Search results for 'tag:Negatives tag:Marriage' matching tags 'Negatives' and 'Marriage'

Re: Hate?

Titithi — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:19:51 GMT

What an emotion it was when hate is a combination of love and fear giving a complex feeling to the "failed' lover. In truth, people often fear someone or something that they love will be taken.No matter what forms of love they are,I agree that fear is really an important agent that makes you hate your ex-lover.
In consumed love,religion and culture tend to trace a deep influence in this emotion.You will feel a sentiment of culpability when involving in this triangle love due to the concept of marital fidelity in monoganous marriage and in the prohibition of adultery in thought of the seventh commandment. There is no abnormal if you hate your ex-lover. Not only is hate a combination of love and fear but it's also clearly affective as grief and jalousy.It is possible to be over this negative emotion.Who has the greatest emotional control is the person often gets his way.
In romance, you must put yourself in competition. There are numerous broken relationship that began in sweet love and ended in bitter anger and hate in this game Love is emotion of wanting while jalousy is emotion of having.Thus, you should ask yourself the reason why you hate your ex-lover,the reason you think you hate him or her, and do you feel good to hate him or her?Would it be fair to hate someone if he meant no harm to anyone?
In true love,you have nothing to lose and nothing to gain.So there is no jealousy.Who have the most to gain have the greatest to deceive. Who have the least to gain and want nothing and who give everything,they can love perfectly.In this unconditional love, there is no desire and reciprocation.How can you fear a rival and how can you hate your ex-lover in case of the break?There was no doubt that displacement was the best way to sold the problem. Indeed, an emotion can only overcome by a stronger emotion. It's really a bad condition if you should empathizing a love's joy with another lover when true love couldn't be fleeting .So, there is a small step between hate and love.True love is always feared by most people because it can never be repressed.A famous Vietnamese monk has advised us:"No matter where or when you live,you would find materials needs (such as food and drink..) very important to keep and develop your love instead of looking at the after glow to build a cloudy castle of love"
Love is sacrifice of sorts so forgiveness is the only way of ceasing to feel resentment or anger against another person.In some context, it may granted without any expectation of compensation and without response ie; we may forgive a person who is dead.The sad truth that many people lived their life in anger and hate and they were easily slighted and took a malign pleasure in hurting others.Therefore love is good for us.Those who love most are happiest while those who hate most live in abysmal dark sadness.
Nothing could be more generous than forgiveness.So spare a smile and forgive for those unhappy people who would hurt you most.You won't feel hate anyone even the ex-lover, the person who makes you painful to live in anger ,jalousy and grief .Try to find an another,you will feel better than living in this complex emotion .May be you haven't truly loved .In true love ,you want nothing and give everything so it's difficult to fear that you might be hurt.

the stranger

LillySchillz — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:05:11 GMT

A Close Reading of a Paragraph from Albert Camus's The Stranger
______________________________________________________________________________

[1] That evening Marie came by to see me and asked me if I wanted to marry her. [2] I said it didn't make any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to. [3] Then she wanted to know if I loved her. [4] I answered the same way I had the last time, that it didn't mean anything but that I probably didn't love her. [5] "So why marry me, then?" she said. <img src="/emoticons/emotion-14.gif" alt="Devil [6]" /> I explained to her that it didn't really matter and that if she wanted to, we could get married. [7] Besides, she was the one who was doing the asking and all I was saying was yes. <img src="/emoticons/emotion-29.gif" alt="Music [8]" /> Then she pointed out that marriage was a serious thing. [9] I said, "No." [10] She stopped talking for a minute and looked at me without saying anything. [11] Then she spoke. [12] She just wanted to know if I would have accepted the same proposal from another woman, with whom I was involved in the same way. [13] I said, "Sure." [14] Then she said she wondered if she loved me, and there was no way I could know about that. [15] After another moment's silence, she mumbled that I was peculiar, that that was probably why she loved me but that one day I might hate her for the same reason. [16] I didn't say anything, because I didn't have anything to add, so she took my arm with a smile and said she wanted to marry me. [17] I said about my boss's proposition and she said she's love to see Paris. [18] I told her that I'd lived there once and she asked me what it was like. [19] I said, "It's dirty. Lots of pigeons and dark courtyards. Everybody's pale." _________________________________________________________________________

This paragraph from Albert Camus's The Stranger appears one-third into the novel. It takes place after Meursault finishes work for the day. The paragraph is mostly being narrated by Meursault, with Marie questioning him concerning love and marriage. It exhibits Meursault's uncaring, simple, and pessimistic nature, as well as Marie's unscathed desire to marry Meursault. Meursault's nature and Marie's feelings are shown by Meursault's simple remarks and actions, and Marie's reoccurring statements concerning marriage.
Meursault doesn't seem to really care about the things that most people would care about. Upon Marie proposing marriage to Meursault, he blatantly states that it doesn't make any difference to him and that they could get married if she wanted to. Marriage isn't something you would suspect one to think so lightly about. It is obvious that Meursault doesn't care whether or not he marries Marie, signifying his uncaring nature (sentence 1 and 2).
When asked by Marie to describe Paris, Meursault states, "It's dirty. Lots of pigeons and dark courtyards. Everybody's pale."(sentence 19). The short general statements made by Meursault display his simple-natured self. In addition to Meursault's apparent simple nature, the statements by him also exhibit how pessimistic he can be, giving only negative feedback to Marie about Paris.
Despite Meursault's colorless feelings towards Marie, Marie touches heavily upon the subject of marriage in the paragraph. Marie asks Meursault if he wants to marry her and if he loves her. With passive responses made by Meursault such as: "No"(sentence 9) and "Sure" (sentence 13), Marie still shows her love towards him and takes his arm "with a smile" and says that she wants to marry him (sentence 16). Marie has shown that she will continue to love and want to marry Meursault regardless of how he does or does not feel about their relationship.
Meursault and Marie have proved to be totally different people, yet they have also shown that they are alike. Like Meursault, Marie has remained unchanged about the subject of marriage, although their views on marriage are quite different. Meursault's uncaring, simple, and pessimistic nature has proved to have attracted Marie and her passionate ways of thinking.

