192. Thoughts of Al-Ghazali. Part one

Ghazali( born 1058 A.D.) was a mystic philosopher, like Saint Augustine ( born 354 A.D.). One is struck by his questioning mind. We are fortunate that he wrote an account of some of his thoughts. Although he wrote many books, some encyclopedic, but I am concerned only with his spiritual autobiography ‘al-Munqidh min al-Dalal’(‘Deliverance from Error’) (1). Why? Because it is an autobiography, and I try to write almost exclusively from autobiographies or from biographies written by mystic’s contemporaries, because mystics don’t lie. St. Augustine wrote his autobiography (‘Confessions’) in fourth century. There is a gap of seven centuries, till Ghazali and Daata Gunj Bakhash ( born 1010 A.D.)(2) wrote their respective autobiographies in 11th century.

In the beginning of his book Ghazali states that he was born with an inquisitive and questioning mind. He questioned the assumption that the religion that he practiced^___Islam, was the only true religion. Why did he question this general belief? Because he made the observation that the children follow their parent’s religion. Infants born to Christian parents become Christians, and the children born to Jews, as they grow up, embrace Judaism, and babies born to Muslim parents stick to Islam. Therefore, he argued, that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism were not inherently superior to one another; rather it all depended upon blind chance^____ where  one was born and brought up, factors beyond one’s control.

He also came upon a hadith (saying  of Holy Prophet^PBUH ) that “each infant is born with a natural fitra ( inclination)” (Towards a particular religion? ). Then probably his parents make him Muslim, Christian or Jew ( this mote’s addition). What is this mysterious fitra? From where did it originate? And most crucially why is it different from one another in infants born to different religious parentage? Ghazali never discusses it in his autobiography.

Two points must be mentioned here by this mote. Almost nine hundred years had to pass before DNA was discovered. An infant’s genes (made of DNA and they determine one’s hereditary traits) are derived from his parents; half from his father and half from his mother. Ghazali had no way of knowing it. This is the mysterious fitra, derived from one’s parents.

Second point is that almost all modern Muslim scholars now believe that everybody is born as Muslim: whether his parents were Hindus, Christian, Jews or atheists, whether he was born in Alaska, Europe or Russia, and whether he was born recently or three thousand years ago^___ before the Holy Prophet Muhammad ^PBUH. Thus, everybody has a Muslim fitra.

At any rate, Ghazali decided to find out that how much of religion was based upon blindly following parents and teachers , and how much on other factors ( inherent superiority of one religion over others, fitra, etc)

Since from the same primary observation Ghazali also realized that the truth (I am using truth as a loose term, what I mean is the path chosen by God) of a religion cannot be ascertained from the arguments, logic and practices of various religions, because every person accepts those arguments which support that person’s particular religion (he/she is conditioned like Pavlov’s dogs) and rejects those which support another religion. There is an inherent appeal to followers of one religion with a practice or belief, whereas the same practice is abhorrent to the votaries of another religion. For instance, according to Muslims, to worship a statue of a diety/god (idolatry) is the highest sin that a human can commit (making  a statue equal to God ), but this worship is carried out by over one billion Hindus.

Therefore, Ghazali realized that he cannot just be content with Revealed knowledge (revealed by God and stored in religious scriptures) but will have to search other sources of knowledge. He came upon three main sources and several minor sources:

(1)    Sense-data. Nowadays we would have called it Science

(2)    Philosophy

(3)    Sufism

 

Sense-data .All knowledge in the world (except revealed knowledge) is received through senses. One sees one’s mother’s face, sun, bird, flower, and water, indeed everything by one’s eyes. One hears ticking of clock, song, voice of a friend, indeed everything through one’s ears. Same is true for taste, smell and touch; there are sensory organs for them. What if the information provided by senses is wrong, then the knowledge would be wrong. Can it happen? Ghazali thought about it. He made a protracted effort to doubt sense-data. He took the example of stars. They look small like a dinar (a coin) but there were clear geometrical proofs that they were bigger than the earth. Our senses led us astray. One could furnish similar examples about all senses.

