|
Antidote to Modern Nihilism: The Qur’anic Perception of Time
|
|
|
A
painting by Salvador Dali, 'Soft Watch at the Moment of
First Explosion', 1954.
|
The
problem with history is intractability: it proffers an obscure, if
not a totally opaque, vision of the human condition. Whether
conceived as a record of human past or perceived as the matrix of
human existence, history, as science and as philosophy, reveals the
unfathomable ends of Man.
As science, it collapses before the question of meaning; as
philosophy it exhausts itself overcoming the antinomies of reason.
While to be human and to strive for a meaningful existence is to
impose on the infinity of the world a structure and a form, to
bestow it a finitude and a temporality, the paradox is that such a
partial world of history and society can only be constructed from
some premonition of the whole. It can only be derived from a
cosmology that is trans-societal and trans-human. History, in other
words, acquires its meaning from a perspective which itself is
meta-historical. Or, at least, this was true of all traditional
civilizations.
History,
in other words, acquires its meaning from a perspective which itself
is meta-historical. Or, at least, this was true of all traditional
civilizations.
|
|
Modernity
however is a different breed. As culture, it creates its meaning by
obdurately refusing to scan beyond the horizons of man and by
confining the meaning of history to history itself. Little wonder
that by so doing, it also abandons the quest for the ultimate
meaning. Despite the lusciousness of its empirical pastures, the
modern epistemological project thus ends in the normative wasteland
of nihilism. All modern discourses, notwithstanding their dissimilar
disciplinary moorings and disparate ideological assumptions, amply
testify to the suffocating embrace of nihilism which wrecks all
modern courtship with the ‘historical truth’. Indeed, even
modernist Islamic thought, resolutely committed to preserving a
normative vision, seems unable to avoid the unsettling gaze of
modern nihilism.
It
is now generally recognized that the biblical concept of history,
when freed of its transcendent moorings and secularized, inaugurates
the reign of relativism and nihilism. Nihilism, of course,
represents the reverse side of the modern, secularized
consciousness; the obverse one, which is displayed far more often as
the real face of modernity, reflects the conflict between science
and religion, reason and faith; or between secular history and
redemptive history (Heilsgeschichte). The upshot of this nihilism
however is that the story of humanity becomes ‘a tale told by an
idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.’ In stead of
the humanity, it is the nation that takes on the challenge of making
history and of defining the goal of collective existence. For, while
partial history, history as the march of a nation or a state in
time, may retain some semblance of meaningfulness, universal history
(Weltgeschichte), history as the story of humanity, looses all
claims to meaning when viewed empirically and without the imposition
of any pre-conceived pattern. It opens up that fateful divide
between the real and the rational, between history and theory that,
pace Hegel, cannot be overcome. Consequently, world-history either
remains a philosophical theory that is without any collateral in
actual history; or it becomes a historical chronology that is devoid
of all normative meaning. In short, on closer reflection, ‘the
philosophy of history’ reveals itself either as history and facts,
or as philosophy and norms. No wonder that from within the
perspective of secular history, from the cognitive premises of
immanentism, the antinomy of norm and history can never be overcome
and the demons of relativism and nihilism can never be defeated.
The
upshot of this nihilism however is that the story of humanity becomes
‘a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying
nothing.’
|
|
True
enough, the revelation is presented in the Hebrew Bible as the
participation of God on the side of the Israelites in actual
history. Such a claim was instrumental in fostering a view of
history (of a specific nation) as sacred. Or, as expressed by a
modern philosopher: ‘Since biblical times, the Western,
Judeo-Christian world has found Transcendence in history. This has
happened for better: in the midst of human historical world was
found a Transcendence other than human and higher-than-human which
gave meaning, if not to all of history, so at any rate to crucial,
epoch-making events in it.’ (Emil L. Fackenheim: ‘Transcendence
in Contemporary Culture’, in H.W. Richardson & D.R. Cutler
(Ed.): Transcendence, Beacon Press, Boston, 1969. P. 144.) Leaving aside the moral discomforts of a universal
God taking sides in history, or the logical incoherence of
transcendence within immanence, there’s no denying that not only
is the biblical proclivity for historicizing the truth, or
sacralizing history, always under the assault of the immanentist,
secular consciousness (the sin of idolatry in its own parlance), it
also becomes vulnerable to the judgment of the empirical vision,
once the latter has freed itself from its sacred moorings. Or,
stated differently, as long as the premise that God has a special
covenant with the children of
Israel
remains valid, biblical history retains both its ‘historicity’
and legitimacy. However, once that premise is set aside, as happens
in the Enlightenment’s secularized version of the universal
history, the truth of the Bible itself comes under the scrutiny of
historicizing sciences which, paradoxically, care nothing for the
kind of transcendence which is the sine qua non of the biblical
vision of history.
