Ethics and Islam Essay

The interpretation of secular vs. religious moral philosophy is always interesting, when we filter to understand which of the two deserve our support. Obviously, both good philosophies have the serious to exist among us, but the provisions of the religious ethical motive in verbalise Nursis vision be not only unique, but are sometimes surprising, and are sometimes unacceptable to those, who keep to secular ethical traditions. Said Nursi insists on moral philosophy having religious foundations. His ethical vision is found on the assumption that religion is the ejaculate of reliable ethical knowledge.For Nursi, the ultimate source of all ethical reflection is the Quran (Markham 69). In this situation it is realistic to suggest that Quran should be simple and understandable to the common people, so that they should be able to follow its provisions. The assumption is rather debatable on the bingle hand, in that respect seems to be nothing negative or threatening in the fact t hat Said Nursi keeps to religious foundations of ethics. On the other hand, I may suggest that those who refuse to accept the life of the prophet Muhammad as the source of ethical knowledge, risk facing opposition from religious ethics supporters.This ethics loses its relevance as soon as it is faced with the fact that there are possible other sources of ethics in other cultures of the world. Moreover, and I would agree with Markham, in that there is no guarantee that being dutiful to Quran means seeing its wisdom in case we do not understand the provisions to which we should keep in our ethics, it loses its relevance and meaning. The strong align of religious ethics in Said Nursis words is in accepting violence as weakness in trying to pick various disputes.Nursi is committed to handling disagreement with peaceful means not because he shared a western skepticism about the true statement of religion, but because of the truth of religion (Markham 72). Secular ethics would easily eliminate these religious attitudes. While Nursi tries to give up the distinctiveness of religion, he obviously forgets that this strength is relevant only at bottom the limited religious circles. Secularism exists and cannot be denied. For those who go out themselves being secular the strength of religion is closely connected with the post of metaphysical phenomenon.In the absence of the latter, the power of the former becomes debatable. Thus, religious foundations of ethics can be applied within the limited space of super religious eastern countries, which keep to Islamic religion. Especially interesting is Nursis ideas about psycheal ethics and social equality. His interpretation of a person in illness is rather curious, though is also natural within the eastern religious framework. O ill person who lacks persistence Be patient, indeed, offer thanks Your illness may transform each of the proceedings of your life into the equivalent of an hours worship (Makrham 74).The question is whether patience is equal to inactivity. Recognizing the religious value of pain and suffering is what Nursi assay to stick in his ethical teaching (Markham 75) but this also risks confusing ethics with religion, without creating any distinct border between them. Social ethics in Nursis vision tends to support equality through rejecting interest and recognizing the splendour of redistribution. In these terms, Nursi seems to reject the pluralism of social status in the society. Moreover, rejection of interest is next to rejecting secularism, than to supporting religious foundations of ethics.Conclusion The whole ethical theory created by Nursi deserves attention but seems to be founded on the grounds, which do not justify the strength of religion but better protect it from the intervention of the out-of-door knowledge. In this light religious ethics seems even more vulnerable, than Nursi tried to represent it.Works citedMarkham, I. Secular or Religious Foundations fo r Ethics A Case Study of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi. In I. Markham & I. Ozdemir, Globalization, Ethics and Islam, Ashgate Publishing, 2005, pp. 65-78.