However there was another kind of data; self-evident truths. An example of self-evident truth would be that ten is bigger than three. If a man converts stone into gold and a stick into snake, in front of us, but proclaims that three is bigger than ten, we would not believe him, despite his miracle.

Ghazali doubted sense-data but he could not doubt rational data of self-evident truth.  One day his mind spoke up, “what assurances have you that your reliance on rational data is not like your reliance on sense-data?.....”

“Don’t you see that when you are asleep you believe certain things and imagine certain circumstances and believe they are fixed and lasting and entertain no doubt about their status? Then you wake up and know all your imagining and beliefs were groundless and unsubstantial”

 

To be continued

 

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

 

(1)    ‘AL-Ghazali’s path to Sufism, his deliverance from error’. “Al-Munqidh min al-Dalal”. Translated from the Arabic by Mccarthy. Prefaced by Burrell. Introduction by  Graham

(2)    ‘Kashaful- Mehjoob’ by Daata Gunj Bakhash

 

 

 

 

192. Thoughts of Al-Ghazali. Part one

Ghazali( born 1058 A.D.) was a mystic philosopher, like Saint Augustine ( born 354 A.D.). One is struck by his questioning mind. We are fortunate that he wrote an account of some of his thoughts. Although he wrote many books, some encyclopedic, but I am concerned only with his spiritual autobiography ‘al-Munqidh min al-Dalal’(‘Deliverance from Error’) (1). Why? Because it is an autobiography, and I try to write almost exclusively from autobiographies or from biographies written by mystic’s contemporaries, because mystics don’t lie. St. Augustine wrote his autobiography (‘Confessions’) in fourth century. There is a gap of seven centuries, till Ghazali and Daata Gunj Bakhash ( born 1010 A.D.)(2) wrote their respective autobiographies in 11th century.

In the beginning of his book Ghazali states that he was born with an inquisitive and questioning mind. He questioned the assumption that the religion that he practiced^___Islam, was the only true religion. Why did he question this general belief? Because he made the observation that the children follow their parent’s religion. Infants born to Christian parents become Christians, and the children born to Jews, as they grow up, embrace Judaism, and babies born to Muslim parents stick to Islam. Therefore, he argued, that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism were not inherently superior to one another; rather it all depended upon blind chance^____ where  one was born and brought up, factors beyond one’s control.

He also came upon a hadith (saying  of Holy Prophet^PBUH ) that “each infant is born with a natural fitra ( inclination)” (Towards a particular religion? ). Then probably his parents make him Muslim, Christian or Jew ( this mote’s addition). What is this mysterious fitra? From where did it originate? And most crucially why is it different from one another in infants born to different religious parentage? Ghazali never discusses it in his autobiography.

Two points must be mentioned here by this mote. Almost nine hundred years had to pass before DNA was discovered. An infant’s genes (made of DNA and they determine one’s hereditary traits) are derived from his parents; half from his father and half from his mother. Ghazali had no way of knowing it. This is the mysterious fitra, derived from one’s parents.

Second point is that almost all modern Muslim scholars now believe that everybody is born as Muslim: whether his parents were Hindus, Christian, Jews or atheists, whether he was born in Alaska, Europe or Russia, and whether he was born recently or three thousand years ago^___ before the Holy Prophet Muhammad ^PBUH. Thus, everybody has a Muslim fitra.

At any rate, Ghazali decided to find out that how much of religion was based upon blindly following parents and teachers , and how much on other factors ( inherent superiority of one religion over others, fitra, etc)

Since from the same primary observation Ghazali also realized that the truth (I am using truth as a loose term, what I mean is the path chosen by God) of a religion cannot be ascertained from the arguments, logic and practices of various religions, because every person accepts those arguments which support that person’s particular religion (he/she is conditioned like Pavlov’s dogs) and rejects those which support another religion. There is an inherent appeal to followers of one religion with a practice or belief, whereas the same practice is abhorrent to the votaries of another religion. For instance, according to Muslims, to worship a statue of a diety/god (idolatry) is the highest sin that a human can commit (making  a statue equal to God ), but this worship is carried out by over one billion Hindus.

