Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Intentions Vs. Actions


Something that stood out to me when reading Sura 2 was the amount of leeway allowed in the practices God prescribes to honor him. Though it may be required that a believer “Complete the pilgrimages, major and minor, for the sake of God”(2:196), there are accommodations made for those who are “ill or has an ailment of the scalp”(2:196). Even if a believer was simply “wishing to take a break between the minor pilgrimage and the major one”(2:196) they could do so provided they showed their devotion through “offering what he can afford”(2:196) as a sacrifice. Even those who could not offer material sacrifice could “fast for… ten days in all”(2:196) to make up for it. This flexibility extends to other practices as well.  For example with the matter of breast feeding a child though the Lord recommends “Mother suckle their children for two whole years”(2:233) there is option to “by mutual consent… wean the child”(2:233) with the further stipulation that the couple “not be blamed, nor will there be any blame if you with to engage a wet nurse, provided you pay… in a fair manner”(2:233). These show the common theme that one can do what is necessary for their own well being and happiness as long as they are “always… mindful of God” (2:196) for “the best provision is to mindful of God”(2:197).
                Such a focus on the intent of a believer’s actions rather than their exact form is in contrast to the strict, procedural, and formalized orders that God gives to the people of Genesis. Noah is told “you shall make the ark… and this I how you shall make it three hundred cubit; the arks length…”(6:15). Similarly Abraham is told, in no uncertain terms, to “Rise, walk about the land through its length and breadth” (13:17) and “take me a three-year-old she-goat and a three-year-old ram and turtle dove and a young pigeon” (15:9-10). These specific demands of God culminate in his request that Abraham sacrifice his own son to prove his loyalty (22:16-18). In Genesis there is a much different picture of a less accommodating God who requires stringent adherence to his instructions accompany mental devotion.


7 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with this post, and I this is why I think the gods are different in the Qur'an versus Genesis.
    The God of Genesis is speaking solely to one person at a time, and God has already picked this person out because of his or her obedience. God says to Noah "...for it is you I have seen righteous before me" Genesis 7:1. And Abram, being a descendent of Noah, holds the same qualities of Noah. God can ask these selective few people of Genesis anything no matter how specific, or demanding it may be, and they will do it.

    The God of the Qur'an speaks to a limitless amount of people through Muhammad. Because His message is made for everyone, and not just prophets, it must be made more realistic and attainable for regular people. Therefore, the God in the Qur'an appears more accommodating, and people's intentions are very important.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anker makes a important distinction between God's interactions with individuals versus members of the community as a whole. Because of this distinction, I found chapters 20-22 from Exodus to be more similar to the Qur'an than Genesis. A comparison of the selections from Exodus and the Qur'an reveals a relationship similar to the one Jon described in his comparison of Genesis and the Qur'an, but I think this has to do with the type of expectations that are being addressed. While both set similar guidlines regarding marriage, the Qur'an places more emphaisis on ways to show your devotion to God, such as prayer and chairty (2:3). Exodus places emphasis on actions that should not be taken such as murder (21:13) and theivery (22:1-14). This difference causes the expectations set forth in Exodus to be more stringent than hose addressed in the Qur'an.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I also noticed these sort of exceptions that God in the Qur'an makes for certain circumstances. That being said, I don't think God gives too much leeway. Though he is giving alternatives to pilgrimages, fasting, etc, he is still saying specific things that must be done. For example with fasting he says, "For those who can fast only with extreme difficulty, there is a way to compensate—feed a needy person" (2:184). So yes, God is being lenient and merciful, yet he is still asserting his power and not letting people off. If a person cannot do one thing, he asks for them to do something within their means.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To go off of a point that Anker made, I think that perhaps God in the Qur'an was more accomodating because, as we've talking about in class, the religion laid out in the Qur'an is completely new. God knows that it will be harder for people to believe. This is shown by repetition of how "God has the power to do everything" (2.148b). This fact is repeated throughout Sura 2, including, but not limited to, references in verses 137, 149, and 163. So, to make the religion the Qur'an sets out easier to swallow, God is accommodating. For example, God "has only forbidden you carrion, blood, pig's meat, and animals over which any name other than God's has been invoked" (2:173). This suggests that God could have forbidden the consumption of many others food, but he did not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. While I appreciate the observation Jon makes about the Qur'an providing alternatives for certain duties, I disagree that the reason God does not provide alternatives for his instructions in Genesis is that his character is less accommodating. Rather, the reason God provides alternatives in the Qur’an and direct orders in Genesis is that the orders are given for very different tasks under different circumstances. In Genesis, orders are typically instructions on tasks which God wants carried out in the physical world. There are no alternatives to these tasks, as they require specific construction in order to succeed. In addition, the tasks which Jon cites as evidence in his post are only carried out by Abraham, and as such God does not need to provide alternative methods for fulfilling the task because He knows exactly what Abraham is capable of. The Qur'an provides alternatives for certain acts of devotion because the purpose of the tasks has to do with values and social interactions rather than physical construction. The subjective nature of the orders means there is room for additional interpretation. In addition, the acts of devotion described in the Qur’an are meant to be carried out by all Muslims, and so God needs to make sure all those his message reach will be able to complete their devotions, even those with disabilities. As such, he includes alternatives to certain instructions for people who are unable to carry out the preferred task. While the differences in God’s behavior in Genesis and the Qur’an Jon points out are significant, they do not indicate a difference in God’s character, but rather are a product of the different circumstances the instructions in each book are given under.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I too have noticed the so-called leeway God permits in th Qur'an. For example, "anyone who is ill or on a journey"(2:185) during the month of Ramadan is able to fast on other days. I think Marlee makes a good point in stating that this leeway is not too great. It is obvious through the recommendation of other methods to fulfill practices, such as "feed a needy person"(2:184) and assure your devotion to God. I do not however see this restrain as taking away from the fact that the God described in the Qur'an is accommodating. Verse 2:185 states that "God wants ease for you, not hardship. He wants you to...glorify Him." In other words, yes he wants a believer to follow the practices he has set up, but he does not want to alienate those in certain circumstances by making the practices hardships. As Emma brought up, it was a new religion, and if it was to difficult to follow perhaps it might not have become so popularized.

    ReplyDelete