On Islam pt IV....

Plato and Muhammad Walked into a Cave...

“any human being who has lived a moral and god-fearing life shall on his death depart for the Isles of the Blessed and shall dwell there, and live a trouble-free life of perfect happiness; however, anyone who has lived an immoral and godless life shall be imprisoned in the place of retribution and justice, which is called Tartarus.” Plato, Gorgias 523b

Socrates' allegory of The Cave recounted by Plato in 'The Republic', represents the importance of education and the benighted state of those deprived of the experience of 'true reality'.

We are asked to imagine men confined within the depths of a long cave, their heads fixed directly towards the wall in front of them: “There's firelight burning a long way further up the cave behind them”, also a road between this source of light and the prisoners with a small wall running alongside it, behind this wall people are carrying various statuettes of animal and human form which protrude above said wall, the fire light casting shadows of these forms against the wall of the cave the prisoners are forced to look at.

Socrates then asks us of the Prisoners: “do you think they'd see anything of themselves and one another except the shadows cast by the fire on to the cave wall directly opposite them....And what about the objects which were being carried along? Won't they see only their shadows as well?...Now suppose they were able to talk to one another: don't you think they'd assume that their words applied to what they saw passing in front of them?...When any of the passers by spoke, don't you think they'd be bound to assume that the sound came from a passing shadow?”

The answer to these questions (though outlandish in the extreme) is given repeatedly in the affirmative, we can hardly disagree, so at this point Socrates begins to explain what would happen: “if they were set free from their bonds and cured of their inanity”; if “someone tells him that what he's been seeing all this time has no substance”. He describes the severe discomfort as the prisoner's eyes encounter the firelight directly for the first time, the confusion as the objects and people passing on the road were shown to him and explained.

This sight he suggests would make the prisoner “turn away and run back to the things he could make out, taking the truth of the matter to be that these things are clearer than what he was being shown”, denying the reality in front of him in favour of the shadow world he had become accustomed to. Socrates continues: “Imagine him being dragged forcibly into the sunlight, wouldn't this cause him pain and distress? And once he's reached the sunlight, he wouldn't be able to see a single one of the things which are currently taken to be real, would he, because his eyes would be overwhelmed by the sun's beams?”[1]

With all forms of religious belief, is it not thus? We must drag ourselves from the comfort and security of an illusory world to which we are chained by circumstances, into the full light of day, into the reality of direct, lived experience that we may feel the sun upon our faces and the wind in our hair, casting aside the factitious representations we may have become accustomed to in our slavery, to truly know this world as it is, the only world in all it's breathtaking luminosity.

Even if it pains us to see it, even if this awareness is marred by similar feelings of discomfort as our infant selves endured upon leaving our Mother's womb, do we not owe it to ourselves in the short time we have here to struggle to see it, to embrace it fully, to explore this world by expressing our inherent curiosity in an unrestrained manner?

Needless to say the author of the Quran doesn't think so...

Chapter 17 (Bani Isra'il)

“Whoso desires the present life, We hasten for him therein what We will- for such of them as we please; then have We appointed Hell for him; he shall burn therein, condemned and rejected.

And whoso desires the Hereafter and strives for it as it should be striven for, and he is a believer-these are the ones whose striving shall find favour with God.”   v.19 & 20

“And surely We have set forth for mankind in various ways all kinds of similitudes in this Quran, but most men would reject everything but disbelief.” v.90

“And nothing has prevented men from believing when the guidance came to them save that they said, 'Has Allah sent a man as a Messenger?'

Say 'Had there been in the earth angels walking about in peace and quiet, We should have certainly sent down to them from heaven an angel as a Messenger.'” v.95 & 96

Chapter 18, Al-Kahf (The Cave) signals a slight departure from previous Chapters, assuming a more poetic style it's author makes use of allegories and parables to answer a direct challenge from the Quraysh, during the period when Islam was beginning to win converts in Mecca.

Ibn Ishaq's history conveys the displeasure experienced by the tribal elders upon witnessing Muhammad's unusual religious practices and public profession of his new mono-theistic faith,  various plans were hatched that they might put an end to his proselytizing, when diplomacy and more nefarious means were employed with no success, the elders of the tribe sent Al Nadr and Uqba to the Jewish Priests of Medina, “for they said, 'the Jews are the possessors of the first book and have knowledge about the prophets which we have not'.”