Therefore, Ghazali realized that he cannot just be content with Revealed knowledge (revealed by God and stored in religious scriptures) but will have to search other sources of knowledge. He came upon three main sources and several minor sources:

(1)    Sense-data. Nowadays we would have called it Science

(2)    Philosophy

(3)    Sufism

 

Sense-data .All knowledge in the world (except revealed knowledge) is received through senses. One sees one’s mother’s face, sun, bird, flower, and water, indeed everything by one’s eyes. One hears ticking of clock, song, voice of a friend, indeed everything through one’s ears. Same is true for taste, smell and touch; there are sensory organs for them. What if the information provided by senses is wrong, then the knowledge would be wrong. Can it happen? Ghazali thought about it. He made a protracted effort to doubt sense-data. He took the example of stars. They look small like a dinar (a coin) but there were clear geometrical proofs that they were bigger than the earth. Our senses led us astray. One could furnish similar examples about all senses.

However there was another kind of data; self-evident truths. An example of self-evident truth would be that ten is bigger than three. If a man converts stone into gold and a stick into snake, in front of us, but proclaims that three is bigger than ten, we would not believe him, despite his miracle.

Ghazali doubted sense-data but he could not doubt rational data of self-evident truth.  One day his mind spoke up, “what assurances have you that your reliance on rational data is not like your reliance on sense-data?.....”

“Don’t you see that when you are asleep you believe certain things and imagine certain circumstances and believe they are fixed and lasting and entertain no doubt about their status? Then you wake up and know all your imagining and beliefs were groundless and unsubstantial”

 

To be continued

 

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

 

(1)    ‘AL-Ghazali’s path to Sufism, his deliverance from error’. “Al-Munqidh min al-Dalal”. Translated from the Arabic by Mccarthy. Prefaced by Burrell. Introduction by  Graham

(2)    ‘Kashaful- Mehjoob’ by Daata Gunj Bakhash

 

 

 

 

167.foreword

167. Foreword

 

Mkadk presents part four of my ‘Journey towards the Great God’. It is a collection of blogs 134-166. I have made no further advance in my quest. It has gradually dawned on me that I have two missions; first mission is to reach God, and the second is to invite others to the Light of God. As of now, I have failed in both missions. The door of God is still closed and I have not awakened the love of God in anybody. Those who are worldly, do not read my blog, or books, or listen to my poems on YouTube. They are not interested in God. Those who are religious are happy in their own rituals. They do not have an inner thirst for spirituality. They praise God, they thank God, they pray to God, they are afraid of God, but they do not love God. They are not even attached to God. They do all those things as a habit, in an absent minded way. Those who are devout worshippers do not need my book because they are quite content, and may get nearness to God in their own way. Only two persons have really liked my books, and praised them, but they are already far advanced in mysticism, much more than I. One of them, Shah Sahib, said, “He should not concern himself about approbation from others; he has been assigned a task, he should just do it.”

 

Whatever I wanted to convey to others has been completed. In these four books I have attempted to answer all the riddles which had perplexed me for years. I will keep on writing more blogs, but they will be about men and women of God or of books, but not about complex subjects. Here is a summary of those topics that I have covered:

1. There are eighteen blogs on God (blogs 97-114).

2. There are three blogs on mysticism, as I understand it (blogs 93-95)

3. There are nine blogs on Fate versus Free will (blogs 134-142)

4. There are six blogs on the systems created by God for the governance of this world (blogs 143-148)

5. There are three blogs on development and critique of religions (blogs 149-151)

6. There are twelve blogs on dark night of the soul (blogs 39-50)

 

Some things have to be added about the proof of God, as provided in my blogs. Without the existence of God, one cannot explain the creation of universe, prophecies about future events, miracles, answer to prayers, and the existence of spirits of dead people. Atheists scoff at these five arguments. They call it “God of gaps argument”. What they mean is that science cannot explain certain things, such as those I have mentioned. They say, these are gaps in our knowledge. That does not mean there is God who is the perpetrator of them, therefore, they are not proofs of God. We, the scientists, are working on these gaps. May be in another five hundred or a thousand years, we will have satisfactory scientific explanation of them.

