The subject of our discourse is 'the school of humanity The human being
who is the only inquisitive being in the world that we know, has always been subjected to
investigation and discussion. The word 'humanity' has always been connected with a sense
of loftiness and santity as a being superior to animals from various points of view, such
as knowledge, justice, freedom, moral conscience, etc. Although many of humanity's sacred
objects have been subjected to doubt and even denial, apparently no school of thought has
yet gone so far as to scorn the special dignity of humanity and its superiority over other
creatures.
This fact has been elegantly expressed in the poems of Rumi and Sa'adi
and by other poets of ours. This topic is also the theme of most of the world's
literature, both religious and non-religious, in which the question of humanity and its
glorification has been described. In Islamic literature, too, both in Persian and Arabic,
we come across many such statements.
In the last two centuries, with the great advance of science, humanity
has suddenly fallen from that pedestal of sanctity it had always been given. It fell with
a real crash since the more one is elevated, the greater is the damage caused by the fall.
In the past, mankind has been exalted to the rank of a demi-god as witnessed in the poems
of Hafiz and other poets.
The first discovery of` humanity was the form of, the universe which
revolutionised its Atlas. Henceforth that, the earth was believed to be the centre of the
universe round which all the Plants and stars revolved. Science proved that the Earth was
a small planet which revolved around the sun, and the solar system was only an
insignificant part of the universe.
It was then that the position of humanity as the centre of all
possibilities anti as the goal of creation was subjected to doubt and denial, and no one
dared any longer to make claims about its exalted position. Then, another severe blow
dealt, was the idea that the human being was no longer a divine creature and vicegerent of
God upon the earth was given up.
Biological research on the question of evolution and the origin of
species at once showed the relationship of people with those same animals which they
scorned and despised. It proved them to he an evolved form of a monkey or some other
animal and thus they lost their divine origin.
Another strong blow as against humanity's apparently brilliant record
of activities, namely, that it could act in such a way that showed only goodness and
benevolence, whose motive was only the love of God, and lacking all animal aspects The new
thesis was that the claim of humanity to all that sanctity and virtues false and all the
activities to which it had given the name of the love of knowledge, art, beauty, morality
and conscience, prayer and devotion and everything supernatural, are similar to those
which can be found in animals, too, except in a more complex form and mechanism It was
said that. the stomach is the source and cause of all activities. Some went so far as to
say that the stomach was also the basis of its thoughts and feelings. There were still
others who considered this position too high and claimed that the human being was even
lower than this
Eventually it was concluded that this being who had formerly claimed
divine origin and exaltation must be subjected to a careful study to discover its true
nature Another theory was offered that there is no difference between humans plants and
even inanimate objects. There is, of course, a difference in the texture and form, but not
in the substance of which they were all made It was stated that spirit and divine breath
were non-existent because the human being is a machine which is only more complicated than
other machines such as cars, planes, and satellites; that is, only a mechanical creature.
This was a great blow to humanity and yet human values were not wholly
condemned except in some schools of thought where ideas like peace, freedom, spirituality,
justice and compassion were considered as jokes. But since the middle of the 19th century,
humanity has won fresh attention in philosophical schools such as schools of humanity and
even worship of' human beings. In the past, the human being was only a sign of
spirituality and the Qur'an speaks of the human being as being the worthiest creature
through whom God could be understood.
Now the human being is trying to recover its former honour and sanctity
and become a goal in itself but without the adoption of the former criteria and without a
regard for its divine or non-divine aspect, or the points stated in the Qur'an that
everything that is created on earth is for it and that God has breathed some of this
spirit into it to make it a manifestation of Himself. "
There is no longer any talk of the above matters, nor even a discussion
of internal human motives, but only a belief in the sanctity of humanity and its
intelligence. Now we see all schools of thought and even the declaration of human rights
beginning their claims with 'respect for the inherent dignity of human beings' They say
this in order to base their education on its foundation and though each individual is able
to violate the rights of others, this respect for the dignity and sanctity of humanity
will serve as a check to such violations. Most of those who follow the philosophy of
humanists have criteria different from those of the past. But the difficulty lies in this
same contradiction in the life, thought and logic of mankind today, a logic which lacks
foundation.