The Jews of Medina kindly obliged, giving them three questions with which to test the knowledge and authenticity of the self appointed 'Apostle of Allah': “...'if he answers them obey him, for he is a prophet; but if not, then he is a pretender, and you may deal with him as you think proper'.

Al Nadr and Uqba returned to Mecca and told the people what the priests had said, and they said to the apostle: (1)'inform us about the young men who passed away in ancient times, because their case is wonderful; (2)tell us also about the traveller who went from the east to the west of the earth; (3) and tell us about the soul and what it is!' The apostle of Allah replied: 'I shall tell you tomorrow.'”[2]

This was a pretty serious miscalculation by Muhammad, whether he brashly believed he would be able to dream up the answers overnight; ask whoever was instructing him and receive an immediate response; hurriedly extract the answers from some fragments of scripture he may have held; or fabricate an accurate, poetic sounding response which would retain his air of authority on such short notice, remains inconclusive.

What is known however is that it took two weeks for an answer to be forthcoming, in which time the Quraysh had already decided 'the apostle of Allah' was an imposter.[3]

This series of events gave us chapter 18 of the Quran: 'Sura Al Kahf', wherein the author sets about providing the answers to these questions while attempting to justify his vagueness, as well as alleviate any doubt likely to spring from those answers, by recourse to the trusty threats of 'divine' punishment for the unconvinced, and rewards for the faithful that anyone reading this far will be familiar with, yet more evidence of the manipulative methodology of the author.

The customary prefatory warnings are here of some subtle interest however, v2 states: “All praise belongs to Allah who has sent down the Book to His servant and has not put therein any crookedness”, the translator's notes state the Arabic term here rendered as “therein”, more accurately translates as “In It”, but as he says himself this would imply one or the other has “no crookedness”, how unsurprising that the translator is unwilling to entertain the idea this may be so?

Whether or not Muhammad was the actual author, following his prior miscalculation and the two week delay we should expect this transference of his self assumed authority to the book, in a sense saying “ok I may have been wrong but the book's what matters”, attempting to save face by affirming the accuracy, therefore importance of 'the Book' above that of himself, this suggests that even to the author, being a mere man; Muhammad may not be entirely, infallibly straight, at least not all the time,[4] which should come as no surprise to the objective reader of our relatively enlightened epoch, who studies these instructions on how to form a totalitarian, religious state.

Following the customary warnings, the 'apostle of Allah' begins by addressing the story of those 'young men who passed away in ancient times who's case is wonderful', which he takes as referring to the story of the 7 Sleepers of Ephesus, a story remembered in the Christian liturgy with a feast day towards the end of June, when soldiers taking shelter from the persecution of Christians under the Roman Emperor “Trajan Decius” (circa 250ce), were found and excavated after about 230 years during the reign of Theodosius (circa 480ce).

Though this obscure version recounted by the author of the Quran lacks direct reference to the pre-existing, Assyrian and Christian myth, nor either of the Roman Emperors fundamental to accurately identifying the story, it does contain enough similarities to suggest this was what the author was describing, v.10,11,12: “Dost thou think that the People of the Cave and the Inscription were a wonder among Our Signs?

When the young men betook themselves for refuge to the Cave and said, 'Our Lord, bestow on us mercy from Thyself, and provide for us right guidance in our affair.'

So We prevented them from hearing the news of the outside world for a few years”

It would seem the author at the time of writing had not heard of one of Socrates' and Plato's most famous analogies, if 'They' had, perhaps they wouldn't have taken the diametrically opposed course for bestowing correct education and right guidance to that outlined by Socrates in “The Cave”, or perhaps 'They' had, and actually intended to accustom the “young men” to a mystical world of shadowy reflections?

v.13: “Then We raised them up that We might know which of the two parties would better reckon the time that they had tarried.”

This is one of the first confused points in the story, (ignoring the use of “We” by this professed Monoto-theist) where has the 2^nd party alluded to come from; formerly we had one party of young men who “betook themselves for refuge to the Cave”, now apparently there are “two parties”, we could assume here the verse refers to those who found the young men, but surely the whole point of a divinely ordained and directed holy scripture is to alleviate the need for human assumption, after all isn't Allah apparently “The all-seeing, all-knowing”?