 

Although I do agree, as I have mentioned in blog 146 (Reply of Einstein), that these supernatural events must be carried out by some yet undiscovered laws, because that is the way of God; everything follows laws, created by Him. Therefore, in a sense, nothing is supernatural. However, even if a thousand years from now we discover the new laws explaining these occurrences, they will still point to a Supreme Mind.

 

The obstinacy of atheists astounds me. They follow two basic assumptions, without any absolute requirement or logical reason to adopt them, as if they were some self evident truths, such as that an elephant is bigger than an ant. These two assumptions are: There is no God, and Revealed knowledge is not true knowledge because it is not testable. All their hypotheses regarding these five supernatural phenomena are based on these two rules that they have adopted. Let us examine some of them.

 

1. God created the universe, because nothing can be created from absolute nothing (discussed in detail in blog 101). Therefore atheist scientists said; No! Universe must have been created from nothing, since we, the scientists, believe that there is no God (and that is an inviolable, unshakable fact to us). A scientist Alan Guth called the universe, an ultimate free lunch.

2.   Bertrand Russell said“...The universe is just there, and that's all.” That means there is no origin of universe. So, Russell denies the current understanding that the universe started from a Big Bang 13.8 billion years ago, and stars and galaxies gradually evolved.

3. David Hume, a Scottish philosopher, said that there are no miracles, because miracles violate laws of nature, which is impossible. It is just superstition. St Augustine relates the miracle of incorrupt dead bodies (blog 160):

“God revealed Bishop Ambrose, in a vision, where the bodies of martyrs Protasius and Gervasius were hidden.  All these years (over two hundred) You had preserved them incorrupt.”

 

Saint Augustine was far from a superstitious fool.

 

4. The chance of intelligent life to arise is 1 followed by 117 zeroes (see blog 153). This is an extremely small chance. The answer by atheist scientists is; have infinite universes. Infinite has 1 followed by infinite zeroes( trillions, googol, googolplex or even more zeroes ), at least  in one of them ( one out of 10¹¹⁷) everything would be exactly right, and intelligent life will emerge.

We cannot fathom one universe. Consider having infinite universes! Who created them? It reminds me of world of fantasy. Create whatever you want, in your mind, and call it a hypothesis, without an iota of data. Keep the mantra; no God, no revealed knowledge.

 

Coming back to the beautiful world of spirituality. God is not a supposition to the great mystics and prophets, because they have actually experienced God. Some have actually seen the light of God, although it had deleterious effects on them. Moses and Saint Paul and Shah Sahib saw it. Moses fell unconscious. Paul became temporarily blind. Shah Sahib (his original name is Noor Alam), a Sufi mystic, told my brother, that he can see the light of God in his mind’s vision, with closed eyes. This mote has written three blogs on Shah Sahib ( 153-155).

These scientists must pause for a minute and realize the absurdity of their denial of a Creator, because it requires three suppositions: universe was created from absolute nothing; intelligent life emerged by itself, against insurmountable odds; and all these dozens of incidents which I have narrated must be wrong and these persons must be liars. It is as if a man was hit three times with lightning on his three birthdays

 

St Augustine could not answer the question that how prophets could see future (blog 159). He wrote:

“For it is utterly impossible that things which do not exist should be revealed. The means by which You do this is far beyond our understanding. I have not the strength to comprehend this mystery, and by my own power I never shall.”

 This mote has attempted to answer this riddle. See explanation 6 in blog 141 and further discussion in blog 142.

Fifteen years and two months have passed since the start of my journey towards God

 

Mkadk

 13^th February, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

163. Saint Augustine. Part Five

 

St Augustine did not perform any miracles (he might have but he did not record it in ‘Confessions’). However there are some incidents which are miraculous.