Can someone help me with my english 2 rough draft? thanks!

J3kp — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:24:07 GMT

Sexual Preference and Discrimination

Homosexuals are found in all walks of life, at all social and economic levels, and in all cultural groups. They are diverse in terms of race, ethnicity, age, parenthood, relationships, careers, health, education, and sexual behavior. (Coon 578-579) They have been around since the dawn of time. It has not been until the 1970s that psychiatrists and psychologists have recognized that homosexuality was not some sort of mental disorder. Stereotypes like this are inaccurate and create much of the difficulty that homosexuals face.

There are currently over 21 million Americans that are either gay and ***, not counting an unknown number of people who consider themselves bisexual. The 2000 census found that same-sex couples live in 99.3% of all counties in the United States. (Human Rights Campaign) Research shows that there has not been an increase in homosexual activities or experiences, but rather an increase in the candor with which sexual preference is discussed and displayed. Taking these statistics into consideration one would think that discrimination against homosexuals would be non-existent. There are still large numbers of people who think homosexuality is deviant and that it is sick, immoral, sinful, perverted, and abnormal. (Newman 207, 216, 251)

There are many forms of discrimination against gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. They are discriminated against in every aspect of their lives. Every homosexual has been discriminated against at least once in their lifetime, maybe as often as once daily, whether it be verbal, physical (such as hate crimes), or just silent disapproval.

The Homosexual Rights Movement seeks to eliminate sodomy laws barring homosexual acts between consenting adults. It also calls for an end to discrimination against homosexuals in all walks of life. The ultimate aim of the civil rights movement is to encourage societyâs tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality.

The U.S. Senate defeated the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). The ENDA granted homosexuals rights and protections in the workplace. (Concerned Women For America) As of 1996, any homosexual American can be legally fired from their jobs or careers just because of their sexual orientation. Employment discrimination is the most common complaint received by the American Civil Liberties Union from gays and lesbians. (Robinson) Homosexuals were reported to have higher average household income, higher college graduation rates, and highest rate of workers in professional or management positions. The argument is that since they have higher percentages they have no need of civil rights protection in employment. According to national average and not because they are a select group, homosexuals (gay and ***) earn less than they would if heterosexual. In 2004, the U.S. Accounting Office determined that over 1,000 rules and regulations exist in determining a personâs eligibility to receive benefits, rights, and privileges. Most benefits are denied to homosexuals and their partners because of their sexual orientations; they are mainly denied all health benefits, death pensions, and FMLA.

The Human Rights Campaign states that over 8000 employers and 215 Fortune 500 companies now provide domestic partner benefits for gay and *** workers. But most states, 42 at the most, have made refusal explicit by enacting statutes that define marriage as being between one woman and one man or including bans in the state constitutions. (Newman 207, 216, 251) Most homosexuals do not convert others to homosexuality, molest children, they are not mentally ill, they do not hate others of the opposite sex, and they do not make their children gay. They can have long term caring, monogamous relationships and can contribute about the same to society as heterosexuals.

Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are denied the right to a civil marriage, which would then open the door to being able to receive all employment benefits. The main arguments of homosexual marriage is that it should be an institution between one man and one woman only, itâs not the best environment to raise children, relationships are immoral, and marriage should be about procreation. In reality homosexuals are loyal to their partners, they value family, and they honor and abide by the laws. In countries such as Denmark, various forms of homosexual marriage has been legal for years. Since gays, lesbians, and bisexuals cannot marry within most states partners are not able to make decisions for loved ones in case of an emergency. Wills and powers of attorney have been known to be broken if a family challenges the life partner. If a homosexual is put into jail a partner may be required to testify against the loved one whereas legally married couples are not required to.

If a single or homosexual couple decide to adopt children there is an above average chance that some discrimination will occur. Adoption is a controversial issue for homosexuals concerning whether there will be negative consequences to the child. Children can be hurt mentally and physically by others who are uncomfortable with a parentâs sexual identity. Studies show that children with same-sex parents do as well as children who are raised in traditional families. (Newman 207; 216, 251) Officially there is only one state that can ban gays and lesbians from adopting children and that is Florida. There is no concrete evidence that homosexuals are unfit to be parents. A parents ability to provide for the child and to create a loving home is not and should not be influenced by sexual preference.

