Friday, 26 June 2015

Fellowship of God

Divine music is broadcast from dawn to dusk in countless rhymes of nature in streams, in birds and insects, in winds and in many other ways if our ears are properly attuned.
Is God to be believed in or tasted? For believers ordinarily it is said that the former is the case. But for some more adventurous souls He is to be tasted here and now. “Her mokh wuchak deedar.” But ordinarily believers believe, and also taste something of Him.
Artists live by tasting Him. Those who are sensitive to the aesthetic richness of the sounds of Quran recitation and na’ts, or know how to offer nimaz-i-shouq, keep tasting it. Listening to great Qari is a rare feast from heaven. Mystics are entirely consumed in this tasting. Prophets preach only after first hand tasting of God. 
Divine music is broadcast from dawn to dusk in countless rhymes of nature in streams, in birds and insects, in winds and in many other ways if our ears are properly attuned. And from dusk to dawn is played  a special music that is vouchsafed to those who know the difference between the day and the night and that nights are reserved for special lovers and identify with the flower that opens at dusk and closes at dawn. For other lovers there is eternally broadcast soz-i mansoor that one can attune to. Thanks to heavens, all of us as lovers, as those who live for others (say our families or spouses), and as poets are given something from the great banquet spread everywhere.
All of us who see and don’t just look at things casually can taste something of God in nature. In every conversation we enjoy, God has been tasted. Every feast we serve or dinner we take gratefully and smilingly, God has been there as the ground of all the sweetness of the experience. Occasionally perhaps all of us have some special moments or experiences which we cherish for sheer intensity and the power to explode our ego. In these epiphanies that may be occasioned by seeing beautiful things or listening to beautiful sounds or may be by no apparent cause, we get peep into the secret garden of mysticism, the full fledged discipline or science of tasting God.
Let us try to understand how we participate as invited guests in the grand celebration.  Moses asked God what should he tell to Pharaoh when asked who sent him.  God said “I am that am.” Who is not absolutely certain that he or she is and who has ever been able to capture this I am ness? God is ‘I am ness’ we know from within and of this no sane man is doubtful. No atheist doubts God in this sense. Atheists are not fools and only the fools have said in their hearts that there is no God as the Bible says. I think in light of these statements the Quranic dictum ‘they didn’t deceive God but deceived only themselves’ is understood.
Love saves the world and not religion as popularly understood but the question is what is love and wherefrom does it come. Christ’s and Sufism's definition of God is that He is love. Love flowers into compassion to become the central tenet of Buddhism.
Religion talks about nothing but charity and love as Augustine said. The thing is to differentiate between love that God is and idolatrous identifications of love with any limited thing such as the self, the nation, the particular ideology or belief system. Faith is not belief. Faith is something that makes us participants in divine life. Ihsan perfects it and we see only God.
For mystics God is in this very moment, the vitality and mystery and beauty of every moment. He is the food also as Indian scriptures assert. Man needs God more than he needs food.  Give a person everything but deprive him of love and see how he kills himself.
To man is not an option given to hide fully from God; he can imagine sometimes that he has hidden himself from the gaze of Reality but willy nilly he is summoned to face It. And if he understands the code of  love that moves all things  he offers to be consumed by it.
Muhammad (SAW), symbolizing or unveiling the Divine or Love, is then alpha and omega and one cries  Diyi na darshun iyi na saalus/ Soz bi istaqbales jaan (O! will he not unveil himself? Will he not accept the invitation? To welcome him I will offer my life).
As Thoreau puts it in his entry in Journals on Feb. 24, 1857: "If my friend says in his mind, I will never see you again, I translate it of necessity into ever. That is its definition in Love's lexicon.” Kierkegaard’s point is also that one's consolation ought to be, "O, consider, then, that love endures!" What this enduring or abiding love means is explained by Kierkegaard. As  Andrew Zawacki explains Kierkegaard’s point: “In abiding love, the past is nullified by reconcieving any break not as a conclusion but as the inauguration of a possibility. The lover is one who refers to love itself before relating himself to another person, since only love is eternal, abiding, and hence capable of sustaining the lover's fortitude and faithfulness through any rupture.”  In truly Christian love (and one can add truly Islamic or truly Buddhist or truly Saivist love), according to Kierkegaard, there is no possibility of real disappointment from any apprehension of break. One can grant the obvious point that lovers are not incapable of disagreement incompatibility but, Kierkegaard asks us to note that two people in love are each individually referred to a third term, which is love itself.
"When one speaks of reaching a breaking-point," Kierkegaard points out, "this is because one is of the opinion that in love there is only a relationship between two rather than a relationship among three." "When two persons relate themselves in love to each other, each one of them all by himself is related to love."
The Upanishads say: "Man becomes true if in this life he can apprehend God; if not, it is the greatest calamity for him."
Whitman says about mossy patch of land as God’s handkerchief. We need to read great nature poetry to learn with poets how to be transported into another world by a mere sight of beautiful object. 
How much joy is available to all of us, the poor or the rich, may be understood by the following quote.
“Any joy is everywhere; it is in the earth's green covering of grass; in the blue serenity of the sky; in the reckless exuberance of spring; in the severe abstinence of grey winter; in the living flesh that animates our bodily frame; in the perfect poise of the human figure, noble and upright; in living; in the exercise of all our powers; in the acquisition of knowledge; in fighting evils; in dying for gains we never can share.
Joy is there everywhere; it is superfluous, unnecessary; nay, it very often contradicts the most peremptory behests of necessity. It exists to show that the bonds of law can only be explained by love; they are like body and soul.
Joy is the realisation of the truth of oneness, the oneness of our soul with the world and of the world-soul with the supreme lover.”
I conclude with a quotation from Leuba whose work is to be approached in a critical spirit but here says something irresistibly beautiful:
“God is not known, he is not understood, he is used- sometimes as a meat-purveyor, sometimes as moral support, sometimes as friend, sometimes as an object of love. If he proves himself useful, the religious consciousness asked for no more than that. Does God really exist? How does he exist? What is he?  are so many irrelevant questions. 
Not God, but life, more life, a larger, richer, more satisfying life, is  in the last analysis the end of religion. The love of life, at any and every level of development, is the religious influence.”

No comments:

Post a Comment