 

1. Episode of the voice in the garden, which led to his conversion. I have already narrated it.

 

2. He developed toothache. The pain was so great that he could not speak. He asked all his friends who were with him to pray to God for him. He wrote down the message and gave it to them to read, and as soon they all knelt down to offer to God their humble prayer, the pain vanished. He writes:

 

 ‘What was that pain? How did it vanish? My Lord and my God, I confess that I was terrified, for nothing like this had ever happened to me in my life. Deep within me I recognized the working of Your will.’

 

3. St Augustine writes: “God revealed Bishop Ambrose, in a vision, where the bodies of martyrs Protasius and Gervasius were hidden (see the footnote). All these years (over two hundred) You had preserved them incorrupt.”

 

4. While the bodies were being carried, on the way, several people who were tormented by evil spirits were cured. There was also a man who had been blind for many years, a well known figure in the city. He asked why the crowd was running wild with joy, and when they told him the reason, he leaped to his feet and begged his guide to lead him where the bodies lay. When he reached the place, he asked to be allowed to touch the bier with his handkerchief.  No sooner had he done this and put the handkerchief to his eyes, his eyesight was restored. The news spread.

What do the followers of David Hume, the Scottish philosopher, say about this episode? St. Augustine was there in the city of Milan. He would not have recounted it unless it was authentic. He may even have witnessed it. Augustine was a highly rational man, as is clear from his struggle to understand time, astrology, and how prophets could see future. He was not likely to suffer from what Hume calls ‘superstitious delusion’.

 

5. I have already recounted the visions of Monica; crossing of Mediterranean Sea, and Augustine and she on the wooden rule when she saw a young man in a halo of splendor.

 

Astrology. People used to consult sorcerers and astrologers, frequently, in St Augustine’s time. Young Augustine did not go to sorcerers because he did not want the sacrifice of any living thing to learn the future, but he frequented astrologers. He became friends with a wise old man. When the old man learnt that Augustine was an enthusiast for books of astrology, he told him to throw them away and waste no further pains upon such rubbish. He asked him why it was that the future was often correctly foretold by means of astrology. He gave him the only possible answer that it was all due to the power of chance.

St Augustine still did not give up astrology, but he started to have doubts.

One day a friend, Firminius, told him a story. The father of Firminius and a friend of his father were deeply interested in astrology. So much so, that they would note the exact time of birth of their domestic animals and studied the position of stars at the time of birth. When Friminius’s mother was pregnant, a female slave was also expecting a child. The two men made the most minute calculations to determine the time of labor of both women, counting the days, hours, even the minutes, and so it happened that both gave birth at exactly the same moment. This meant that the horoscopes which they cast for the two babies had to be exactly the same. If the horoscopes were the same, their lives should be the same!

The one baby born of a rich family had a good life. His wealth increased and high honors came his way. But the slave continued to serve his masters. His lot never improved.

This story made the final end of St Augustine’s doubts.

Later on, he considered astrologers as imposters

 

 

Footnote. The sons are said to have been scourged and then beheaded, during the reign of the Emperor Nero, under the presidency of Anubinus or Astasius, and while Caius was Bishop of Milan. Some authors place the martyrdom under the Emperor Diocletian, but others object to this time, because it is not clear how, in that case, the place of burial, and even the names, could be forgotten by the time of Saint Ambrose, as is stated. It probably occurred during the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius (161-180)

 

St Ambrose in 386 had built a magnificent basilica at Milan, now called the Basilica Sant'Ambrogio. Asked by the people to consecrate it in the same solemn manner as was done in Rome, he promised to do so if he could obtain the necessary relics. In a dream he was shown the place where such relics could be found. He ordered excavations to be made outside the city, in the cemetery Church of Saints Nabor and Felix, who were at the time the primary patrons of Milan, and there found the relics of Saints Gervasius and Protasius. In a letter, St Ambrose wrote: "I found the fitting signs, and on bringing in some on whom hands were to be laid, the power of the holy martyrs became so manifest, that even whilst I was still silent, one was seized and thrown prostrate at the holy burial-place. We found two men of marvelous stature, such as those of ancient days. All the bones were perfect, and there was much blood

Source: Wikipedia: St Protasius and Gervasius

162. Saint Augustine and Time. Part Four

 

What is time?