Fortunately,
the Qur’an has a view of history, revelation, truth and man that
avoids the conundrums and aporias of biblical Heilsgeschichte. To
start with, the Qur’anic perspective, whether theological,
cosmological or anthropological, is that of unity. However, this
unity is not ontological; for God remains distinct from his
creation, but it is a unity of purpose, goal and meaning that all
are expressions of God’s will. From this perspective, both the
concept of history and that of nature appear problematical.
The created world (nature) and the temporal one of man (history) are
certainly real, indeed even indispensable for the fulfilment of
man’s mandate of vicegerency. Nevertheless, the Greek concept of
“nature”, whether postulating a self-contained, self-sufficient,
self-regulating universe, or signifying the intrinsic disposition of
a thing to obey immanent laws, is alien to the Qur’anic worldview.
The world exists, according to the Qur’an, not due to any
intrinsic necessity but because of the gratuitous act of a
transcendent will: it is radically contingent rather than naturally
necessary. The same is true of history: the very concept of history
– pure immanence and temporality that is self-referential and
immediately accessible - is missing in the Qur’an. History does
not have any claim to any autonomous inner logic which must perforce
follow its logical course. Whatever its other benefits, such a
deterministic view of history is compatible with man’s moral
freedom.
The
world exists, according to the Qur’an, not due to any
intrinsic necessity but because of the gratuitous act of a
transcendent will: it is radically contingent rather than naturally
necessary.
|
|
As
befits the transcendental worldview of the Qur’an, the addressee
of its discourse is a universal, archetypical and trans-historical
human being. Even the covenant that God has with man is primordial
and is contracted prior to the advent of the historical time. Man
enters his/her historical existence only after submitting to the
sovereignty of God (7:172). Further, Adam, the first man, stands for
all humanity and inasmuch as he is recognized as the first prophet,
mankind has never been without divine guidance. Hence, when the
Qur’an speaks of historical men and women, especially former
prophets, it does so without the least regard to chronology. The
Qur’an does not concern itself with the historical succession of
messengers and prophets but with the proclamation of the unity of
the trans-historical revelation. Neither does it make any
distinction between former prophets. The unity and identity of
divine guidance, available to all prophets and preached by all of
them, renders all historical, ethnic and geographical distinctions
superfluous.
The
very notion of faith, Islam (Surrender to God) also presupposes a
trans-historical and transcendent disposition of man (fitra).
Surrender to God is not something that may be realized, gradually
and progressively, within the flux of time. It is an instant
decision of the individual soul: one either surrenders
himself/herself to God or one doesn’t. Consequently, God’s
guidance (huda) is not a progressive march towards a single,
climactic event, but a here-and-now that is forever eternal, forever
available to every human soul. Thus, a modern Muslim may confidently
pronounce that the Qur’anic idea of revelation is
trans-historical:
‘It
is also impossible on the basis of the goal and mean (of divine
guidance) to construct a history of salvation which is gradually
realized either in a Christian or non-Christian [secular] sense,
neither Muhammad (S) nor the Muslims thought of such a possibility.
For the Koran recognizes no original sin and no corresponding
redemption; hence it presents no salvation history comparable to the
Christian tradition. But if salvation is understood, as it is in the
prophetic religions, as “the individual’s encounter through
faith and grace with a personal God”, then salvation is contained
precisely in the human surrender to God (Islam) and that divine
guidance (huda) which according to the Koran remains or should
remain forever unaltered by time and history. Accordingly, there’s
no reason to conceive of revelation as something temporal or
historical.’ (Abdoldjavad Falaturi: ‘Experience of Time and
History in Islam’, in Annemarie Schimmel & Abdoldjavad
Falaturi: We Believe in One God. Burns and Oates,
London, 1979. P 65. Emphasis added).