If 'He' is, why does he frequently come across as monotonously repetitive, not to mention ignorant and often incoherent?

v.14,15,16,17: “We will relate to thee their story with truth: They were young men who believed in their Lord and We increased them in guidance.

And We strengthened their hearts, when they stood up and said, 'Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth. Never shall we call upon any God beside Him; if we did, we should indeed have uttered an enormity.

'These our people have taken for worship other gods beside Him. Wherefore do they not bring a clear authority for them? And who is more unjust than he who invents a lie concerning Allah?'

'And now when you have withdrawn from them and from that which they worship beside Allah, then seek refuge in the Cave; your Lord will unfold for you His mercy and will provide for you comfort in this affair of yours.'”

This strikes me as the 2^nd obscure point, the wording seems to suggest that actually this refers to the people composing the book, those adherents of Allah hunting the answers to these three questions, the vagueness of the narrative seeming to refer to the contemporary situation in Mecca not events of the past, perhaps owing to the authors' reluctance to mention the Roman Empire directly, or perhaps their inability to actually give a definitive answer or accurate historical account?

Again it is difficult to be convinced either way, it may well just refer to the story of the young men in a cave, while trying as much as possible to parallel the situation new Muslim converts were experiencing in Mecca, thus helping them relate more easily to the affirmation of mono-theism and alleged primacy of Allah, using the opportunity to accentuate certain aspects of the story such as the 'Lord' sending them to live in a cave as Muhammad had done, while portraying the practice of idolatry the Meccan establishment were engaged in, as being on the 'wrong' side at all points in history.

After v.18 tells how the sun was seen to rise and set from the cave and v.19 introduces a dog peculiar to the story in the Islamic tradition, verse 20,21 and 22 seem to continue in this convoluted fashion: “And so We raised them up that they might question one another. One of them said, 'How long have you tarried?' They said, 'We have tarried a day or part of a day.' Others said, 'Your Lord knows best the time you have tarried. Now send one of you with these silver coins of yours to the city; and let him see which of it's inhabitants has the purest food, and let him bring you provisions thereof. And let him be courteous and let him not inform anyone about you.'

'For, if they should come to know of you, they would stone you or make you return to their religion and then will you never prosper.'

And thus did We disclose them to the people that they might know that the promise of Allah was true, and that, as to the Hour, there was no doubt about it. And remember the time when people disputed among themselves concerning them, and said, 'Build over them a building.' Their Lord knew them best. Those who won their point said, 'We will surely build a place of worship over them.'”

The Lord knows best who these townsfolk were who had power superior to that of Allah, able to turn 'His' faithful away from 'His' religion towards their own.

“The Lord knows best” is an evasive tactic employed frequently in this chapter, it wouldn't wash in any academic setting, imagine answering any question: “your Lord knows best”, it's merely a device allowing the answerer to avoid making an incorrect guess, because as the next verse (23) shows Muhammad was only guessing, he had no definitive answer, no proof, he couldn't go to the Library as I have and look in a Catholic encyclopaedia of saints to find “The Seven Sleepers of Ephesus”, which his story very loosely alludes to: “Some say, 'They were three, the fourth was their dog,' and others say 'They were five, the sixth was their do,' guessing at random. And yet others say, 'They were seven, the eighth was their dog.' Say, 'My Lord knows best their number. None knows them except a few.' So argue not concerning them except for a casual discussion, nor seek information about them from any one of them.”

v.24,25: “And say not of anything, 'I am going to do it tomorrow,'

Unless Allah should will. And remember thy Lord when thou forgettest and say, 'I hope my Lord will guide me to what is even nearer than this to the right path.'”

We can see Muhammad has at least learned from his earlier error, however that doesn't stop him from immediately proceeding to make another mistake, perhaps even more destructive to the image of 'divine messenger' he is attempting to convey, v.26: “And they stayed in their Cave three hundred years, and added nine more.”

The addition of 9 years relates to the Lunar Calendar, though why the author thought fit to provide the solar and lunar calculation remains unclear, perhaps to create the illusion of specificity, perhaps to add an interesting fact that might distract from the wrong answer he gives.

This man is supposedly the 'Messenger of Allah', the emissary of the 'Lord of Creation', one of 'His' prophets on Earth, but he couldn't even accurately portray what was relatively recent History to him at the time of writing?