Bill Clinton introduced the âDonât ask, Donât tellâ policy in 1993. The policy prohibits anyone who has sexual bodily or romantic contact with a person of the same sex from serving the armed forces and prohibits any homosexual or bisexual from disclosing his or her sexual orientation, or from speaking about any homosexual relationships, including marriages while serving in the military. In 2005, 742 people in the military were discharged because of the âDonât ask, Donât tellâ policy. Three polls show that a large majority of the American public favors letting gays, lesbians, and bisexuals into the U.S. Military. (Wikipedia)

Another form of discrimination comes in the form of hate crimes. The official definition of a hate crime is criminal actions intended to harm or intimidate people because of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, or other minority group status. One of the most famous homosexual hate crimes today would be the story of Mathew Shepard. He was lured from a campus bar on October 7^th by â two gayâ men. He was tied to a fence, beaten, and pistol-whipped by his attackers. He was then left for dead in freezing temperatures. He died on October 12^th with his family at his bedside. He was so badly injured that doctors were unable to operate. Out of 450 lesbians, gays, and bisexuals one-third of them have been a victim of a crime based on sexual orientation. 16.6% of hate crimes were the result of a sexual orientation bias. (The varieties of Hate Crime Victimization)

Homosexuals deserve to have the same rights as heterosexuals because we are all human beings. We all deserve to be treated fairly and in a respected manner. In most countries homosexuality is a âno-noâ subject. Millions of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are out of the closet and are now campaigning to get the same rights that are given to the heterosexuals.

âEach individuals journey through life is unique. Some will make this journey alone, others in loving relationships -maybe in marriage or other forms of commitment. We need to ponder our own choices and try to understand the choices of others. Love has many shapes and colors and is not finite. It can not be measured or defined in terms of sexual orientation.â (Robinson)

Argument Essay on the Impact of The Internet on Meaningful Relationships

Anonymous — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:25:14 GMT

Has the Internet Affected You?

Recently, issues of how the Internet has made an impact on interpersonal relationships ,have given cause for alarm. With the induction of the Internet, into peopleâs homes , the Internet is becoming the way people prefer to meet or seek their soul mateâs, confidantâs, friends and romantic interests. People are going to the Internet and spending hours online chatting and instant messaging. Forms of entertainment are also sought online ,which range from music ,videos , gossip, movie listings, concerts , etc. The Internet was initially designed to aid people in the enhancement of acquiring rapid information and communication purposes . The way we used to meet our companions and friends was face-to-face, or over some type of small talk. Eventhough the advancement of technology has come a long way , I believe that the Internetâs impact on interpersonal relationships is negative because of hidden dangerâs, trust issueâs , and deceptive behavior from frequent Internet use. For instance, parents not trusting their adolescentâs truthfulness of the content that they are viewing ,and mistrusting their spouses.

Reports of adolescents online frequently encountering pedophiles has increased over time. The program series that aired on NBCâs Dateline ,âTo Catch A Predatorâ, in September 2004 , featured men going to meet with young girls and boys. Upon arriving those men were surprised by reporters and undercover officials waiting to arrest them. The airing of this segment caused more concern among parents and awakened them to be more attentive (Bahney). This program proved to parents that the breakdown in communication, with their adolescents may be causing them to seek out attention online. Because of the content of their conversations, they deceptively hide the information from their parents, creating trust issues with their parents.

Predators surf the various Internet sites like Myspace.com or Friendster.com. Because this type of website is frequented mostly by adolescents, itâs a predators preference. This creates a dangerous atmosphere for adolescents while online. Websites like MySpace ,created in 2003, are under constant monitoring (Baney). Websites like Friendster.com, Tribe.net , Xanga. com and Meetup.com , are currently popular choices for adolescent socializing. According to Bahney these websites have at least 60 million registered users.

The dangers of the Internet has caused officials to reach out to areas where they can speak to groups of adolescents. The dangers online are not obvious to everyone. Some parents are not even aware of what is happening online. According to Bahney ,at Packer High School ,in Irvine California a meeting was held for the parents and adolescents discussing the dangers of the Internet. The meeting was conducted by Steve Wolf ,an Irvine , California Police Officer. The schoolâs newspaper polled students afterwards and reported that at least 80% of studentâs parents had installed some type of restriction to their MySpace page , in which previously there was only 14% of adolescent households with restrictions in place (Baney).

Secondly, the Internet has an strong effect on close relationships, especially when it comes to family and friends. The HomeNet project by *** in 1998 and a survey by Nie and Erbring in 2000/ 2001 reported, that frequent use of the Internet had negative outcomes for the user .âSuch as increases in loneliness and neglect of existing close relationshipsâ( Bargh and McKenna). Because of frequent use of the Internet less time is being spent with family and friends. The bonds that we once shared are being challenged by online relationships. According to Nie and Erbring, researchers, information reported from a âU.S. nationwide survey of about 4000 people concluded that heavy Internet use resulted in less time associated with family and friends.â(Bargh and McKenna).

Next, the Internet has made it is easier to chat about personal issues with a complete stranger . It is so much easier to leave out the important details in a conversation and hide your true feelings. The person on the other side of the screen canât console you ,they can only advise you. Personal contact , or in better words , or touching a person ,is the closeness that people miss out on , when developing a relationship online. Sociologists at Duke University in Arizona found that âmost adults only have two people they can talk to about the most important subjects in their livesâ for example ,medical issues and final arrangements. âAbout one-quarter have no close confidants at all â(Fountain).

Finally, spending too much time on the Internet can cause problems in marriages and established relationships. According to Jeffery McQuillen âthe absence of the characteristics associated with face-to-face communication can result in a loss of fidelity and an increase in the psychological distance between interact ants.â The Internet makes it easier to commit infidelities and in some ways it encourages deceptive behaviorâs among spouses. For example, it is much easier to hide infidelities behind a computer screen, and disguising it as work. Trying to justify time and whereabouts to your spouse takes more lying , practice and face-to-face justification. Emotions are harder to hide when there is a face-to-face confrontation. According to s study by Walther & Tidwell in 1995, state that âon-line systems do not have the nonverbal code that is present in Face-to-Face conversationsâ ( McQuiillen).

