this writing. If this were not in this Book but in some other less entitled book, it would be such a raw and oft-quoted paragraph. It’s so good. No matter how many times I read this, it won’t lose its power. Imagine being so transfixed by someone’s beauty that you forget you are cutting lemons and accidentally cut your fingers. And imagine coming up with this plan to prove how the person you had fallen for was out-of-this-world beautiful. Couldn’t be me.

15:16

Indeed, We have placed constellations in the sky, and adorned it for all to see.

Nothing to see here, just me thanking God for doing this.

24:31

And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment [i.e., beauty] except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess [i.e., slaves], or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

Sigh. This ain’t the move. The only logic I can see behind this is, you do not want people to get unnecessarily provocated into lustful actions. Which is kind of dumb, considering we are not apes and monkeys. We are slightly evolved and have slightly more self-control. But I get it. He created us. He knows what is in our hearts. And knows how much self-control we are capable of. But, then could He not also have made us more stoic and less inclined to fall prey to passions? Like, again I don’t see the point in this. If you are going to ask one group to hide themselves but it still does not guarantee their safety, then what’s the point? Would it not have been better to just pump up the self-control in the initial recipe? But what do I know. I am not wise.

24:34

Do you not see that Allah drives clouds? Then He brings them together; then He makes them into a mass, and you see the rain emerge from within it. And He sends down from the sky, mountains [of clouds] within which is hail, and He strikes with it whom He wills and averts it from whom He wills. The flash of its lightning almost takes away the eyesight.

Beautiful imagery and description.

25:53

And it is He who has released [simultaneously] the two seas [i.e., bodies of water], one fresh and sweet and one salty and bitter, and He placed between them a barrier and prohibited partition.

This is going to shatter the world of WhatsApp uncles who share pictures of different colored waters with this verse as the caption. I googled and the first answer said something about a French explorer which sounded like bullshit to me. So I went to the Tafseer, and that makes so much more sense. 

Apparently this verse isn’t about two separate bodies of waters with an invisible barrier between them. Rather is it Allah making us count the blessings by telling us that the sweet water flows and we can drink from it, as it is fresh. While the stationary water bodies like seas are intrinsically stable, and salty. But they may have tides in certain seasons that ebb and flow thus making sure that the air in the world is constantly fresh and doesn’t turn putrid. It also makes sure that the dead of the sea do not float up to the surface and stay there. 

This explanation is a little boring, but it does feel more true.

26:224

And the poets - [only] the deviators follow them;

I am going to use this verse to segway into Imr-ul-Qais: the madlad. He has some really lewd and sexually charged poems. I am not going to talk about them here. I feel like they deserve separate writing some other time. Maybe the whole of Mu’Allaqah does. In any case, Imr-ul-Qais revolutionised the poetry scene in Arabia, so much so that when the big Q was revealed, people thought that such fineness in wording could not have been by anyone but Imr-ul-Qais and they went to falsely allege that certain verses were straight up copies from his works. No proof was found however. If you are interested and shameless enough, hit me up and I’ll tell you about his shameless love story with Unayzah.

27:20

And he took attendance of the birds and said, "Why do I not see the hoopoe - or is he among the absent?

Just taking this opportunity to show you this beautiful bird that was an envoy of Prophet Solomon.

29:2

Do the people think that they will be left to say, "We believe" and they will not be tried?

Also probably one of my favorite verses.

Rookie mistake guys. 

:)

31:27

And if whatever trees upon the earth were pens and the sea [was ink], replenished thereafter by seven [more] seas, the words1 of Allah would not be exhausted. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.

Stealing this description when I run out of paper the next time in my letters, but not things to say. Cool imagery.

35:42

And they swore by Allah their strongest oaths that if a warner came to them, they would be more guided than [any] one of the [previous] nations. But when a warner came to them, it did not increase them except in aversion

Very true. Probably more on this later. I think. Remind me if you read this and haven’t addressed this elsewhere.

37:62

Is that [i.e., Paradise] a better accommodation or the tree of zaqqūm?

The Zaqqum tree is a tree rooted in Hell and fuelled by Hellfire. It’s just a terrible thing if you really want to imagine it. I couldn’t help but make the association of this tree and it’s description found in the Tafseer with the Yggdrasil from Norse Mythology. But Yggdrasil is the Life Tree. This isnt. 56:52 mentions the tree again.

