On Piety, Knowledge & Muslims : Part 2

Piety & knowledge of God  

Piety comes from the knowledge of God. The question here is, if someone doesn’t have knowledge of God, does it mean they are by default deprived by God from attaining other branches of knowledge? 

Before we go further into our assessment of piety and knowledge another question needs to be explored: is knowledge independent of God? Or in other words let’s say as believers are we saying God only awards knowledge only to those who believe in him?

History suggests otherwise and we know many knowledgeable men were blessed with knowledge irrespective of their belief in God. The list is very long: Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), Michel Foucault (1926–1984), Karl Marx (1818–1883): John Rawls (1921–2002): Bertrand Russell (1872–1970): Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860): Sigmund Freud (1856–1939): Stephen Hawking (1942–): Alfred Nobel (1833–1896): Alan Turing (1912-1954) Francis Crick (1916-2004), Noam Chomsky (born 1928-) to name a few.

I observe many Muslims not keen at all in exploring the knowledge these scholars have contributed to advance humanity as a whole, depriving themselves of crucial knowledge from many fields and indulging in an ocean of ignorance by restricting themselves with religious texts. Yes this is a mere generalisation and I am aware of some Muslims who are indeed objective in acquiring knowledge, but they are not the mainstream and are fewer in numbers.

Piety & Living by Gods Instructions

The second condition of piety I mentioned was the importance of living by God’s instructions. One needs to understand God’s teachings before following it. We have all sorts of complexity here and history is blood-spattered with contentions of what God’s message is and how to understand and comprehend His instructions. Preserving, interpreting and understanding God’s first testament (Torah), second Testament (Bible) or Final testament (Quran) revealed to his messengers dominates religious and political history of the world, since Moses received the 10 commandments in Mount Sinai about three thousand years ago.

I would argue that in understanding God’s instruction it is important to remember the basics philosophy of knowledge as I have defined above. The changing of context and the time of enquiry is of paramount importance here. Otherwise we risk calling that object in the desert blue and disregard that it had to embrace different colours later on. It is important for new observers to renew their observation than rely on the previous observer’s descriptions and ignore the reality it confronts.

To a large extent comprehensive knowledge is independent of knowledge of God and rather God’s message is heavily dependent on human interpretation, linguistic ability, history, scientific evolution, understanding interactions, societal evolution, psychology, economy, geography, mathematics, astronomy, biology and every other branch of knowledge you could think of.    

Another relevant question here is: what about those who believe in God but failed to comprehend God’s instruction, hence live an irreligious or in other word ‘impious’ life. Does this mean that by default are they are deprived of any kind of knowledge?

All three hypotheses on the knowledge of God, living by God’s guidance and being moral require comprehensive knowledge and are not entirely subjective to piety. 

Being Moral

The third element of piety is the perception that by believing in God and following his instruction, someone becomes moral and this is the only path to true morality. Is human morality dependant on religious belief or believing in God? Many atheists would say no and embarrassingly can show evidence for it. But I would like to look at it from believers’ perspectives. As believers can we claim that God is unable to allow his creation to distinguish between good and bad and award morality irrespective of their belief in his existence? Of course not, thus morality exists and is not dependent on any spiritual or religious belief. God made it inherent for His creation - as it seems. In many war torn countries non believing aid workers are a great example of this and also the indiscriminate killing of them by the so-called believers of the scriptures shows the irony of this.

This is why the whole Judgement Day project is reserved by God and He allowed human beings to follow their conscience with Free will and it is for Him to judge not us His ‘subjects’. So, morality is not inevitably connected to the knowledge of God or being devoted to Him.

Comprehensive knowledge can guide humans towards morality and distinguish between good and bad, either by education or life experience. We Muslims better start living with this reality and promote this fact.

Conclusion 

I have tried to provide explanations for my claim that piety is not a pre-requisite of knowledge. Comprehensive knowledge should supervise religious knowledge. Knowledge of God and His instruction is also not necessarily imperative to attain morality. It is absolutely important for religious individuals and groups to promote knowledge irrespective of what packaging it comes in and irrespective of their piety and spiritual status.

Muslims can and should learn and read from non-Muslims and any impious Tom, Dick or Harry as long as they are contributors to comprehensive knowledge. Muslims should not self-destructively deprive themselves of the available knowledge labelling them as ‘disbelievers of knowledge’.  

It is true we should mot judge a book by its cover. But it is also true that a good book can suffer from having a bad cover. I see Muslims unfortunately being a bad book cover for God’s final revelation, the Quran, and that is because they are reluctant and afraid of contrasting the knowledge of the Quran and take up the challenge that comprehensive knowledge may impose.

Muslim organisations promoting Islam have an obsession with the knowledge of piety and depriving themselves of other knowledge that God has made available to them. They need not shy away from being critical and should ask more questions. Questions - that the foundation of Islam itself. The Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) had questions and sought answers to them, retiring and meditating in the Hira cave before God spoke to him and said Iqra – ‘read’ then he said ‘read in the name of thy Lord’. ‘Read’ here was not just about recitation but about observation and examination. Before the Quran was revealed to Mohammed, he was pious, he was religious and he was knowledgeable. The Qur’an and Sunnah can be a great foundation of comprehensive knowledge but not all of it. 