With so many temptations ,the ability to engage in oneâs fantasy ,completely unknown by their significant other, is overwhelming. People enter porn sites and live out their fantasies. Itâs like the Internet is a forbidden fruit. So trust in the relationship is broken ,and breakdownâs in communication are formed. One definition of the communication process ,according to Walther and Tidwell in 1996 , the asynchronous benefits permitâs the participants time to plan and edit comments more mindfully (McQuillen).

People leave out important information over the Internet about themselves, which leaves the opponent believing the best or worst about them. The sender or receiver could say that they are wealthy, exceptionally attractive and the best catch ever. Trust is an important element in forming relationships and maintaining them. The World Value Survey says â Can people generally be trusted, or is it that you canât be too careful in dealing with people?â(Bahney). In short this means that people have tendencies to stretch the truth and you should always be careful with whom you deal with.

The evidence shown has proven that the Internet has rightly given us cause for much concern. There are some good advantages that come from the Internet. Such as , relationships formed , that in some cases have ended up marriage, finding a soul mate, and the exposure to new people and their cultureâs are rewarding in itself. Some other good advantages are that the Internet can help people research items ,like medical problems and remedies. The Internet even allows people to stay in touch with distant family, friends and significant others. In a study in 2002 by McKenna and Bargh polled about 600 people and a substantial number reported that they had gotten close with someone they met online and more than 50% of those new relationships have bloomed into âreal-lifeâ situations including marriage (Barghand & McKenna). Granted that the Internet has many positive attributes. Based on the evidence that I have gathered, the negative outcomes outweigh the positives. People are incorporating the Internet into daily life. People will continue to suffer the negative side effects of the growth of the digital age and adjust.

The issue of the negative impacts of the Internet on meaningful interpersonal relationships is indeed an issue that needs to be addressed. There are so many negative effects occurring from this digital age that solutions are few. Iâm sure that the Internet has affected you or at least someone you know, maybe it was a positive outcome or a negative one, but you have been effected in some way. It is up to us to save our kids, personal relationships ,or business relationships and we must set boundaries when it comes to the amount of time we frequent the Internet. Whatever the ending result, we will learn how to deal with it and move on to the next program.

Re: Humility

rishonly — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 00:02:13 GMT

This is an interesting topic. In my opinion, such negative attitudes and temperaments are mostly due to the way the people are brought up. These people, in fact, remind me of my former room mate who would always refute whatever others say. If your answer or statement is "X", he would immediately rebut and come up with a new answer as "Y". It is unfortunate, though, he got divorced few months after his marriage. God only knows what statements of his wife he would have refuted or dodged.

and much worse

Kanonathena — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 18:32:04 GMT

The minimal user of pornography also shows signs of significant negative impact. The damage to marriage of visual infidelity is massive, Sex addicts often have no conception of healthy sexuality and their partners often end up engaging in degrading behaviors. I often hear complaints from partners who feel degraded by a sex addict who watches pornography during the sex act with them and much worse.

much worse than what?

Thanks.

Re: Howard's dramatic monologue!

Anonymous — Mon, 15 May 2006 17:40:05 GMT

hey,

well il show you some of the stuff i have but it is all over the place i haven't edited it yet, but there's so much i want to write and so little time to do it in, but i would really like some guidance please.

I have also read Browning's poem, but have yet to really talk on the comparison between the two.

p.s my writing is quite bad at the moment, been writing whilst ill with the flu so please point out any major contradictions or plain nonsense that you see within the text.

thank you

A dramatic monologue has âseven definite characteristics: âspeaker, audience, occasion, revelation of character, interplay between speaker and audience, dramatic action, and action which takes place in the present.â (pg 8)

âThe dramatic monologue is a hybrid form. It has relations with lyric, because it is an expression of thought and feeling; but it is like a speech from a play, in that the character whose speech is represented is speaking out of a specific situation, and usually a problematic one. A dramatic monologue is like a speech from a play taken out of context. Its speaker is a figure other than the poet â in other words it dramatises the speaking subject â and the speaker generally speaks out of a situation that involves or leads towards action, a situation that is problematic or conflicted. It is a monologue because there is only one voice, and that voice is usually presented as speaking.â

Richard Howard has written a brilliant sequel to the Browning poem, My Last Duchess. His "speaker" is the envoy to whom Browning's duke has recently spoken to, and who is now reporting on that interview to his principal, the Count of Tyrol. However, Richard Howard has decided not to write it in the same form as Browning's but has used a letter form instead. The poem does not appear to have a particular rhyme scheme or a specific metre. It does, however, have a rather syllabic stanza form with mainly monosyllabic words, which is different compared to Browningâs rhyming iambic pentameter couplets.

Nikolaus Mardruz is the speaker of the poem. He is a representative of a government, a messenger: âMy Lordship's service, I remain his Envoyâ. It is clear to see that the poet is not the speaker of the poem, thus it abides with the rules of a dramatic monologue. The speakerâs voice is quite individualised. Nikolaus appears to be very loyal and faithful to the count; he travels to Ferrara and patiently waits hours before the Duke attends to him: âseveral hours were to elapseâ¦ before the Envoy.. Be seen to by His Grace.â The messenger tries his best to assure the Count that all will be well if his daughter were to marry the Duke, and also comes up with a proposal so that the Countess need not suffer from the âmurderous temperâ of the Duke. The sentence describing the Dukeâs temper is a clue from Browningâs poem that the Duke murdered his wife. It is a plausible to suggest the poem has the quality of a dramatic monologue. There is a speaker speaking to the Count of Tyrol. The situation described can be considered, to a certain extent, as problematic. Clearly, the Count has certain anxieties regarding the marriage of his daughter to a Duke who has experienced such a complex past.