38:82

[Iblees] said, "By Your might, I will surely mislead them all.

The most irksome part about this verse is: “By Your might”. In some translations the word might is replaced by Glory. Which is even more thought provoking. The Tafseer also did not talk much or clarify this much except mentioning other verses of a similar nature or those where Allah promises to fill Hell with Jinns and mankind till it is full 32:13 & 17:62. I don’t really want that. I want to talk about how it is clearly said here that it is only by His power that Satan will fill Hell with people. That if it weren’t for Him, Hell would be empty. We earlier saw the verse that pointed out humans do not sin except when triggered by Satan. And here we see it being mentioned that Satan does it through His might. This brings about the age old problem about monotheism and omniscience: “If God is All-Powerful, He is not all good. If He is all good, He is not All-Powerful.” This verse negates the second part of that statement. He is All Powerful. Then the question is, why does He allow that to happen. I suppose it is me asking the same question I asked earlier in why mankind had to be divided. Why is it that some of mankind had to go into Hell? One way of answering this is by saying that He is All-Powerful, and our fates are already written. And He knows what we are going to do. And for that purpose to help us reach our fates by the right way He sent warners. If we still mess up, then we go to the bad place. Does the logic hold? I suppose so.

49:17

They consider it a favor to you that they have accepted Islām. Say, "Do not consider your Islām a favor to me. Rather, Allah has conferred favor upon you that He has guided you to the faith, if you should be truthful."

I think that now this verse might be more for the self-righteous mullahs and the people who make the argument that they will do a certain religious act like say worship only because someone asked them to. They are not doing anyone any favors. Not the ones forcing beliefs and not the ones who do it for others. If you do it, you are doing it for yourself. For purely selfish reasons. It should be for yourself. Nobody else needs it, nobody else is actually going to be affected by the strength of your belief. I am not saying you aren’t allowed to preach but to really corner someone into following the same things is no bueno.

53:1-2

By the star when it descends,

Your companion [i.e., Muḥammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,

The star mentioned here is the Pleiades

57:27

Then We sent following their footsteps [i.e., traditions] Our messengers and followed [them] with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy and monasticism, which they innovated; We did not prescribe it for them except [that they did so] seeking the approval of Allah. But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.

Here the implication that the Christians not only invented stuff in their religion but then themselves did not even follow those properly implies that being morally good in itself has some merits even if the fundamental beliefs like Tauheed are compromised. And although they might not be enough to guarantee passage into heaven but it doesn’t hurt to be generally virtuous. TLDR, be good?

66:1-5

Tells an event from the Prophet’s life. To be honest just mentioning it because it’s an anecdote I had not heard before. Check it out if you want to from any of the tafseers. Nothing too mindblowing.

69:44-46

And if he [i.e., Muḥammad] had made up about Us some [false] sayings,

We would have seized him by the right hand;

Then We would have cut from him the aorta.

Just like the wording, the idea and the tone behind these. The fact that the aorta or ‘al-Watin’ is mentioned and how the Prophet can’t make up stuff because he’s enlightened by Allah himself.

109:6

For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."

I have always liked this verse. Despite its simplicity, it is lyrical. And despite it’s straightforwardness it speaks so much more. I also think it is neat how this is the last verse that I specifically highlighted. There’s definitely something to say on how it is in the last part and then one of the last surah’s of the Quran. This verse just sums it up beautifully. Despite everything, you do not have to force your religion or even your version of beliefs on someone. If you are on the right, and you know it, good for you. You are not bound to carry a stick or a mic and blare out what you think is right. You have no compulsion to rectify someone. At the end of the day, and the end of the world really, everyone will reap what they sow. If someone believes they follow the truth, and their truth is dubious for you, and yet they are not willing to change their mind then you aren’t bound to change them. And it really ties in neatly with a concept of stoicism that I have had a problem thinking about. This is a long stretch regardless but the idea that someone might be beyond help even if you only want the best for them and then giving up on them after recognising that your efforts won't make a difference is an idea that is mentioned multiple times in stoicism.

**

I know I know. You are pining to get your pitchfork back. You are saying Mehwar please I want to hold it again, how much longer is this going to go?