On Piety, Knowledge & Muslims : Part 1

I have observed a trend amongst Muslims that they regard ‘piety’ as the key criteria or pre-requisite to appreciate knowledge of a scholar or individual. What this means is that someone can have knowledge but if he or she doesn’t fit the religious norms or is seen visibly as a practising Muslim, they do not qualify as someone who can have knowledge of any matter. No distinction is made between religious and comprehensive knowledge and rather the former is regarded as the condition for the latter.  I have observed this as a dominant attitude among the Muslim community in Bangladesh and in the East End, especially in Muslim proselytising organisations.

Though ironically, this Muslim community on the majority of everyday matters, from education to health services, are dependent on knowledge developed, founded and practised by non-Muslims. These non- Muslims are often regarded as ‘impious’ and ‘impure’. Strikingly, when it comes to non practicing Muslims, he or she is discredited for not being religious and their knowledge is regarded as futile and likely to be ignored; as if somehow these knowledge is inspired from the shaitaan (devil).

To unpack the whole phenomenon and asses its plausibility one has to look into what piety and knowledge is and the relation between them. I would argue that comprehensive knowledge is important and that knowledge or God, following His instructions and having an overall pious life, is dependent on comprehensive knowledge.

What is piety?

Piety commonly means to follow established religious norms and practices and to live a disciplined life devoted to God. Conventional Muslims’ definition or understanding of piety is interesting.  The understanding of ‘piety’ is exclusive of other forms of piety (expanded below), and judgments are made strictly on that basis.  Piousness is related to spirituality and God. I assume this is also the case with other religions which I have limited knowledge of.  

We regard someone as pious who fears God or lives a life according to His instructions. They also displays example of obedience that makes us ‘perceive’ him or her as ‘pious’. I use the word ‘perceive’ as I think ultimate status of piety is dependent on God’s acceptance of his devotion and the communication between him and God. We cannot absolutely testify this. If we did, a minority bunch of paedophiles in established religious institutions would deserve our respect just because they seem pious or hold a position that is supposed to promote piety. So piety is an idea and not a fact. So measuring someone's knowledge based on this idea of 'piousness' is irrational. 

A clergy, imam or rabbi by institutional definition are ‘pious’. Followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism honour them as authorities on religious matters. In other words they seek knowledge of God, Godliness and His instruction as interpreted by them.

A pious man’s piety is unfortunately highlighted with any deed that relates to his devotion exclusively to God rather than humanity or any other cause which can be regarded as ‘Godly’ by their very definition of good and evil. For example, Bill Gates having donated millions of dollars is not regarded as a pious but Mother Teresa is pious by institutional value. So piety is reserved as a religious term for religious people. Hence when knowledge is sought it is unfair to measure it by someone’s piety. 

The third element of piety is that a pious man is moral. They have knowledge of God and lives life according to God’s instructions, thus they are  supposed to be moral.  So we can conclude three elements of piety here; knowledge of God, His instructions in how to live a life and as a result of following God’s instructions they are moral. For the third element, the pious man or woman has an authority in a religious and secular society.  These three elements in total, I argue, is heavily dependent upon human beings knowledge of other matters which I am referring to as ‘comprehensive knowledge’.  

Other forms of Piety

There are pious human beings who knowingly or unknowingly connect with God through many forms of devotion. Whether we like it or not I have seen spirituality in beggars, musicians, poets, politicians, travellers, gypsies, Sufis and singers. Just because they do not fall into our common understanding of piety should not let us justify a judgement on their spirituality or moral status. We do not know what knowledge they have acquired via their mysticism. Here, knowledge of piety differs within each religious community and even independent of even a specific knowledge of God.

A definition of Knowledge

I will not dare going into an in depth discussion of what knowledge is and all the theories that already exist. I will keep it simple.

Knowledge is ‘what we came to know with our experience or observations from past and now we understand it within a context of enquiry and we can use that as a fact or information on any given matter in a specific time’. Socrates simplified it as ‘justified belief’ which is too simple to regard this as knowledge of defining knowledge.

To me the time of the observation, experience, context and the time of the enquiry, is crucial in defining a piece of knowledge. Here evolution of a fact or information is very important in certifying knowledge of a particular subject matter.

Let me give an example to explain. An observer of a newly painted object in blue in a desert will describe the object as blue. Next year another passer-by may observe the same object without any paint because storms have faded the blue paint  from that object. This observer may describe the object as grey or any other colour it took having got rid of the blue. The following year a Beduin decided to renew its paint and painted it in red. Now we have three versions of knowledge of the same object due to its timeframe and changing contexts. Therefore an absolute stubbornness in defining the object as any particular colour would be ignorance.

I often prefer the suspension of judgement than claiming a knowledge which cannot be confirmed. This at least saves you from a state of ignorance. Here, the time of enquiry is relevant to the knowledge of that object. With this pretext, I argue that knowledge of God is subjective to the creation’s perception, experience and time of enquiry. Thus knowledge of God is not exclusive to one individual or religious discipline. Hence piety is unique to individuals and a communal industry of piety is implausible and can often promote classification, segregation and degradation of others. 

(Part 2: Knowledge of God and Morality)