I do not think that there are any scholars in the world who would
interpret humanitarianism to mean universal peace. There are, of course, ordinary people
who think all human beings in the world are the same and of equal worth. But this is not
true. One is ]earned, another is ignorant. one is virtuous, another is impure; one is
tyrannical, another is oppressed; one is benevolent, another is malevolent. Should we
consider them all the same from a humanitarian point of view, irrespective of their
knowledge, faith, chastity and benevolence or vice versa?
If we say so, we are betraying humanity. Let me give an example. Both A
and B are human beings who are biologically similar. If you dislike one of them, it has
nothing to do with his blood group. But if you are humanitarian, you cannot be indifferent
to both of them and claim that they are equally human; for then both should be equally
liked, or both equally disliked. But this is not so since the human being's basic
difference with animals is that the human being has more potentiality than animals and
less actuality. What does that mean? A horse on its birth possesses all the peculiarities
that a horse should have and if it hassles than that, it can gain it by practice. But a
human being has potential only at birth. It is not known what he or she will be in the
future. The shape is human but that person may, in reality, become a wolf or a sheep or a
human being.
Mulla Sadra, the great Iranian Islamic philosopher, in pointing out the
error of people in thinking human beings equal in everything, says that there are as many
kinds of individuals as there are individuals. He is, of course, regarding the human being
philosophically, not biologically. A biologist pays attention to human organs and limbs,
while a philosopher concentrates on the human being's qualities and thus he cannot believe
that human beings are all of the same Kind. That is why human values are potential. Some
attain the height of humanity while others fail to do so. As Hazrat Ali says, "The
shape is human, but the mind maybe a beast. "Not all individuals have an interior
proportionate to their exterior.
As I said before, to a great extent, the world is returning once again
to the school of humanity, meaning that philosophies of Humanity have appeared; and the
strangest of them all is the creed of humanity which Auguste Compte originated in the
middle of the 19th century. This man wavered between his intelligence and mind on the one
hand and his heart and conscience on the other and came to the conclusion that the human
being needed a creed, the absence of which results in all kinds of social corruption.
According to him, past religion (Catholicism) is not adequate enough
for modern mankind. He describes three stages of religion: The divine supernatural stage,
the philosophical reasoning stage and the scientific positive stage. He said that
Catholicism belonged to the human being's supernatural thinking and this is not acceptable
to the person of the scientific age. His invented religion, however, lacked an occult
root, but he accepted all the traditions and rites which existed before, and even proposed
having priests in this new creed, presenting himself as its prophet, but a prophet without
a god. They say about him that he got his rites from Catholicism and lie was criticised
for this since he disbelieved that religion but imitated and adopted its ceremonies and
traditions. lie was right in one thing, that the human being needs worship and devotion as
well as the performance of a number of rites.
He seems to have found a large number of followers in Europe and
America and his house has became a centre of pilgrimage for them. According to some Arabic
books, he had fallen in love with a lady whose husband had been condemned to life
imprisonment, but she died before he could win her and consequently he turned away from
the world of the intellect to the world of sentiments and eventually started his creed of
humanity. His lady-love is considered by his followers as holy as Mary the mother of
Christ. But this school of humanity underwent a number of changes which gave it its
present form.
One of the questions concerning the human being is freedom and
responsibility. Is the human being really free and independent or does it have a
responsibility and a mission to perform? According to the Qur'an, the human being is faced
with no compulsion before God. On the contrary, the human being is created a free being
with a Fixed responsibility and mission. The Holy Qur'an refers to the human being as the
vicegerent of God, while no other holy book has given such sanctity to the human being,
God says in the Qur'an, and when your Lord said to the angels, 'I am setting on the earth
a vicegerent' they said, 'What will You set therein one who will do corruption there and
shed blood...' But God answered Assuredly I know what you know not.' "(2:28)7
All that, is evidence of the human being's talents and potentialities.
