Spirituality from the Perspective of the Quran: A Conversation with Dr. Abolghasem Fanaei

A Conversation from the Monthly Magazine *Hekmat va Marefat* with Dr. Abolghasem Fanaei
Title: Spirituality from the Perspective of the Quran
Year 1393, Issue 2, Pages 9-13

The word "spirituality" and its derivatives are not used in the Quran. Nevertheless, due to the prominent presence of spiritual teachings in the Quran, it can be claimed that the Quran is a spiritual book, or is also a spiritual book. Therefore, instead of asking for the definition of the "word" spirituality from the Quran's perspective, it is better to ask, "Are the components of spirituality found in the Quran?", or "What are the characteristics of Quranic spirituality?", or "If, perchance, a definition of the nature of spirituality, or the characteristics of spiritual people, or the spiritual lifestyle can be found in the Quran, what is that definition or what are those characteristics?"

1. The opening of this conversation, like any conversation, article, etc., requires a conceptual clarification of the subject under discussion, which here is spirituality from a Quranic perspective. Please tell us, from your point of view, what definition for the word spirituality can be derived from the heart of the Quran?

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. It is clear that the word "spirituality" and its derivatives are not used in the Quran. Nevertheless, due to the prominent presence of spiritual teachings in the Quran, it can be claimed that the Quran is a spiritual book, or is also a spiritual book. Therefore, instead of asking for the definition of the "word" spirituality from the Quran's perspective, it is better to ask, "Are the components of spirituality found in the Quran?", or "What are the characteristics of Quranic spirituality?", or "If, perchance, a definition of the nature of spirituality, or the characteristics of spiritual people, or the spiritual lifestyle can be found in the Quran, what is that definition or what are those characteristics?"

On the other hand, "spirituality" has various meanings that should not be conflated with one another. Three of these meanings that are relevant to our discussion are:

(1) Spirituality as the essence of religions (= religious/sacred spirituality),

(2) Spirituality as a substitute or alternative for historical and institutionalized religion (= secular/profane spirituality), and

(3) Spirituality as a trans-religious–trans-secular category (= trans-religious–trans-secular spirituality).

The first meaning has a long historical precedent, its antiquity reaching back to the antiquity of the history of religions. But the second meaning is relatively new, and its emergence dates back approximately to the second half of the nineteenth century AD. As far as I know, the use of the word spirituality in the second meaning of this word has had two main reasons: the first consists of the great historical and institutionalized religions being emptied of or separated from spirituality, or the value and importance of spirituality fading in these religions, and the spiritual teachings present in these religions being overshadowed by accidentals, or the place of the shell/form and the kernel/content being swapped in these religions; and the second consists of the transformations that have occurred in the mentality and lifestyle of human beings in the modern world.

Spirituality in the second meaning of the word is, in fact, a kind of new religiosity that, according to the claim of the advocates of such spirituality, is empty of and purified from (1) "the metaphysics of traditional religions," (2) "sacred scripture," (3) "sacred history," and (4) "religious figures who play the role of spiritual models." Whether "such spirituality is possible in principle?", and "if possible, can it fulfill the human need for spirituality?", and also whether "such spirituality will not, over time, suffer the fate of historical and institutionalized religions, and will not, like them, come to possess sacred scripture, sacred history, and sacred figures?", are questions that I am not here to answer.

In my opinion, these two meanings of spirituality, while seemingly rivals, are not entirely distinct/mutually exclusive [2]; rather, alongside their specific characteristics, they also share common ground, meaning that both are instances of spirituality in a third sense of the word. I personally incline toward the view that spirituality has a third meaning, in which it is a "trans-religious" and "trans-secular" category capable of manifesting in various forms and types, including religious and secular forms, or of having diverse religious and secular "readings"/"narratives." Therefore, spirituality in the third sense of the word is broader than religious spirituality and secular spirituality. If this spirituality is combined with other components and elements of religion, it will take the form of religious/sacred spirituality, just as if it is combined with the components and elements of secularism, it will take the form of secular/profane spirituality (there are debates about the possibility of these two combinations while preserving the function of spirituality, which I will not address here).