 

 St Augustine pondered over this question. Why did he ponder over this question? Because, he pondered over another question first. How have the prophets been able to predict future events?

A modern man, even if he was a thinking man, like David Hume, an 18^th century Scottish philosopher, would simply deny that prophets could do such a thing (Hume did not believe in anything supernatural). However, Augustine believed in it.

 

If prophets could tell future then it exists somewhere, but future cannot exist since it has not been made yet. Now, I hope you realize Augustine’s difficulty. Let me quote his words from his book (1):

 

‘As a boy I learnt that there were three divisions of time, past, present, and future. But there might be people who would maintain that there are not three divisions of time but only one, the present, because the other two do not exist. Another view might be that past and future do exist, but time emerges from some secret refuge when it passes from future to the present, and goes back into hiding when it moves from present to the past. Otherwise how prophets see the future, if there is not yet a future to be seen? It is impossible to see what does not exist.

In the same way people who describe the past could not describe it correctly unless they saw it in their minds, and if the past did not exist it would be impossible for them to see it at all. Therefore both the past and the future do exist!’

 

Is St Augustine contradicting himself? No, he is simply thinking loud and exploring various theories. He is trying to think which of the two is true, three divisions of time or only the present, and secondly he is trying to figure out how could prophets see future?

He observes very succinctly, “How can two, the past and future, be, when the past no longer is and the future is not yet?”

At one point he even questions whether present exists. He writes: “ How can we say that even present is, when the reason it is is that it is not to be? In other words, we cannot rightly say that time is, except by reason of its impending state of not being”

 

He observes the other attributes of time: it is never still, that it derives its strength only from a great number of movements constantly following one another into the past; once it becomes past it ceases to be. The present has no duration (see footnote 1)

He arrives at a very important conclusion, that the past and future wherever they are and whatever they are, it is only by being present they are.

This is a subtle point, that we do not see past and future as such, both have to be converted to the present.

He floats a theory ( I do not know whether that was his final conclusion about prophecies ) about how future may be foretold. Sometimes future events give a sign of things to come. For instance, one can tell that the sun is about to rise by witnessing the break of day. Nowadays, this theory will not carry any weight. Weather forecasters do it every day. What we are discussing, are future events that cannot be predicted by any scientific means.

He cannot solve this mystery. He surrenders. He writes:

 

“For it is utterly impossible that things which do not exist should be revealed. The means by which You do this is far beyond our understanding. I have not the strength to comprehend this mystery, and by my own power I never shall.”

 

 He asks God for help (see footnote 2)

 

“My mind is burning to solve this intricate puzzle. O Lord my God, good Father………..I long to find the answer. Through Christ I beseech You……..Let Your mercy give me light”

 

He disagrees with some men who says that time is nothing but the movement of heavenly bodies (one rotation of sun makes a day and a night). He argues that everything moves in time, it is not that their

 movement constitutes time.

 

Finally he states his solution. Remember, he had made an important point which I have already mentioned; that the past and future wherever they are and whatever they are, it is only by being present they are. We do not see past and future as such, both have to be converted to the present.

 

He carries this point to its logical conclusion. Where is the place where past and future exist, as present? The answer is; in the mind. Past is memory, present is attention, and the future is expectation.

 

British Philosopher Bertrand Russell did not agree with his analysis, because it made time something mental (2)

 

He still did not solve the riddle that how prophets had been able to predict future.

____________________________________________________________________________________

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ (1) ‘Confessions’ by St Augustine

(2) A history of Western philosophy by Bertrand Russell

Footnote 1. Smallest unit of time is a Planck time; 10^-43 seconds. It is the time for the light to take to travel a Planck length.

Footnote 2. This mote also begged God to help him to understand how future can be foretold, by giving him such an experience. I quote from blog 142; “this mote prayed to God, even today, a way to access the future, at least for once, so that I can then say that I have myself seen some future event. For me, at least, then it won’t be hearsay”.