The speaker does reveal certain thoughts and opinions about his encounter with the Duke. These are more apparent in the side comments separated with brackets. An example of this is when the messenger first arrives on the Dukeâs grounds, and is surprised to see the place âclose to a ruinâ. Nikolaus comments on the fact that âeven my Lordâs most unstinting dowry may not restore this wasted precincts to what their deteriorating state demands.â This shows us that he personally believes that no amount of money can restore the palace to a reasonable standard. It is almost as if the messenger is really picking on the weaknesses of the Duke, and maybe hoping to flatter the Count and appeal to his better nature. The speaker also observes the fact that the Duke is getting very old, âhe is no longer a young manâ. These small revelations of character show that he does have concerns regarding the Dukeâs age. It is not necessarily the case that he does not approve of the Duke being much older than the Countess, but rather that it works in their favour. The Duke will obviously pass away within a few years, therefore leaving the new Duchess with freedom and wealth. The speaker is very cunning; he is able to devise an alternate pre-nuptial agreement so that the Countess has the upper hand. Thus, the Duke will receive the intended dowry in installments instead of a lump sum; therefore the Count will have a guarantee that his daughter will be treated fairly and remain in good health. The speaker is generally hoping that the Duke will pass on as soon as possible, so that the plan goes ahead as planned, âthe long devotion (so long as he lasts)â.

The poem has many attributes which may lead an audience to believe it is a dramatic monologue. However, as a point of definition, âbecause the sense of an individual voice, and often of speech, is fundamental to the form, it is not correct to use the term of a poem written in the form of a letter.â The poem, therefore, can be more appropriately called a dramatic epistle.

The language in âMy Last Duchessâ is calm. It is a drawn out, one sided conversational boast yet the Dukeâs speech is sophisticated and eloquent.
The style contains a gradual build up to the whole story, and the drama takes place slowly with obvious mystery surrounding the fate of the Duchess. The language and actions of the Duke relay his jealous and controlling nature and yet his mannerisms and speech make him affable and admirable to such an extent the reader refrains from casting a moral judgment on him. In both poems Browning demonstrates the ability to detach himself completely and in the former, even offers the insight to a killers psyche using the monologue narrative.

The speakerâs attitude is revealed in his intonation. Upon his arrival in Ferrara, the messenger is quite disappointed by what he sees; he has a high expectation of the quality and extravagance of the palace grounds, but is taken aback when all is not as he had anticipated. This can be seen in lines such as âsuch mirroring was my first dismayâ and âqueasy it made meâ. His first impressions of the palace do not impress him at all as he cannot understand why the Duke would let his âlife in fallen stoneâ remain in such a state,

âin the dingy water that somehow

held them up as if for our surveillance-

ours?â

The speaker refers to this meeting as an âopportunityâ and also emphasises that it is also his âobligationâ. In the second stanza, this opportunity does not change his perception of what he has seen, but instead, the meeting with the Duke enhances his disappointment as he is delayed for hours assessing âa set of cameos just brought from Cairoâ. He sees the Duke caught up in a dull and gloomy state, his âtenebrosityâ. They discuss plans of the pre-nuptial agreement, from the speakerâs point of view, he feels that their negotiations look âpromisingâ. Nevertheless, whatever the outcome is, he realises the Countâs daughter will remain âamong Ferraraâs treasuresâ and refers to her as a âtrophyâ. However, there is a downside to this as a lot of the Dukeâs prized possessions do not appear to be in perfect condition or looked after, so it can be said that the speaker is not too keen on this idea as at the end of this stanza he says that if this is the Countâs wish then âso be itâ.

The speaker feels humiliated when he is confronted with the painting of the Dukeâs late wife. He calls it a âpainted deceitâ and his âembarrassment afforded a cue for audible laughterâ. The speaker is not impressed by the portrait and just sees it as another âchicaneâ or a form of trickery. The speaker himself has a more inferior role to play in society compared to the Duke, yet the speaker has formulated many opinions against the Duke based on appearance and plausibility of the Dukeâs encounters and experiences. In his letter, the speaker talks of the Dukeâs ârodomontadeâ meaning pretentious boasting. The Duke is proud to talk about his âbronze Neptuneâ which was cast in bronze especially for him, however, the messenger states how he must have seen âat least six of them cluttering the summer palace at Innsbruckâ. This is also in relation to Browningâs poem, whereby in the last few lines the Duke draw attention to the same prized possession, âNotice Neptune, though,
Taming a sea-horse, thought a rarity,
Which Claus of Innsbruck cast in bronze for me .â * From the messengerâs point of view, it was all ânonsenseâ. In spite of this, the speaker chooses to give the Duke the benefit of the doubt and proceeds to guarantee the future of the Countess, be it with the Duke, or if he passes on, the âyoung lordlingâ the Countess has had her eye on.

The mood of the poem is quite mischievous and unsupportive towards the Duke. The speaker talks about his encounter with the Duke from a negative perspective. He is not overly impressed with the Dukeâs presence and boastful personality. The speaker comes up with ways in which the Count will have the upper hand on his new relation.