To put it more clearly, if we consider spirituality as a "gem," this gem can, in principle, be presented in various "shells," some of which are religious and others secular. If this claim is correct, then instead of saying, "In secular spirituality, spirituality replaces religion," it is better to say, "In secular spirituality, one type or reading of spirituality replaces another type or reading of spirituality."

In light of these explanations, when we speak of spirituality in the Quran or from the Quran's perspective, we must first clarify which of these three meanings of spirituality we intend. At present, I am uncertain whether one can find a verse or verses in the Quran that, negatively or positively, contain a point about spirituality in the second sense of the word, i.e., "secular spirituality," although I do not deny the possibility of such a verse or verses existing. However, regarding spirituality in the first and third senses of the word, i.e., sacred spirituality and trans-religious–trans-secular spirituality, many points can be inferred from the verses of the Quran.

By trans-religious–trans-secular spirituality, I mean spiritual teachings whose acceptance does not depend on accepting specifically religious or specifically secular presuppositions. Therefore, the existence of such spirituality in the Quran means that there is a verse or verses in the Quran for whose content to be accepted and applied in theory and practice, a person does not need to be a Muslim or even religious, nor to believe in the prophethood of the revered Prophet of Islam and the truth of the Quran as a divine book, nor to accept the truth/validity of the content of that verse or verses out of deference (= knowledge by testimony) [3] rather than based on reason (= knowledge by reasoning) [4]. In the continuation of the discussion, I will try to point out some of these verses.

2. How does the Quran introduce the practical and theoretical elements of spirituality?

The answer to this question is very broad, and naturally, we cannot address all these elements and components here. I will merely point out three components of spirituality that are emphasized in the Quran, without claiming any deductive or inductive exclusivity in this regard.

The first component of a spiritual person or a spiritual life can be formulated in the form of the most important question that arises for such a person; a question that is the cornerstone of the spiritual lifestyle. This question is: "What should I do?" This question has two important features:

First, it is a "particular" question about the questioner themselves, not a "universal" question about all human beings. This question differs from the question "What is to be done?", which is a universal question concerning all human beings. Of course, it may be possible to show that discovering the answer to the first, particular question depends on knowing the answer to the second, universal question. But in this assumption, for someone concerned with living spiritually, the first question is primary and the second is secondary; that is, the second question has only preliminary and instrumental value for them, and is useful only insofar as it enables them to answer their primary question.

Second, this question concerns the person's "duty," not the existence or non-existence of other beings. This also means that answering questions about the existence or non-existence of other beings, or the nature and characteristics of those beings, matters to a spiritual person only insofar as the answers to these questions help them find the correct answer to the foundational question.

Therefore, a spiritual person engages in ontology and general deontology only to the extent that these two types of knowledge are relevant to understanding their personal duty.

Now, if we turn to the Quran, we see that the Quran emphasizes "action"/"striving"/"endeavor" as the sole capital/provision/store of the human being. Some of the verses that point to this are as follows:

"Indeed, the Hour is coming – I almost conceal it – so that every soul may be recompensed according to that for which it strives":[5] "The Hour is coming; I want to keep it hidden so that every person receives their striving as recompense,"

"And that there is not for man except that [good] for which he strives; And that his striving is going to be seen":[6] "and that a human being has nothing except their own striving, and their striving will soon be seen,"

"On the Day when man will remember that for which he strove":[7] "The day when a human being remembers their striving,"

As you can see, these verses explicitly emphasize that the real asset/capital of every human being is nothing but their own effort, endeavor, and striving. This asset is the criterion for salvation/deliverance or wretchedness/misery, immunity or lack of immunity from criticism, blame, and reckoning. Action constructs a person's identity and character, and this identity and character is all that one has and upon which one can be judged. External possessions, such as wealth, riches, power, fame, and so on, are not part of a person's character and identity, whereas their internal possessions are part of their identity and character.