Far
more radical than the Qur’anic disregard of history as a chronicle
of events, is its perception of time. Time, according to the
Qur’an, is not the perpetual flux that results in a linear or
cyclical conception of temporality, but an eternal present that
always carries with it the possibility of surrender to God (Islam).
Again, the Greek term for times, Xronos, which is usually translated
as zaman (not of Arabic origin) does not occur in the Qur’an. The
proper expression for time in the Qur’an is, of course, waqt.
According to Falaturi, an analysis of the term shows that ‘it does
not imply progressive enactment, and that it has no regulatory
character, as is the case with Xronos (zaman), a character which
every concept of history presumes as its basis. Waqt is rather
spatial, a self-enclosed, static, unalterable where of an event…..
In waqt, …. [in] an ever-present area of events created by
God, all events are independent of one another, yet have a direct
relation to their omnipotent, omnipresent Creator.’ (pp. 68-9). It
is the consciousness of the transcendence of God which shatters, as
it were, the fluid temporality of ordinary experience into an
infinity of static ‘nows’
Another
comment by a perceptive non-Muslim also reinforces this insight
about the ‘atomistic’ nature of the Qur’anic temporality.
Commenting on Surah 18 (Al-Kahf), Norman O. Brown, a non-specialist
on Islam but a celebrated American thinker of our age (1913-2002),
makes the following statement: ‘Massignon calls the Sura 18 the
apocalypse of Islam. But sura 18 is a résumé, epitome of the whole
Koran. The Koran is not like the Bible, historical, running from
Genesis to Apocalypse. The Koran is altogether apocalyptic. The
Koran backs off from that linear organization of time, revelation,
and history which became the backbone of orthodox Christianity and
remains the backbone of the Western culture after the death of God.
Islam is wholly apocalyptic or eschatological, and its eschatology
is not teleology. The moment of decision, the Hour of Judgment, is
not reached at the end of a line, nor by a predestined cycle of
cosmic recurrence; eschatology can break out at any moment. Koran
16:77: “To Allah belong the secrets of the heavens and the earth,
and the matter of the Hour is as the twinkling of an eye, or it is
nearer still.” In fully developed Islamic theology only the moment
is real.” (Norman O Brown: ‘The Apocalypse of Islam’, in
Apocalypse and/or Metamorphosis. University
of
California
Press, 1991. P 86.) Brown is also cognizant that the rejection of
linearity involves rejection of narrative and that ‘the Koran
breaks decisively with that alliance between the prophetic tradition
and materialistic historicism – “what actually happened” –
which set in with the materialistically historical triumph of
Christianity.’ (87). Finally, in his judgment, ‘Islam is
committed by the Koran to project a metahistorical plane on which
the eternal meaning of historical events is disclosed.’ (88). Or,
returning to our own query, the transcendent worldview of the
Qur’an is not affected a whit by the cognitive haggling between
archaeology and the Bible which.
In
postmodern times, however, the grand narratives of both the Christian
redemptive history (Heilsgeschichte) and the Enlightenment’s
universal history (Weltgeschichte) have been abrogated by the new
logic of globalization and Empire.
|
|
The
cult of history is a modern heresy, just as the philosophy of
history is a supremely arrogant and narcissistic form of reflection
on the meaning and goal of western civilization. In postmodern
times, however, the grand narratives of both the Christian
redemptive history (Heilsgeschichte) and the Enlightenment’s
universal history (Weltgeschichte) have been abrogated by the new
logic of globalization and Empire. The message today is that history
has come to an end and the current hierarchy of powers represents
the permanent state of humanity. And yet, humanity’s search for a
meaningful, moral existence has not come to a halt. It is the
Muslim’s duty to delineate the Qur’anic vision of history and
time – the purpose and meaning of human existence - in such a way
that it acts as an antidote to the modern form of nihilism which is
the principal source of the spiritual and moral anguish of our
times.
Dr.
S Parvez Manzoor is a Sweden-based Muslim writer, thinker,
and critic
|