There vocabulary used throughout the poem which bring out and places emphasis on the tone of the poem. Words such as âchicaneâ, ârodomontadeâ and âgloboseâ are all very uncommon and complex terms used for words with a simple meaning behind them. Howardâs purpose for sprinkling words like these throughout the poem is to show that it is a complex situation that that the messenger is involved in.

that's it so far, i have yet to reference my work but they should all be in quoatation marks.

thank you again for all your help

hi...could you please check my writing and give some suggestions ^^

Anonymous — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 20:49:36 GMT

Should women quit work after having a child? This question has become a well-known issue in todayâs society since more and more women refuse to be housewives, even after having a child. Traditionally, the husband goes to work and feeds his family while the wife stays at home, looking after their children. This family structure might be advantages to the growth of the children, because good parenting could possibly lead children to success and prevent them from harm. In addition, parents normally prefer to look after their children themselves since daycare services are always considered expensive and unreliable.

However, there are many reasons for women not to quit work after having a child. First, quitting work directly increases the financial pressure of a family, which may have negative impacts on each family member physically and mentally. Second, quitting work imposes women to be isolated from the work force. When women waste their intelligence on shopping for bargain food or daily groceries, they may lose the opportunity to enhance their working skills and communicate with the outside. Besides, instead of working for earning money, women start expecting too much of their children, wondering their next generations would have better lives than theirs, which may put too much pressures on both mothers and children. More importantly, the relationship between husbands and wives may degenerate since they start living in two different worlds. They might gradually have difficulties communicating with each other and this would become a very serious marriage issue.

Should women quit work after having a child? Even though there may be some advantages to stay at home and look after children, I think it is more important for women to keep part of their lives independently- keep working on their careers.

Re: What do you know about Prophet Mohamed (Peace Be Upon Him)?

Anonymous — Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:08:01 GMT

One thing I know for sure is that the Danish papers did not do him justice,

Mohammed (Peace be upon him) is the last prophet and the religion he brought is Islam.

Islam does not deny Christianity nor Judism but says that they have been altered during the years.

This is a biography by a NON-MUSLIM I repeat a NON-MUSLIM,

It is a bit lengthy bu bare with me,

Biography by a non-Muslim, K. Rao

Ø

Mohammed The Prophet

By Prof. K. S. Ramakrishna Rao, Head of the Department of Philosophy,
Government College for Women University of Mysore, Mandya-571401 (Karnatika).

Re-printed from "Islam and Modern age", Hydrabad, March 1978.

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

In the desert of Arabia was Mohammad born, according to Muslim historians, on April 20, 571. The name means highly praised. He is to me the greatest mind among all the sons of Arabia. He means so much more than all the poets and kings that preceded him in that impenetrable desert of red sand.
When he appeared Arabia was a desert -- a nothing. Out of nothing a new world was fashioned by the mighty spirit of Mohammad -- a new life, a new culture, a new civilization, a new kingdom which extended from Morocco to Indies and influenced the thought and life of three continents -- Asia, Africa and Europe.

When I thought of writing on Mohammad the prophet, I was a bit hesitant because it was to write about a religion I do not profess and it is a delicate matter to do so for there are many persons professing various religions and belonging to diverse school of thought and denominations even in same religion. Though it is sometimes, claimed that religion is entirely personal yet it can not be gain-said that it has a tendency to envelop the whole universe seen as well unseen. It somehow permeates something or other our hearts, our souls, our minds their conscious as well as subconscious and unconscious levels too. The problem assumes overwhelming importance when there is a deep conviction that our past, present and future all hang by the soft delicate, tender silked cord. If we further happen to be highly sensitive, the center of gravity is very likely to be always in a state of extreme tension. Looked at from this point of view, the less said about other religion the better. Let our religions be deeply hidden and embedded in the resistance of our innermost hearts fortified by unbroken seals on our lips.

But there is another aspect of this problem. Man lives in society. Our lives are bound with the lives of others willingly or unwillingly, directly or indirectly. We eat the food grown in the same soil, drink water, from the same the same spring and breathe the same air. Even while staunchly holding our own views, it would be helpful, if we try to adjust ourselves to our surroundings, if we also know to some extent, how the mind our neighbor moves and what the main springs of his actions are. From this angle of vision it is highly desirable that one should try to know all religions of the world, in the proper sprit, to promote mutual understanding and better appreciation of our neighborhood, immediate and remote.

Further, our thoughts are not scattered as appear to be on the surface. They have got themselves crystallized around a few nuclei in the form of great world religions and living faiths that guide and motivate the lives of millions that inhabit this earth of ours. It is our duty, in one sense if we have the ideal of ever becoming a citizen of the world before us, to make a little attempt to know the great religions and system of philosophy that have ruled mankind.

In spite of these preliminary remarks, the ground in these field of religion, where there is often a conflict between intellect and emotion is so slippery that one is constantly reminded of fools that rush in where angels fear to tread. It is also not so complex from another point of view. The subject of my writing is about the tenets of a religion which is historic and its prophet who is also a historic personality. Even a hostile critic like Sir William Muir speaking about the holy Quran says that. "There is probably in the world no other book which has remained twelve centuries with so pure text." I may also add Prophet Mohammad is also a historic personality, every event of whose life has been most carefully recorded and even the minutest details preserved intact for the posterity. His life and works are not wrapped in mystery.

My work today is further lightened because those days are fast disappearing when Islam was highly misrepresented by some of its critics for reasons political and otherwise. Prof. Bevan writes in Cambridge Medieval History, "Those account of Mohammad and Islam which were published in Europe before the beginning of 19th century are now to be regarded as literary curiosities." My problem is to write this monograph is easier because we are now generally not fed on this kind of history and much time need be spent on pointing out our misrepresentation of Islam.