But if a person's own striving and action hold such unique importance, the question "What should I do?" will inevitably become the most important question a person must seek to answer. Therefore, the above verses and verses with a similar theme imply, by necessary implication, that the most important question every person should try to answer is the question "What should I do?" It is also noteworthy that in these and similar verses, the emphasis is on the "striving" and effort itself as the criterion for felicity and wretchedness, not on the "result" of the striving and effort. The reason for this is clear; the result of an individual's striving and effort is not under their control and authority and depends on fate and destiny.

Before continuing the discussion, it is good to pause briefly and respond to a potential criticism or objection. Someone might say that the Quran, in most cases, introduces the combination of "faith" and "righteous deeds" as the criterion for salvation or deliverance, and this shows that, from the Quran's perspective, deeds without faith are completely worthless.

The answer is that, from the Quran's perspective, "faith" as a result/product is not important; rather, the act or process of "coming to faith" and its quality is important. As is evident from many Quranic verses, "coming to faith" and, in contrast, "disbelieving," as well as "associating partners with God"/"not associating partners with God," are voluntary-optional acts, which, like other voluntary-optional acts, are subject to rational, moral, and spiritual evaluation. Therefore, coming to faith is not a category separate from action; rather, it is itself a type of action, which is mentioned independently solely due to its importance, not because its nature differs from the nature of action and belongs to a different category.

Therefore, if a person's striving is accompanied by "sincerity" and "seriousness," such a person is guided and saved, and deserving of praise and reward, and in modern terms, worthy of happiness, peace, and hope. If we consider attaining happiness, peace, and hope to be among the consequences of the spiritual life, these three consequences are achieved when a person possesses "sincerity" and "seriousness" in the realms of knowledge and action. One who has sincerity and seriousness has no reason not to be happy or not to have peace and hope. True and lasting happiness, peace, and hope originate from within the person and therefore do not vanish or fluctuate due to external changes, developments, and ups and downs. On this basis, it can be said that striving accompanied by sincerity and seriousness has intrinsic desirability, meaning that it cannot be said that such striving might fail to bring a person to felicity and salvation or happiness, peace, and hope.

Sincerity in this context means that a person, in the position of discovering truth and discerning duty, is free from prejudice, bias, dogmatism, and other epistemological vices, and that their interests, carnal desires, loves, hatreds, and emotional attachments do not prevent them from seeing or accepting the truth that is accessible to human beings, as it is.

In other words, sincerity here means "being open to the truth" or "being submissive to the truth," as it is, not as I wish it to be. And this is precisely the general meaning that is inferred for the word "Islam" and its derivatives from some verses of the Quran.[8] Unlike Islam in the specific sense of the word, which is the name of a particular religion as opposed to other religions, Islam in the general sense of the word is a name referring to a mental, psychological, or heartfelt state that is a kind of moral and epistemological virtue. This moral and epistemological virtue, in my opinion, is one of the most important components of spirituality in the third sense of the word, which has also been greatly emphasized in the Quran.

Many of the criticisms in the Quran addressed to disbelievers and polytheists are moral criticisms, not religious criticisms; these criticisms are addressed to those who are not open to the truth. Essentially, a "kafir" (disbeliever) in the language of the Quran is someone who conceals, hides, and denies a truth whose truthfulness is clear to them personally.[9] On the other hand, the polytheists who are condemned, blamed, and criticized in the Quran are those who worship, alongside God or instead of God, something or someone for which they have no proof.[10]

