BARAKA BASHMENT

Some of these next few are repeats but updated as I am putting together a manuscript. A number are brand spankin’ newbie.

Do you not see that all creatures
in the sky and on earth glorify God—
even the bird on a wing?
Each one knows its prayer and manner of praise.
Qur’an 24:41

The outline of the human figure is often hard to perceive. The farther one stands the more blurred our once pristine reference becomes as it merges into innumerable Others. And yet, approaching the Other gives us a similar lack of outline. The closer we investigate—the deeper we dig—the human skin once again loses interest in its definition and dissolves into a deviant migration from one atom to the next. Tendon yields to wormhole yields to the unnamed. The human being! The assumed form of context and experimentation.

However, the irreducible rarely remains as such. Always a work in process, this culmination of interest, ecology, language, salt water, and breath constantly defines and is instantaneously defined. The senses relay to the totality a category of responses. Upon utterance the deliberately almost-constitution—now a human-thing—walks with a (not always) invisible burden. This human-thing, no longer a work in process, is idolized and immersed in the corporate plasma of social admen. The continuous unfolding becomes frozen in time.

Do they seek something other than the religion of God,
to Whom all in the heavens and on earth
have submitted, willingly or unwillingly,
and to Whom they will be returned?
Qur’an 3:83

If God is (not just) the uncontainable totality of is-ness, and Islam is a peaceful surrender to the already immersed nature of the human being into this is-ness, and to be muslim (not necessarily a Muslim) is to be a person who willingly or unwillingly submits to these conditions, how than and to what does the plasma stick?

Rock. Tar sticks easily to rock. Feathers stick easily to tar. On the road to Mecca there is rock, tar, possibly feathers, and a number of road signs. One sign in particular dictates that all Muslims may stay the coarse while all non-Muslims must exit to the right. The questions one must ask are: does this sign describe anything real—anything possible? Who in the desert must really veer to the right? If a person exits to the right, does the road continue to turn right until it places the human-thing where it previously veered? Does the exit from the road to Mecca even exist? Can a person really veer in any direction? Are we not all willingly or unwillingly enveloped by the perpetual manifestations of Truth?

The world as experience exists as an infinite number of potentials. In the constructed social realm (how social this realm truly is has yet to be seen) people do in fact turn right—people whose identity does not coincide with the dominant identity construct. All non-Muslims must exit, which ironically enough includes muslims who do not bare the title Muslim™. At its best, radical monotheisms consider all beings partial to the same divine motivation, thus challenging egocentric sectarianism and categories beginning with “non.” Radical monotheism recognizes a common breath that manifests in as many ways as there are people to in fact breathe. To restrict this breath is to provide only a straw through which to suckle air, over time converting raw brainpower into a lethargic brain damage.

However, this strangling of the process-human is by no means limited to religious affiliation. The human-thing is a perpetual manifestation of the linear narrative that careens through the mind upon noticing an Other of notable interest. Atheism may strangle. Pantheism may strangle. Communism may strangle. Monotheism may strangle. Anarchism may strangle. Post-postmodernism may strangle. The common thread is the common narrative where ideological borders solidify and condemn those outside the gates to subjugation. This narrative typically plays out as such: Two people are walking towards one another at which point the mind begins to construct a flawless personal identity that in turn maintains an Other’s flawless personal identity. Here is a person doing the “business thing.” S/he is an asshole. I probably wouldn’t be able to talk to him/her about anything. They are against all that I believe and therefore is an enemy and needs to be avoided. At best I will ignore this person.

One way to even begin to recognize a subversion of this common scenario is to possibly follow this person (to whatever degree this objectifies her/him and makes him/her a goal I am not sure) and proceed to engage her/him in the most lengthy conversation possible-making sure to ask many questions. With a sense of humility the conversation may yield a transcommodified experience—one in which the minute orchestra of cellular activity is (sub)consciously appreciated. Mind you, this is not a goal. And this is certainly not an attempt to have us “get along.” Rather it is a simple practice of moving away from engaging with the representation of the Other (via film, TV, newspaper, etc.) towards engaging the Other directly, taking notice of the subtle body language. Smelling the breath. Hearing the voice among other voices. Remarking about someone’s cough. I don’t expect us to like this so-called Other, however, I expect us to recognize its humanity. It’s a very preliminary and small step with possible radical implications.

The questions still remain, however. Is talking to a stranger revolutionary? Will it lead to a global or even local dialogue? Are we using strangers for our own therapy? Have we merely fashioned them into golden calves? Is the exit from the road to Mecca an expression of samsara, a blessing, both, or neither? Maybe we should first get in touch with our loved ones. Have we listened what they have to say? Have we asked? And when they answered have we heard?