The theory of Islam and Sword for instance is not heard now frequently in any quarter worth the name. The principle of Islam that there is no compulsion in religion is well known. Gibbon, a historian of world repute says, "A pernicious tenet has been imputed to Mohammadans, the duty of extirpating all the religions by sword." This charge based on ignorance and bigotry, says the eminent historian, is refuted by Quran, by history of Musalman conquerors and by their public and legal toleration of Christian worship. The great success of Mohammad's life had been effected by sheer moral force, without a stroke of sword.

But in pure self-defense, after repeated efforts of conciliation had utterly failed, circumstances dragged him into the battlefield. But the prophet of Islam changed the whole strategy of the battlefield. The total number of casualties in all the wars that took place during his lifetime when the whole Arabian Peninsula came under his banner, does not exceed a few hundreds in all. But even on the battlefield he taught the Arab barbarians to pray, to pray not individually, but in congregation to God the Almighty. During the dust and storm of warfare whenever the time for prayer came, and it comes five times a every day, the congregation prayer had not to be postponed even on the battlefield. A party had to be engaged in bowing their heads before God while other was engaged with the enemy. After finishing the prayers, the two parties had to exchange their positions. To the Arabs, who would fight for forty years on the slight provocation that a camel belonging to the guest of one tribe had strayed into the grazing land belonging to other tribe and both sides had fought till they lost 70,000 lives in all; threatening the extinction of both the tribes to such furious Arabs, the Prophet of Islam taught self-control and discipline to the extent of praying even on the battlefield. In an aged of barbarism, the Battlefield itself was humanized and strict instructions were issued not to cheat, not to break trust, not to mutilate, not to kill a child or woman or an old man, not to hew down date palm nor burn it, not to cut a fruit tree, not to molest any person engaged in worship. His own treatment with his bitterest enemies is the noblest example for his followers. At the conquest of Mecca, he stood at the zenith of his power. The city which had refused to listen to his mission, which had tortured him and his followers, which had driven him and his people into exile and which had unrelentingly persecuted and boycotted him even when he had taken refuge in a place more than 200 miles away, that city now lay at his feet. By the laws of war he could have justly avenged all the cruelties inflicted on him and his people. But what treatment did he accord to them? Mohammad's heart flowed with affection and he declared, "This day, there is no REPROOF against you and you are all free." "This day" he proclaimed, "I trample under my feet all distinctions between man and man, all hatred between man and man."

This was one of the chief objects why he permitted war in self defense, that is to unite human beings. And when once this object was achieved, even his worst enemies were pardoned. Even those who killed his beloved uncle, Hamazah, mangled his body, ripped it open, even chewed a piece of his liver.

The principles of universal brotherhood and doctrine of the equality of mankind which he proclaimed represents one very great contribution of Mohammad to the social uplift of humanity. All great religions have preached the same doctrine but the prophet of Islam had put this theory into actual practice and its value will be fully recognized, perhaps centuries hence, when international consciousness being awakened, racial prejudices may disappear and greater brotherhood of humanity come into existence.

Miss. Sarojini Naidu speaking about this aspect of Islam says, "It was the first religion that preached and practiced democracy; for in the mosque, when the minaret is sounded and the worshipers are gathered together, the democracy of Islam is embodied five times a day when the peasant and the king kneel side by side and proclaim, God alone is great." The great poetess of India continues, "I have been struck over and over again by this indivisible unity of Islam that makes a man instinctively a brother. When you meet an Egyptian, an Algerian and Indian and a Turk in London, it matters not that Egypt is the motherland of one and India is the motherland of another."

Mahatma Gandhi, in his inimitable style, says "Some one has said that Europeans in South Africa dread the advent Islam -- Islam that civilized Spain, Islam that took the torch light to Morocco and preached to the world the Gospel of brotherhood. The Europeans of South Africa dread the Advent of Islam. They may claim equality with the white races. They may well dread it, if brotherhood is a sin. If it is equality of colored races then their dread is well founded."

Every year, during the Haj, the world witnesses the wonderful spectacle of this international Exhibition of Islam in leveling all distinctions of race, color and rank. Not only the Europeans, the African, the Arabian, the Persian, the Indians, the Chinese all meet together in Medina as members of one divine family, but they are clad in one dress every person in two simple pieces of white seamless cloth, one piece round the loin the other piece over the shoulders, bare head without pomp or ceremony, repeating "Here am I O God; at thy command; thou art one and alone; Here am I." Thus there remains nothing to differentiate the high from the low and every pilgrim carries home the impression of the international significance of Islam.

In the opinion of Prof. Hurgronje "the league of nations founded by prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity of human brotherhood on such Universal foundations as to show candle to other nations." In the words of same Professor "the fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done the realization of the idea of the League of Nations."

The prophet of Islam brought the reign of democracy in its best form. The Caliph Caliph Ali and the son in-law of the prophet, the Caliph Mansur, Abbas, the son of Caliph Mamun and many other caliphs and kings had to appear before the judge as ordinary men in Islamic courts. Even today we all know how the black Negroes were treated by the civilized white races. Consider the state of BILAL, a Negro Slave, in the days of the prophet of Islam nearly 14 centuries ago. The office of calling Muslims to prayer was considered to be of status in the early days of Islam and it was offered to this Negro slave. After the conquest of Mecca, the Prophet ordered him to call for prayer and the Negro slave, with his black color and his thick lips, stood over the roof of the holy mosque at Mecca called the Ka'ba the most historic and the holiest mosque in the Islamic world, when some proud Arabs painfully cried loud, "Oh, this black Negro Slave, woe be to him. He stands on the roof of holy Ka'ba to call for prayer." At that moment, the prophet announced to the world, this verse of the holy QURAN for the first time.