Seriousness in this context means that a person, to the extent of their capacity and ability, does not fall short in the position of discovering truth and the position of discerning duty, and in the theoretical and practical commitment to the result of their effort in these two positions. Guidance in the Quran does not mean "reaching the destination," but rather means "finding the way" and "moving on a correct path," and those who have sincerity and seriousness are moving on a correct path and in a correct direction. Reaching the destination depends on the convergence of factors, some of which are beyond a person's control and volition, and therefore they are not responsible for reaching the destination, meaning that if their failure to reach the destination is due to obstacles beyond their control and volition, they cannot be blamed and held accountable for not reaching the destination. In a case where their failure to reach the destination is due to their own lack of sincerity and/or lack of seriousness, their blame and accountability is for their lack of sincerity and/or lack of seriousness, not for their failure to reach the destination. What matters here is not reaching the destination, but moving on the correct path and in the correct direction. More precisely, one who is moving on a correct path and in a correct direction has, in fact, reached the destination while moving. As Rumi says,

This court is the presence of the Infinite

Leave the seat of honor, the path itself is your seat of honor

In the Quran, God says: "And those who strive for Us – We will surely guide them to Our ways. And indeed, Allah is with the doers of good."[11] In this verse, the term "strive" (jāhadū) indicates the element of earnestness, and the phrase "for Us" (fīnā) indicates the element of sincerity. The plural form "Our ways" (subulanā) also indicates that the path of guidance and salvation is not one, but multiple, and whoever possesses sincerity and earnestness, whatever result they reach is on the path of God and moving towards Him. The final sentence of this verse also indicates that such a person is among the doers of good, and God is with them along this path.

The second important component of the spiritual lifestyle emphasized by the Quran is "shunning vain affairs" in the broad sense of the word. The Quran explicitly refers to this component in at least three instances. The first is in the enumeration of the characteristics of the believers.[12] According to the Quran, the believers are saved, and one of the characteristics intrinsic to faith that leads to the salvation of the believers is that they shun engagement in vain and futile affairs. Avoiding futile affairs is, in fact, part of the "definition of faith" from the Quran's perspective. This means that faith has manifestations in the believer's behavior, actions, and lifestyle, and one of these manifestations is shunning vain and futile affairs. The second instance is in the enumeration of the characteristics of the servants of the All-Merciful. One of the characteristics of this group is that when they encounter a vain matter, they pass by it nobly and pay it no heed, meaning they do not engage with it.[13] The third instance is in describing a group of the People of the Book who are open to the truth and, when they hear vain speech, they turn away from it.[14]

Avoiding vain pursuits is another expression of following the wisdom of "What does it have to do with me?" A spiritual person is one who, before engaging with any question, asks themselves, "Is this question and its answer relevant to me or not?" Likewise, a spiritual person is one who, before undertaking any action, asks themselves, "Is this action relevant to me or not?" (Here, 'action' has a broad scope and includes any deed, such as listening to others' speech, studying a book or article or anything else, etc.). If the answer to these preliminary questions is negative, then it becomes clear that the question or action is not relevant to the person, and engaging with it is a vain pursuit.

For example, there are mysteries in this universe that are undiscoverable, such as the nature of God and the time of the Resurrection. And there are tasks in this world whose performance is beyond the capacity and ability of humans, such as eradicating sin, building paradise on earth, or bringing all humans to paradise. The spiritual person does not engage with these matters and, so to speak, does not tread on God's turf; that is, they rid themselves of the desire to play God and firmly believe that "the human is not God, but a servant." The spiritual person is self-aware, and because they know themselves, they also know their own limits and scientific and practical capacity and do not transgress them.

Furthermore, there are unknowns for which an answer might possibly be discovered, but their answer plays no role in answering the spiritual person's fundamental question, namely, "What should I do?" There are also actions that are within the person's capability, but engaging in them is neither part of the person's duties, nor required by any virtue, nor of any benefit to them personally. The spiritual person will not engage with such questions and actions either.