 

 

160. Saint Augustine. Part two; Conversion

 

St Augustine carried on his pursuit for worldly gains and passions till he was 32 years old. He taught the art of public speaking to pupils. He was studying for the law. He was at the top of the school for rhetoric. He was pleased with his superior status and swollen with conceit. He was vain and ambitious and wanted to cut a fine figure in the world. He was eager for fame, wealth and marriage. He consulted imposters, the astrologers (although he refused to consult sorcerers because they sacrificed animals and prayed to spirits). He went to the theatre and watched the spectators enjoy their sadness, by witnessing the tragedy and suffering on the stage (although to his credit, he never liked the gladiatorial shows because of the cruelty).

He described himself: ‘But why do I talk of these things? I lived in misery, like every man whose soul is tethered by the love of things that cannot last and then is agonized to lose them’

 

 He was a slave of lust. He had a mistress and together they had a son. After she left him and went back to Africa, he found another mistress. He describes those days:

 

 “I had prayed to You for chastity and said ‘Give me chastity and continence, but not yet’. For I was afraid that You would answer my prayer at once and cure me too soon for the disease of lust, which I wanted satisfied, not quelled”

 

His dear friend died. He mourned for him. He narrates his grief in eight pages ‘What madness, to love a man as something more than human! What folly to grumble at the lot man has to bear! I lived in a fever, convulsed with tears and sighs that allowed me neither rest nor peace of mind’

 

He wondered about the powers the astronomers possessed; they could foretell eclipses of sun and moon many years before they happened, and whether the eclipse would be total or partial.

 

But he still searched for truth. He read many books, including Aristotle’s ‘Ten Categories’. He talked to many learned men but none could satisfy him. He writes:

 

‘Truth! Truth! How the marrow of my soul within me yearned for it’

 

And finally, he met a man of God; Bishop Ambrose, in Milan (now called St. Ambrose), who was known throughout the world for his goodness. He writes: ‘Unknown to me, it was You who led me to him, so that I might knowingly be led by him to You. This man of God received me like a father…….My heart warmed to him’.

 

Although he could not talk to Ambrose face to face, because the Bishop was always busy, but at least, over a period of time, after listening to the sermons of Ambrose he turned towards Catholic teaching. He writes:

 

‘I was glad too that at last I had been shown how to interpret the Holy Scripture of the law and the prophets in a different light from that which I had previously made them seem absurd’.

 

He narrates a strange incident. It is not clear whether it was day or night, and whether he was asleep or awake.

 

‘I entered the depth of my soul…….I saw the Light……….. What I saw was quite different from any light we know on earth…... It shown above my mind……... It was above me because it was the Light itself that made me, and I was below because I was made by it. All who know that Light, and all who know this Light know eternity’.

‘I heard your voice calling from on high, saying “I am the food of full-grown men. Grow and you shall feed on Me. But you shall not change Me into Your own substance, as you do with the food of your body. Instead you shall be changed into Me’”

 

He now started loving God! But he was amazed that he did not persist in enjoying Him. He began to search the means to gain strength in enjoying God. He found the strength through the mediator between God and men, Jesus Christ.

He derived great joy and comfort in writing of Apostle Paul.

 

This mote has learnt that if one adopts the path of religion to reach God (which unfortunately I could not) then due to certitude the task becomes easier. St Augustine makes this point:

 

‘It is one thing to catch sight of the land of peace……and unable to find the way to it, struggle on through trackless wastes where traitors and runaways, captained by their prince,……lie in wait to attack. It is another thing to follow the high road to that land of peace, the way that is defended by the care of the Commander’.

 

Two mystics (Shahab and the mystic from Bhaun, Pakistan, blogs 65-6,103) have written in their books, that they were never assailed by doubts.

 

Now, the chain of events which led to the most important event of his life; the episode of the garden.

 

To be continued.
mkadk2012@gmail.com

159. Saint Augustine. Part One

 

What impresses a person the most about St. Augustine is his love for God, and his habit of thinking. Both are overawing. He had a towering intellect. He pondered over things which most people take for granted and never give a second thought.

