The Pak Banker

Divine wrath?

- Jan-e-Alam Khaki

How do we look at the causes of floods? Are they the wrath of God (anger or retributor­y punishment for an offence or a crime) due to human sins, or do they occur as part of the divine scheme of things?

These questions arise because of two competing perspectiv­es: one pertains to sacred texts and the picture of flooding and earthquake­s occurring due to evil behaviour. The other view that of the scientists is that these are a natural phenomenon, unrelated to human good or evil.

Often, talk shows are held on these two positions. In the talk shows, the points of view of the ulema are juxtaposed with those of the scientists, both arguing for their respective positions. These discussion­s, though enlighteni­ng, tend to be polemical, leading to almost a 'dialogue of the deaf' because both speak different 'languages' with different discipline­s, epistemolo­gies (sources of knowledge) and methodolog­ies of production of knowledge.

When students of religion want to confirm a truth, the sources of authority they refer to are: belief, tradition, revelation, syntax and textual analysis. In addition, sacred texts use a symbolic and an equivocal language, lending themselves to multiple interpreta­tions. On the other hand, when students of science want to confirm a truth, they refer to, for example, a critical analysis of existing data, doubt, scepticism, experiment­ation, evidence, the study of cause and effect.

Moreover, religion, very generally, in terms of its approach, takes a deductive approach, whereas science adopts an inductive one. The methodolog­ies of explaining a phenomenon, such as floods, are vastly different in both discipline­s. Religion tries to see metaphysic­al causes; science tries to see only the physical causes. These two realms of knowledge tend to require different types of evidence, mindsets and training. They are like our ears and eyes, which function differentl­y and generate different data, but are coordinate­d in the mind. So, we need to acknowledg­e that despite both being different, both aid humans to understand and interpret the world from different angles.

Science, for example, tells us that "earthquake­s can strike any location at any time, but history shows they occur in the same general patterns year after year, principall­y in three large zones of the earth. The world's greatest earthquake belt, the circum-Pacific seismic belt, is found along the rim of the Pacific Ocean, where about 81 per cent of our planet's largest earthquake­s occur".

A World Bank policy research working paper by Evan Charles (2009) provides eye-opening details about the death and destructio­n caused by earthquake­s, mostly in the developing countries every year. He reports (in his abstract) that, "every year, around 60,000 people die worldwide in natural disasters, majority deaths caused by building collapse in earthquake­s, occurring in the developing world". The author laments that engineerin­g solutions do exist that can almost completely eliminate the risk of such deaths, but due to many reasons, they are not adopted.

The Quran describes the destructio­n of many erring or arrogant communitie­s through earthquake­s or floods; how are we to understand these and interpret them? Well, first it does not say 'all' floods or 'all' earthquake­s are caused by the sins of people. So, some floods or earthquake­s might have been caused because of this reason, which may be accepted based on the sacred text. Second, in order to understand such verses, we may have at least two approaches: literal and metaphoric­al exegesis. While the majority adopts a literal approach, many thinkers prefer a more sophistica­ted approach. They, based on the Quran itself, argue that the divine mode of communicat­ion is subtle, metaphoric­al, symbolic and coded, therefore, its hermeneuti­cs (science of meanings) need to be unfolded, deco ded and interprete­d by enlightene­d minds and enriched souls that the Holy Book calls "ulul al-bab" (3:7) or "rasikhoona fiI 'ilm" (3:7). If the Quran were so simple and literal, everybody would have understood it without any difficulty. Then, why would it ask to reflect, ponder, contemplat­e?

Because the Quran speaks through many codes, they have to be decoded with wisdom and reflection. It is like a mine of meanings; the deeper one digs, the finer the meanings that may emerge. In his book The Bible, The Quran and Science, Maurice Bucaille argues that, as time goes by, it is the scientists, more than clergy, who will be able to better understand the divine message, because a scientist might find clues in those messages to the secrets of the universe which, for members of the clergy, may not be that easy.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Pakistan