The story of Snow White, the 5 Dwarves and their Dog would never be treated so haphazardly, and it doesn't even claim to contain a miracle, do Muslims honestly believe this story about people sleeping in a Cave for 300 years, before being “raised up” by God and going to Town to buy some food with one of their, -I assume- extremely valuable antique “Silver Coins”?

If so do they also believe the story of Snow White is an accurate account of real historical events?

v.27: “Say, 'Allah knows best how long they tarried.' To Him belong the secrets of the heavens and the earth. How Seeing is He! And how Hearing” They have no helper beside Him, and He does not let anyone share in His government.”

At this point the incorrect retelling of the story of the Seven Sleepers ceases, Muhammad knowing he's made a grotesque error begins to recount the most disgusting threats for those who disbelieve his version of events, all the while attempting to assert the power of this half blind, deaf and forgetful monotheistic totalitarian deity he claims to represent, conveying the rewards this disabled demiurge has laid on for the credulous believers, namely gold bracelets; reclining sofas and fine green dresses of silk[5].

v.30: “And say, 'It is the truth from your Lord; wherefore let him who will, believe, and let him who will, disbelieve.' -(how uncharacteristically liberal)- Verily, We have prepared for the wrong doers a fire whose flaming canopy shall enclose them. And if they cry for help, they will be helped with water like molten lead -(oh, ok maybe not that liberal)- which will burn the faces. How dreadful the drink, and how evil is the Fire as a resting place!”

Having failed in his attempt to answer question one, 'the messenger of Allah' sets forth a simple parable of a man rich in worldly possessions and another who coveted his neighbours wealth, Muhammad telling his faithful preachers, or being told himself by the actual source of the Quran to: “...set forth to them the parable of two men: one of them We provided with two gardens of grapes, and surrounded them with date-palms, and between the two We placed corn-fields.

Each of the gardens yielded its fruit in abundance, and failed not the least therein. An in between the two We caused a stream to flow.

And he had fruit in abundance. And he said to his companion, arguing boastfully with him, 'I am richer than thou in wealth and stronger in respect of men.'” v.33,34,35

v.38,39,40,41,42: “His companion said to him, while he was arguing with him, “Dost thou disbelieve in Him Who created thee from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then fashioned thee into a perfect man?

But as for me, I believe that Allah alone is my Lord, and I will not associate anyone with my Lord.

And why didst thou not say when thou didst enter thy garden: 'Only that which Allah wills comes to pass. There is no power save in Allah?' if thou seest me as less than thee in riches and offspring.

Perhaps my Lord will give me something better than thy garden, and will send on thy garden a thunderbolt from heaven so that it will become a bare slippery ground.

Or it's water will become sunk in the earth so that thou wilt not be able to find it.””

And what reward proceedeth from Allah regarding this resentful and jealous believer, how did his Lord redress the balance between this faithful servant and his wealthy, boastful neighbour?

v.43: “And his fruit was actually destroyed...”

So it seems Allah is 'the great leveller', for whosoever covets his neighbours goods and worships Allah; his Lord will wreak disaster and catastrophe on those His servant resents.

v.44,45: “And he had no party to help him against Allah, nor was he able to defend himself.

In such a case protection comes only from Allah, the True. He is the Best in respect of reward, and the Best in respect of consequence.”

As if any clarification were needed as to the nature of this demiurge, spawned of the mind of a megalomaniacal merchant afforded the luxury through marriage, of sitting around watching the business practices of the inhabitants of Mecca he came to resent, seeking to separate himself from them by dwelling in a cave while formulating a totalitarian system which he believed would destroy them and their idols.

Having thus bestowed upon the faithful a far from complex parable, in the following verses Muhammad is instructed -or instructs his followers- to: “...set forth to them the similitude of the life of this world: it is like the water which We send down from the sky, and the vegetation of the earth is mingled with it, and then it becomes dry grass broken into pieces which the winds scatter. And Allah has power over everything.” v.46

Perhaps it shouldn't surprise us that Muhammad, the inhabitant of a drought stricken, arid, infertile region of the world, not to mention an ignorant age, would fail to adequately describe the hydrologic cycle of the earth, for there would be no water to 'precipitate' from the sky were it not for the evaporation of surface water.

Besides this understandable oversight by the author, the allegory is extremely bad and subsequently discarded forthwith.