 

He wrote the book ‘Confessions’ in 397-8 (1), which is considered a classic in spiritual literature. Whatever I am going to write about him is taken from this book (except my personal opinions), and is therefore 100% authentic. We may differ from his opinions, but we cannot doubt his sincerity. He is unduly harsh upon himself throughout his book. Some of the things for which he criticizes himself so severely were sort of trivial. For instance he and his friends stole pears from a neighbor’s tree. He did not even eat them. He was just a boy of sixteen, swept under peer pressure, to make mischief. Nowadays, it won’t be considered stealing but the rowdy behavior of a bunch of teenagers. But look at a sample of what he says, and carries on in four pages:

 

‘It is certain, O Lord, that theft is punished by Your law………..For no thief can bear that another thief should steal from him, even if he is rich and the other is driven to it by want. Yet I was willing to steal, and steal I did, although I was not compelled by any lack….. a greedy love of doing wrong. For what I stole I already had plenty………and I had no wish to enjoy the thing I coveted by stealing, but enjoy the theft itself and the sin’.

 

Let us take the first point; his love for God. Every page of this 347 pages book, mentions the magnificence of God and his love for Him. Sometimes dozens of time in a single page. Let me give you an example; book 1:

 

“Who will grant me to rest content in You? To whom shall I turn for the gift of Your coming in my heart and filling it to the brim, so that I may forget all the wrong I have done and embrace You alone, my only source of good?

Why do You mean so much to me? Help me to find words to explain. Why do I mean so much to You, that You should command me to love You? O Lord, my God, tell me why You mean so much to me. Whisper in my heart, I am here to save you( Psalm, 34:3 )………….I shall hear Your voice and make haste to clasp You to myself. Do not hide Your face from me, for I would gladly accept death to see It, for not to see it would be death indeed”.

 

He is talking to God, all the time, in this book. He is telling Him his problems. He is confessing his sins. He is begging for His mercy. He is thanking Him for all the things that He has given him. He is asking him to show him light on some of the thorniest issues of all times; such as, where does sin come from? What is Time? How to reconcile passages of Bible to the scientific discoveries of his time? How were the prophets able to predict future events? He asks for His help to conquer lust, his major weakness.

 

The sentence that I highlighted (Why do I mean so much to You, that You should command me to love You?) carries an extremely important point in mysticism. I want to explain what St. Augustine meant.

 

What he is saying is that God need not have bothered Himself about him. He is just one human amongst billions of humans on planet earth, which is one of perhaps hundred billions planets in our galaxy, which is one of a hundred billion galaxies. It is God’s mercy to note Augustine and help him. God could have kept on doing what He was doing, but He paused and helped Augustine. This mote, only recently, understood God’s mercy, His kindness, in noticing this speck. We, lovers of God, think that our love somehow compels Him, as if He likes flattery (see footnote). Yogananda said as much in his book (2), that God is drawn to the tears and sighs of a lover of God. Nothing compels God; He just takes pity on His devotee. My interpretation is that God likes a true devotee, because he cares about God and not the world and is different from others. Such persons are rare, perhaps one in a thousand. Their desire to reach God is noticed by God. How does God help them?

 He puts, in their heart, love for God. And that is what St Augustine meant.

 

So the sequence of events is somewhat like this: A person wants to be near God and prays for it repeatedly, God notices it, God takes pity on him, and He puts His love in his heart. The love for God gives great strength to the person, and he travels on the path towards God despite tremendous difficulties and sorrows.

 

To be continued


mkadk2012@gmail.com

 

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­________________________________________________________________________________

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ (1) ‘Confessions’ by St Augustine, Penguin Edition

(2). ‘Autobiography of a Yogi’ by Yogananda

Footnote. This mote has written approximately 6 blogs on Daata Gunj Bakhash, the 11^th century mystic buried in Lahore, Pakistan. I once asked, through somebody, an exalted saint who communicates with spirit of Data Sahib, that did Data Sahib like my blogs. The saint replied that Daata Sahib is beyond these things. Surely then, God is beyond censure or praise.