The reason for this is clear. Because every individual's time, opportunities, material and spiritual resources, and mental, psychological, and physical energy are limited, to the extent that they spend their time, opportunities, resources, and energy seeking answers to questions or performing actions that are not relevant to them, they will be hindered from striving to answer the questions and perform the actions that are relevant to them.

And finally, the third component of the spiritual life that the Quran emphasizes is “the authentic life.” The Quran places great emphasis on the individuality of human beings and on the point that every person is responsible for their own actions and conduct, and that they alone must answer for their deeds and behavior,[15] and no one bears the burden of another.[16] From the Quran’s perspective, every human being is resurrected alone in the presence of God.[17] Being resurrected alone in the presence of God is an allusion to the fact that no other person is present there who can shoulder the burden of responsibility for a person’s words and deeds, and that a person cannot, by relying on the words, commands, or advice of another, provide a convincing justification for what they have done and shift their responsibility onto someone else’s shoulders.

But the point is that every human being will be responsible for their own actions, and will have no right to shift the burden of their responsibility onto another/others, only on the condition that they have the right to decide and act based on their own understanding, meaning they can be “autonomous,” and their autonomy—that is, deciding and acting based on their own understanding—is recognized. On the other hand, the authentic life means nothing other than that a person is autonomous, meaning they decide and act based on their own understanding, not based on the understanding of others, or the desires, likes, and dislikes of others, or conformity to public opinion, fashion, or the command and will of another.

Of course, primary/fundamental autonomy does not contradict secondary/superstructural heteronomy, in the sense that sometimes, and under certain conditions, a person is rationally obliged/entitled to rely on the testimony of others as a source of knowledge or to obey their commands. In these cases, the person does so at the command of their own reason and based on their own understanding. On this basis, it can be said that consulting scholars and experts, accepting their testimony, and following their advice and instructions within the realm of their knowledge and expertise is compatible with autonomy, self-governance, and living according to one’s own understanding.

In these cases, it is the individual themselves who, based on their own understanding, decides whether to accept another’s testimony or to act upon their advice or command. If the other person possesses the necessary qualifications, and the individual has, through honest and diligent investigation, ascertained the existence of these qualifications in them, and their testimony, advice, or command is not incompatible with the information and evidence available to the individual through other sources and channels of knowledge, then that individual, in following the other, has acted at the command of their own reason, and is excused in case of error—not because responsibility is thereby transferred from their shoulders to the other’s, and the other must answer in their place, but because they have fulfilled their own responsibility. Our rational and moral responsibility does not require that we personally investigate every matter; such a thing is impossible, and if it were possible, it would not be desirable.

3. From a Quranic perspective, how does spirituality serve as a source of effect in acquiring moral virtues and attaining perfection and flourishing?

In my view, the relationship between religious/sacred spirituality and ethics is multifaceted. This relationship can be explained by relying on the concept of taqwa/piety. The first facet of this relationship is the role that sacred spirituality can play in the “recognition” of moral virtues. The second facet is the role of this spirituality in a person’s “motivation” to follow moral values. The third facet relates to the “acquisition of moral virtues” or “moral education,” and the fourth facet returns to the role of ethics in sacred spirituality. Here, I will try to offer explanations about each of these facets as concisely as possible.

One of the very important attributes ascribed to God in sacred spirituality is the attribute of the “Ideal Observer” [18]. The Ideal Observer is someone who, due to possessing specific moral and epistemological characteristics, holds “epistemological authority” [19] in the realm of ethics, meaning that to know the moral ruling or the correct moral ruling, one must refer to them and prioritize their judgment over the judgment of others. From the perspective of sacred spirituality, our need for God and His moral judgment is prior to performing an action and at the stage of decision-making, and God’s role in this realm is not limited merely to judgment on the Day of Resurrection and reward and punishment after the action. When the Quran says, “God is the most just of judges,” [20] or “God is the best of judges,” [21] its meaning is that we need to refer to and consult with God before acting and at the stage of decision-making.