You see, then, that Islam, which is a school of humanity believes in the exalted position
of the human being from a philosophical point of view, The Qur'an says again that God
taught the human being the names of all thing. ;Then it showed itself superior to the
angels in this knowledge and God reproached the angels for what they did not know about
humanity and while they supposed the human being to he a creature. If wrath and lust, the
had ignored the other side of its character The angels confessed their ignorance and
begged for His forgiveness Then God told the angels to prostrate themselves before His
creature
The greatest interpretation that can be given to this command in order
to show the human beings mission, freedom and option is that God makes it the vicegerent
of and the successor to Himself God is the Creator and here He confers some of His
creative power on the human being to benefit from.
Another question about the human being is its happiness and pleasure. I
say briefly that the human being seeks pleasure. Where should it be if be found? Is it
from within the self or from without, or from both within and without and in what
proportion? Those who focus their attention on issues outside themselves, wrongly
supposing that the whole joy of life is this, have not been able to know themselves as
human beings. They cannot consider the life within themselves as a source Of joy and
pleasure. Their exhilaration lies in a wine-cup, in a cabaret.
How well does Rumi describe a person addicted to drinking and direct
that person to righteousness and away from evil saying, You are the symbol of existence,
wherefore do you seek annihilation? You who are an ocean, what do you intend to become?
Why do you make yourself indebted to wine? He continues to say that the human being is the
essence and the world is the form."
It is equally wrong to reject all external things and So to the other
extreme of thinking that all joys must be sought internally. In some poems of Rumi we come
across such an exaggeration when he says, "Consider that the way of pleasure is all
from within, not without "And think it foolish to abandon customs and traditions.
"Someone is happy and intoxicated in the corner of prison, "And another is full
of grief in his garden."
He does not mean that all external things should be put aside but, at
the same time, it should not be supposed that all joys are found in material things. The
self is the centre of joy and there should be an equilibrium between the internal and
external. There are many things to say about the human being. The school of thought which
considers itself human should be able to answer certain questions in order to be accepted
as a true human school. The human being was considered as the door of spirituality, that
is, one could discover the spiritual world throughout one's own essence. Spirituality and
humanism or religion and humanism are two inseparable matters. We cannot accept one of
them and abandon the other.
The contradiction which we claim to exist in various genuine humanistic
schools lies in this point that when humanity suffered downfall, however wrongly, namely
through a change in the Polemic astronomy, it should not make us doubt the exalted
position of the human being as a goal in the course of creation. The human being is the
goal of the universe whether the earth is the centre of the universe or not. What does the
phrase 'goal of the universe' mean? It means that nature moves in a certain direction in
its evolutionary course whether we consider the human being a spontaneously created being
or a continuation of other animal species. It makes no difference to this process whether
we think it to possess a divine spirit or not.
God has said, "We have breathed some of Our spirit into Him."
He has not said that the human being is the race of God. If he had said that the substance
of which the human being is made was brought from another world, then the human being
would be a lofty and sacred being.
To those of you whose philosophy is humanitarian, we say, is there a
sentiment in the human having either called benevolence, goodness or service, or not? If
you say there is not, then to attribute such quality to the human being would be as
meaningless as calling him a stone or an animal. Rut the human being has the sentiment
What is it? Same one may say the feeling of service in us is a kind of substitution. What
does that mean? When we witness something and our humanitarian feeling is supposedly
roused to go and instruct, serve and save the oppressed, we are told that if we ponder
about it, we as human beings are putting ourselves in their place, thinking of them first
as belonging to our group or our group related to them and then we substitute ourselves
for them. Then, the feeling of selfishness which makes us defend ourselves is roused to
defend the oppressed; otherwise there is no genuine sentiment in the human being to defend
an oppressed person directly.
The school of humanity must firstly answer whether such a sentiment
exists in the human being or not? We answer that it does on the basis of its being
appointed the vicegerent or God? And as the manifestation of divine generosity and
benevolence. It means that while the human being ill its selfishness is duty-bound to show
activity for its survival the whole of its existence is not selfishness. -The human being
also has benevolence humanity, world-building and moral conscience.