If you just wanted to tell me that you tried being a good Muslim, you didn't really succeed because you are being exhibitionistic about your virtue. And you aren't exactly being pious with your words. Whatever else you tried isn't even evident. Maybe you just wanted to vomit some words, Mehwar. Or perhaps you just wanted to feel entitled by saying you've accrued all of this knowledge when in reality, you've only pasted stuff you've read elsewhere or paraphrased other people's work and literature. It's fine. You've done that too and much. Its time now. Let us go.

Let me reunite with my pitchfork and torches and my very easily bent opinion and inability to question anything or think uncomfortable thoughts. I want to stroke the wooden shaft and feel the icy cold touch of the metal prongs. Can I please bring it closer to me now?

And to that I say,

Just wait a little longer

**

There are a couple things that don't really came to me from specific verses. They were themes or ideas that I found frequently reoccurring or thoughts I had while reading it.

Firstly some of the Surah names, I really liked. The sound of those Arabic words. I don't know why I haven't ever noticed that before. But I found myself trying to figure out why a certain Surah was called that, while reading it. 

I also noticed this pattern that there were Surahs like the Surah of the Poets. And others like 50, 51 were all written in short smoothly flowing phrases. So when you read it whether in Arabic or English, it comes out like a single symphony. These parts specifically made me appreciate the language and the tone of the Book. And how fundamentally each verse is a poetic verse. I think this is perhaps also why Arabic speakers find so much more beauty in it's recitation than others.

I cannot stress this enough but the stories in it are so powerful. They are enough in themselves to convince any man. As someone who has read a lot of books and loves the concept and deifies the power of stories, this is a goldmine. I believe that stories can change our worlds and make our perspectives fresher and change us quite frankly. And where this is a Book of philosophy, it is also a Book of stories, supposedly true stories. I wanted to make an index of all the anecdotes and the people and the places and the terms. But by the point I got that idea, I had already past the half way point of the Book and I might have still pushed through until I got swamped by other work that felt more important at that time and now feels stupid. The story of Prophet Younus; of the Bani Israel; of Prophet Yousuf; Ibrahim; and Isa and Zulqarnain and so many others. Each and every single one of them in itself is a powerful literary device. Maybe sometime in the future I will index them. Someone on the internet has probably already done it.

Now to some gritty connotations. One fundamental problem with theology and specifically Divine Books is that they are always making use of the 'Carrot on a stick' method. If you do the right thing/ walk the right way, you'll get the carrot. If you falter or stray, you will be hit by the stick from which the carrot is dangling. And you are supposedly ravenous for carrots. I have heard it said that the fact that such techniques are applied automatically void any worth these belief systems have because they are playing off of the human concepts of pleasure and reward. They are so to speak hacking the system. What makes them particularly even more fraudulent is the fact that you can't see neither the carrot nor the stick. They count on your belief to not only adhere to the guidelines but also on your imagination to convince you that the consequences are real. This should make religion a hard-sell. However, it is clearly not. Which should tell you that there is really a Greater Power out there, deserving our veneration. Or that the human psychology really needs an anchor to function properly as a society. I have deviated so much from my point. While reading le Book, I felt like there was no carrot. And no stick. There were only options. There was no compulsion on you to pick one, or associate one with good and the other with bad. The Book only tells you about what to do. And what the possible consequences are of your actions. And you might say, but oh, isn't it implied that unless you follow the book, you will reach the bad consequences. Duh! It does. It wouldn't be a manuscript of philosophy if it wasn't trying to sell itself. Every book on philosophy makes you end up believing that unless you follow that school of thought, you are the worst vermin to walk on the surface of earth and you deserve a fate worse than Kafka's Insectoid man in 'Metamorphosis'. To sum up, is there a carrot? Yes. Is there a stick? Yes. Do you have to obligately follow the principles laid down to reach one or the other? No. Do you really have to continue reading this? No.

And this is an amazing transition into what I want to talk about next. Countless times it is mentioned that the Holy Prophet is nothing more than a warner. I mean the word messenger says it in itself. I don't understand why it has to be embellished. It is just a person who gives a message. What makes them stand out is that they were virtuous enough to receive revelations. They didn't create anything. Like us, without His power and will, they could not do anything. It is He who made everything possible. And I think this is something not only the Christians in regards to Jesus but also Muslims should understand better that at the end of the day, he was just the (last) Messenger of Allah. Maybe what makes him better is the fact that unlike the rest of humanity, he didn't just preach, or wasn't all talk and no action. He showed the people through his Sunnah and Hadith how to act on the Divine messages he was receiving and transmitting forward. This shows the potential that the Book has if we are able to implement on it for even a fraction of it's teachings. Nevertheless, it is Allah who sent the Message in the first place which is apparently perfect and all the other adjectives (Please it's late and I am trying to finish it without omitting any crucial thought or point I have jotted down).