Of course, as I have elaborated elsewhere, including in the two books Religion in the Scales of Ethics and The Ethics of Theology, ethics is independent of religion in all respects, including epistemologically and psychologically. However, the epistemological independence of ethics from religion means that God’s epistemological authority in the realm of ethics is not an “exclusive” authority; that is, the moral ruling or the correct moral ruling can also be known through other means, including “reason” or “moral conscience.” The psychological independence of ethics from religion also means that religion is not the “exclusive” source of motivation for moral behavior; rather, this motivation can also be supplied from other sources, including from ethics itself.

The concept of “divine piety” (taqwa), which is heavily emphasized in the Quran and our religious culture, does not mean fear of God, but rather being mindful of God and having a vivid sense of being in His presence. “God-consciousness” is different from “God-fearing.” The emotional and psychological state accompanying piety is not “fear,” but “shame”; the shame resulting from being in the presence of a majestic Lord. In truth, the etiquette of being in the presence of God is nothing other than observing moral values.

This sense of being in the presence of God both causes a person to seek guidance from God when making a decision—that is, to try to discover His view regarding the moral status of the action they intend to perform—and causes a person to refrain from committing morally wrong actions because of God’s presence; that is, to prioritize God’s moral judgment of that action over personal desires and interests, their own fear and greed, and the temptation and will of others who invite them to commit such actions. In other words, the sense of being in the presence of God causes a person who possesses such a feeling to annihilate their own will in the will of God, and God’s will, by definition, is a moral will.

On the other hand, an existential and spiritual connection with a God who possesses all moral virtues to the utmost perfection and is free from all moral vices, and companionship with Him and worship of Him, causes these virtues to be cultivated in the human soul and spirit and those vices to be cleansed from the realm of one’s existence. Thus, sacred spirituality plays a prominent role in moral perfection and flourishing, because being mindful of God has three important functions in the realm of ethics. The feeling of God’s presence in the universe, or the sense of being in the presence of God, has an epistemological function, a psychological function, and an educational function; that is, piety is a source of knowledge, a source of motivation, and a source of virtue.

On the other hand, without a doubt, ethics also plays an important role in drawing closer to God and making a person more spiritual. From this perspective, the relationship and mutual influence of ethics and sacred spirituality is reciprocal. Living ethically and living spiritually have various levels and degrees, and progress and advancement in each of these two realms will lead to progress and advancement in the other. Whoever is more ethical is closer to God, and whoever is closer to God is more ethical.

4. Does the Quran’s teaching suggest that an ideal life can only be achieved through spirituality, or does an ideal life require other elements as well? In other words, does spirituality completely cover human life?

Your question is ambiguous. If you mean that spirituality completely covers human life, that is, there is no realm of human life in which spirituality has nothing to say, the answer to this question is yes. Spirituality is a kind of approach or disposition that accompanies a person in private and in public, in the street and the marketplace and the corner of the home, and naturally influences their movements and stillness, their deeds and speech, and their interaction with themselves and others. Spirituality is like a perfume that fills the living space of a spiritual person and is with them everywhere.

But if you mean that spirituality is everything we need as human beings to have an ideal life, the answer is no. Spirituality is a virtue that must be accompanied by other virtues, including the virtue of rationality, both so that it can play its proper role in human life and so that it does not cause neglect of other essential components for a life worthy and befitting a human being. For example, politics and economics are among the things that a spiritual person should not ignore either. The difference between a spiritual person and a non-spiritual person is not that the former is completely indifferent to politics and economics, but rather that the former also has a spiritual approach in political and economic activity and does not forget their spiritual concerns in these two realms either; that is, spirituality has something to say in these two realms as well, but what it says is not that engaging in political and economic affairs contradicts living spiritually, but rather that engaging in these affairs should not make a person neglectful of God, the Hereafter, and attending to the self.[22] I am very grateful for the opportunity you have given me.

-----------------------------------------------

pdf of the conversation