It seems to suggest life is sent down from the sky to nourish the vegetation of the earth, rather than making this vegetation healthy and vibrant however, the author suggests it makes it become dry, brittle, breaking into pieces to be scattered by the wind, rather than decomposing and fertilizing the soil.

But is it actually a “similutude” at all, a likeness or allegory of “the life of this world” because it appears to be merely an inaccurate description of it?

“Wealth and children are an ornament of the life of this world. But enduring good works are better in the sight of thy Lord in respect of immediate reward, and better in respect of future hope.” v.47

We know from Ibn Ishaq's history of the Prophet, that these events were prior to the various battles which would come to define the shape and ensure the prosperity of Islam, at that later stage it could be fairly said that war and especially looting were the “good works” required of the faithful; but what could be more enduring than the legacy secured by having children who will be well fed and supported, then as now wealth offers far more “immediate rewards” than religion, also can it be denied that child rearing (so i've heard) offers far more by way of satisfaction than wealth, let alone religion and certainly more in terms of (realistic at least) “future hope”?

The point he makes more strenuously than needs be is this, “the life of this world” is transient “which the winds scatter”; “wealth and children are an ornament of the life of this world”, so also must be considered transient, when in actuality these are two of only few things which will leave a lasting legacy in the world.

One can only conclude this is a not so subtle imperative to focus on the afterlife, but also to dedicate oneself entirely, as slavishly as a drone in a bee colony to the manufacture of the emerging religion.

“And bethink of the day when We shall remove the mountains, and thou wilt see the nations of the earth march forth against one another and We shall gather them together and shall not leave any one of them behind.

And they will be presented to thy Lord, standing in rows: 'Now have you come to Us as We created you at first. But you thought that We would fix no time for the fulfilment of Our promise to you.'” v.48,49

This may refer to a grandiose delusion on the part of the author, or, and perhaps this is a little generous, a specific example of mountain dwelling tribes whom it was believed would be 'brought round' to belief in Islam, if so it would have symbolic relevance to the intellectuals of the day, who would have perhaps known of the failure of numerous large empires, to subdue the unruly, diverse tribes north of Mt. Ararat around the Black Sea towards the Caucasian Mountains, and unify them with those empires East of the Zagros Mountains.

What better way to seduce the power crazed into adopting this new imperialist ideology than suggesting the ways it may improve on the ancient Persian, Macedonian and Roman attempts at Empire building in the region?

And the book will be placed before them, and thou wilt see the guilty fearful of that which is therein; and they will say, 'O woe to us! What kind of book is this! It leaves out nothing small or great but has recorded it.' And they will find all that they did confronting them, and thy Lord does not wrong anyone.” v.50

Unfortunately we can't be sure, as indeed a centuries long tradition of Islamic theological disagreement demonstrates, to 'put forth a similitude'; we are here dealing with shadows upon the wall of a cave, the reality behind these shadowy images, which is to say the veiled, perhaps even unconscious intentions of their creator or creators, are barely perceptible, can only be vaguely discerned, being as they are indirectly alluded to in the manipulative, coercive methodology, the means the founders of Islam employed to obtain an end which with hindsight we can at least be slightly more certain about.

__________

[1] abridged excerpts from Plato's 'The Republic', 514-516b. Circa 400bce

[2] Ibn Ishaq's 'The Life of Muhammad', 44-45

[3] This precipitated the persecution of his Muslim converts in Mecca by the Quraysh, leading to them being sent away to live under the protection of the Negus of Abyssinia (Modern Ethiopia), which had been cultivated by Christian scholars from Egypt since around 300ce. Muhammad remained in Mecca in relative security, being beyond reproach -besides the occasional 'mocking'- owing to the protection granted him through his filial bonds with the Quraysh elder Abu-Talib.

[4]If the botched and bungled band of followers Muhammad had amassed by the time of his death, accepted this primacy of the book, it's object of idolization: Allah's importance above that of Muhammad whom they idolized instead, then maybe they wouldn't have descended into almost immediate conflict regarding who would fill the latter's boots, becoming numerous antagonistic sects at war from then till now?

But then perhaps if it hadn't divided into two predominant sects vying to out do the other, the movement would have simply attained a stultifying 'peace of mind', withered and atrophied in the deserts of Arabia, and would never have dispersed upon the known Earth and beyond, spreading their religion by the sword, and seeking out knowledge which might grant them supremacy over the  other along with all those they encountered.

[5] Verse 32