And that provides me with another amazing shift into the next and the last (I heard you visibly breath a sigh of relief) thing I have noted down here on my trusty Van Gogh mini diary that is more annoying than useful because its binding is so strong, it keeps on closing in on itself. The aspect I wanted to write about was the Muslim nation. I think we are really lucky and also really unfortunate at the same time. We are lucky because we got all these perfect products, right? There are going to be no more modifications after this. We are not supposed to wait for anyone. We got the final thing directly from the right person. There is technically no combination or permutation here to corrupt things up like other religions ended up doing. All we have to do is follow the guidelines, which is admittedly not that easy. Once we've done that, we are pretty much set for the figurative carrot. Conversely, we are also unlucky because unlike the other nations, there's little margin of error for us. We do not have a second chance. There will be no one coming to revise the core concepts or update us with new information. No one will come to warn us and tell us that you are on the wrong path. There will be no Divine intervention destroying some town which erred too much, but it is a town that you have heard about, and now you have seen His wrath first hand. There will be no such thing for us. Not evidently. We have to keep ourselves updated and apply this Book that is supposed to be complete with all knowledge that humanity will need till the end of time using Qiyas and Ijma on current world and ethical issues. 

You know what, and that is fine. I am going to end here, because really that is the point of this really long poorly written Book review. If you are one of those people that scroll till the end before reading something, STOP AND READ THIS RIGHT NOW: You don't have to read any of that. Just don't stop learning. That's it. That's my TED Talk. I had read the big Q before but never this way, and I learnt something. Did it make me a better Muslim? maybe not. Did it make me a better human? Arguably, yes. For I believe that any gain of knowledge is always going to put you closer to the truth. I sound so sanctimonious and full of bullshit. What the fuck is happening to me? Is this the first F-bomb? Am I going soft in old age? Oh dear God.

You know it's not complete till I have said my absolute favorite line from the Book:

"Get a load of this guy! Making WhatsApp styled quotation pictures and posting them!! He's really gone off the rocker this time"

******

Hey! Did you guys get your pitchforks back?

And did you figure out yet that the devil is characteristically shown to be holding a pitchfork?

Oops

Vanitas

 

I have read a lot of philosophies and even more stories. There are many things to learn and take away from both of these information sources, and one of those is their concept about death. 

Ideally we want to be not scared of death. There should be no qualms about life's fleeting nature and the transience of this life's possessions and its enjoyments as well as worries. Death is an inevitable destiny. It is the redeemer at the end of this dark tunnel that time marches us across forcefully with a stick. It's arms are wide open, ready to kiss you; to embrace you and make you hers forever. 

Theology would want you to believe that there's life after death and there's more to death than just this life. It paints death as a gateway from one form to another. It takes away the sting from death by making it transitory like life on this world. However the silver linings of these beliefs end here, because it adds 'rung main bhung' by letting you know that the life you're currently living is a test of sorts. My sincere apologies for being presumptuous if you are a zombie, a ghost or any of the other undead reading this. The blogger stats fail to take you into account, or maybe you're all from some hamlet in Portugal because I really do not have any other explanation on why on earth somebody from Portugal would be tuning in to read this 'gob smack of desultory paraphernalia'. Anyway, almost all religions want you to think your life as some kind of an evaluation and the results dictate what will welcome you after death. Obviously sometimes good actions can lead to rebirth as a better creature in some beliefs, sometimes it is just peace and sometimes you get in to the good place (or the bad place; you can never be sure how good, your 'good' actions were). My point being, it is hard to take death seriously when it is only a doorway. And it is hard to take life seriously if the place the doorway leads to cannot be verified. Or if you aren't even sure there is a place afterwards at all. Which is why I think theologians have the hardest time explaining and reaffirming the significance of death.

Most of rest of philosophy (yes theology is a philosophy too), usually deals with life without taking into account the presence of an Omniscience or by negating the presence and talking about an absence of one. Some philosophy fetishizes death while some of it takes it to the next level by glorifying anti-natalism or non-existence. Some of it yet again talks about death as a gateway. But I want to exclude all of those definitions and only factor in the philosophies where death is agreed upon as an inescapable fact. It is the ending. There is nothing after it. And that is alright.