Some time ago when I was in Shiraz, an organisation called the Happy
Organisation was introduced to me consisting of individuals with an internal sentiment and
Personal faith and a gathering of the deaf and dumb. I visited one of their classes. For
us fastidious people it would he exhausting to spend even one hour in such a class and
watch them and their strange gesticulations for a remark. .heir teacher was a Sayyid who
was named after the first son of Imam and he was showing a great deal of interest and
sympathy in those children even though his salary was less than an elementary school
teacher's, for that organisation was short of funds. lie taught them how to write and made
them understand words with a great expenditure of effort.
What is this sentiment in the human being. It is the manifestation of
humanity and its genuineness. Generally speaking, what is this sense of praise for the
good and dislike for the sick, even though they belong to the distant past? When we hear
the names of Yazid and Shimr and remember their wickedness and crimes, and, on the other
hand, when the names of the martyrs of Karbala are mentioned, we have a feeling of hatred
for the first group and a sense of wonder and respect for the latter. What is the reason
for it? Is it a class feeling which makes us think of ourselves as belonging to the group
of the martyrs of Karbala and dislike Yazid and Shimr as we dislike our enemies? Do we
project our feelings of sympathy and hatred on to each group respectively, while in truth
both are related to our selves? If this is so then the person you consider your enemy will
be no different from you. For in his turn he has he right to praise those you dislike and
hate those you praise.
On the contrary you may look upon it from a different angle which is
not personal and individual but is related to the whole of humanity in which there is no
question of personal dislike but the truth. There your connection with the martyrs in your
praise, and your dislike of their enemies, is not personal but general and universal.
The school of humanity must supply an answer to what these feelings are
and whence they arise and to such problems as the human being's honest love of aptitude,
to someone who has done a good deed. When the genuineness of human values are discovered,
then the question of the human being crops Lip. Is the human being who has such genuine
qualities the same person spoken of by materialism? Is that person a machine, a satellite?
A machine, however big, is only big. If a machine is made a thousand times bigger than an
Apollo, what could we say about it? We could say it is great, amazing and extraordinary
but not noble or sacred. Even if it is made a billion times bigger, possessing a billion
pieces, again it can only be called amazing and extraordinary but never noble, holy and
honourable.
How can the declaration of human rights and communist philosophers who
support human genuineness in various forms, speak of the human being's inherent prestige
and sacredness without paying attention to God's words saying, "We breathed some of
Our spirit into him." When they ascertain the genuineness of these values then they
can realise the genuineness of the human being itself.
Now supposing we realise this genuineness of the human being. Is it
only the human being who exists in this universe which is in infinite darkness? As a
European says, is the human being only a drop of sweat in an ocean of poison created
accidentally? Or is the human being a drop of sweet water in a sweet ocean? Does this
small light represent universal light?
Here the relation of the genuineness of the human being with God will
become clear for both of them are inseparable. In the phrase of the Holy Qur'an, "God
is the light of the heavens and the Earth, "13 the word God is not what Aristotle
calls the first Cause for that is different from the God of Islam Iris god is separate
from and foreign to the universe. But the God of Islam, when the phrase. "'He is the
first, he is the last, He is the Outer and He is the Inner", (57:3) is heard, it at
once gives you a different view of the universe. Then you understand the meaning of all
the genuine qualities within yourself and realise that there is a goal. You will see that
if you are a beam of light then a whole world of light exists and if you are a drop of
sweet water it is because an infinite ocean of sweetness exists there and a ray of His
light is within you.
Islam is a humanistic school based on human criteria. There is nothing
in it based on wrong discriminations between human beings. In Islam there exists no
country, race, blood, zone and language. These things are not an evidence and criterion of
privilege for human beings. That criterion in Islam is those human values. If it respects
those values, it is because it believes in the genuineness of the human being and the
universe; that is, it believes in God Almighty. That is why Islam is the only humanistic
school that has for its foundation prayer logic and there exists no other such school in
the world.