Maybe I just wanted to write the stoic idea of death but didn't want to mention exactly that it is the stoic idea I want to talk about. Too late now.

For some reason, I have found it really hard to come to terms with the finality of death. Maybe that's not the right wording. Let me bare myself of the fancy words and come clad to you in words like 'things', 'stuff', 'many', 'all' and 'good'.

I have no problem with dying. If I were to die tonight, I would die with no regrets. I wouldn't think of all the missed opportunities or all the things on my to-do lists (who needs bucket lists when you have to do lists filled with menial tasks, am I right or amirite?). I have no issues worrying about the state in which people might find my affairs. I do not care about the conditions in which I will die too. In the same manner, this conviction about death, still does not propel me to be ambitious or achieve great tasks in the fear that I might die tomorrow. Perhaps when you make peace with dying, you also make peace with the fickleness of life and the well that your ego is. No matter how much you throw in there, it will never fill up. It is wise to leave it as is. Maybe draw from it when needed though. I digress. Death also doesn't hold a charm over me. I do not want to die. I have been brought into this world, and although that isn't the best of things to happen to me or anyone for that matter, but it has happened. There is no reverting back to my embryonic form and going back into the womb. One does not simply do the Benjamin Button. So, I have been brought here, I might as well live, but when I die, I will die and that's fine. I'll go. I won't let my death feel like a piece of silk cloth stuck on a thorny desert plant to my soul. Hopefully. And you might be wondering, well what's the problem then. Why do you find it hard to come to terms with the finality of death.

Herein lies the problem. I think it comes from my long lasting need for validation and external approval. Or just the thought that I wont be enough. The other day, I got to bed after a particularly normal day. Maybe even a pleasant day. And just before I slept, a train of thoughts choo-choo-ed it's way into my brain. And suddenly, blank mind. Four words. In big red colored Times New Roman font. 

You are not enough.

I might have started crying like a little pussy boy. Thankfully, the dogma came in handy. I told myself, I don't have to be enough for anyone except myself. Everyone else I just have to accept. And I can easily be enough for myself tomorrow by doing 3 out of the 100 tasks in my petty works to do lists.

I take so many winding routes before coming back to the topic. As I was saying; death. My only issue with dying, or the only thing I want modified is that I want a credits scene after my death. I want to know who directed, produced and wrote this C class movie. No seriously though, I want to be able to see what happens after I die. Maybe a week or a month or a day. How everyone I loved behaved on hearing about my death? Or more importantly did they know I loved them? Did they love me back? A part of me wants to ruin a couple lives by dying. The other part wants people to live their life unnoticed after my absence, save for the little photograph frame on their bedside that will remind them of me. Even in movies when rarely the main character dies, they show what happens to all the side characters. That's all I am asking for God, an epilogue type scene. I also want to know what happens to all my belongings, and how someone reacts after finding some unpublished half written writings in my phone notes. All of this makes me come out as deeply insecure maybe. I also understand that these things matter to me more as I live because of my conscience and ego, but when I die, and these elements scamper away from my self then technically they shouldn't matter any more. This last sentence possibly also reveals that this entire writing is wrongly titled and themed, and the problem might as usual be more intricately related to life and how I deal with it, instead of death.

I am not sure if I know the fix for this pattern of thought. Any ideas about death and life's fragility cannot be of much help here, I think. The change has to come from within like all effective and permanent changes, and it has to associate my relatively stable concept of death with this idea of wanting closure after death.

The funny thing about all of this is we do not know. We do not know. Maybe people do get closure after death and we simply do not know. It might be in the form of loss of any factors that make you care for any of this stuff.

Or, and this is a long shot:

Maybe there is a ephemeral personal cinema waiting for us just past our graves, with cosmic popcorns and neutron sodas. There are no crying babies or parents asking when the movie will be over, or friends trying to prove their wit by making ill-timed jokes. No one is going to ask you to give way "please". You don't have to really pee suddenly because you drank the large cup of the overpriced soda. There are no inconveniences. The movie is titled 'Your Life', and I want to believe that you came to watch the 'epilogue' but after watching the entire movie, the epilogue doesn't really matter.

(Final holler to my undead audience from the middle of the bumfuck in Russia or Portugal, if any of this is true, let me know.)