"O mankind, surely we have created you, families and tribes, so you may know one another.
Surely, the most honorable of you with God is MOST RIGHTEOUS AMONG you.
Surely, God is Knowing, Aware."

And these words of the holy Quran created such a mighty transformation that the Caliph of Islam, the purest of Arabs by birth, offered their daughter in marriage to this Negro Slave, and whenever, the second Caliph of Islam, known to history as Umar the great, the commander of faithful, saw this Negro slave, he immediately stood in reverence and welcomed him by "Here come our master; Here come our lord." What a tremendous change was brought by Quran in the Arabs, the proudest people at that time on the earth. This is the reason why Goethe, the greatest of German poets, speaking about the Holy Quran declared that, "This book will go on exercising through all ages a most potent influence." This is also the reason why George Bernard Shaw says, "If any religion has a chance or ruling over England, say, Europe, within the next 100 years, it is Islam".
It is this same democratic spirit of Islam that emancipated women from the bondage of man. Sir Charles Edward Archibald Hamilton says "Islam teaches the inherent sinlessness of man. It teaches that man and woman and woman have come from the same essence, posses the same soul and have been equipped with equal capabilities for intellectual, spiritual and moral attainments."

The Arabs had a very strong tradition that one who can smite with the spear and can wield the sword would inherit. But Islam came as the defender of the weaker sex and entitled women to share the inheritance of their parents. It gave women, centuries ago right of owning property, yet it was only 12 centuries later , in 1881, that England, supposed to be the cradle of democracy adopted this institution of Islam and the act was called "the married woman act", but centuries earlier, the Prophet of Islam had proclaimed that "Woman are twin halves of men. The rights of women are sacred. See that women maintained rights granted to them."

Islam is not directly concerned with political and economic systems, but indirectly and in so far as political and economic affairs influence man's conduct, it does lay down some very important principles to govern economic life. According to Prof. Massignon, it maintains the balance between exaggerated opposites and has always in view the building of character which is the basis of civilization. This is secured by its law of inheritance, by an organized system of charity known as Zakat, and by regarding as illegal all anti-social practices in the economic field like monopoly, usury, securing of predetermined unearned income and increments, cornering markets, creating monopolies, creating an artificial scarcity of any commodity in order to force the prices to rise. Gambling is illegal. Contribution to schools, to places of worship, hospitals, digging of wells, opening of orphanages are highest acts of virtue. Orphanages have sprung for the first time, it is said, under the teaching of the prophet of Islam. The world owes its orphanages to this prophet born an orphan. "Good all this" says Carlyle about Mohammad. "The natural voice of humanity, of pity and equity, dwelling in the heart of this wild son of nature, speaks."

A historian once said a great man should be judged by three tests: Was he found to be of true metel by his contemporaries ? Was he great enough to raise above the standards of his age ? Did he leave anything as permanent legacy to the world at large ? This list may be further extended but all these three tests of greatness are eminently satisfied to the highest degree in case of prophet Mohammad. Some illustrations of the last two have already been mentioned.

The first is: Was the Prophet of Islam found to be of true metel by his contemporaries?

Historical records show that all the contemporaries of Mohammad both friends foes, acknowledged the sterling qualities, the spotless honesty, the noble virtues, the absolute sincerity and every trustworthiness of the apostle of Islam in all walks of life and in every sphere of human activity. Even the Jews and those who did not believe in his message, adopted him as the arbiter in their personal disputes by virtue of his perfect impartiality. Even those who did not believe in his message were forced to say "O Mohammad, we do not call you a liar, but we deny him who has given you a book and inspired you with a message." They thought he was one possessed. They tried violence to cure him. But the best of them saw that a new light had dawned on him and they hastened him to seek the enlightenment. It is a notable feature in the history of prophet of Islam that his nearest relation, his beloved cousin and his bosom friends, who know him most intimately, were not thoroughly imbued with the truth of his mission and were convinced of the genuineness of his divine inspiration. If these men and women, noble, intelligent, educated and intimately acquainted with his private life had perceived the slightest signs of deception, fraud, earthliness, or lack of faith in him, Mohammad's moral hope of regeneration, spiritual awakening, and social reform would all have been foredoomed to a failure and whole edifice would have crumbled to pieces in a moment. On the contrary, we find that devotion of his followers was such that he was voluntarily acknowledged as dictator of their lives. They braved for him persecutions and danger; they trusted, obeyed and honored him even in the most excruciating torture and severest mental agony caused by excommunication even unto death. Would this have been so, had they noticed the slightest backsliding in their master?

Read the history of the early converts to Islam, and every heart would melt at the sight of the brutal treatment of innocent Muslim men and women.

Sumayya, an innocent women, is cruelly torn into pieces with spears. An example is made of "Yassir whose legs are tied to two camels and the beast were are driven in opposite directions", Khabbab bin Arth is made lie down on the bed of burning coal with the brutal legs of their merciless tyrant on his breast so that he may not move and this makes even the fat beneath his skin melt. "Khabban bin Adi is put to death in a cruel manner by mutilation and cutting off his flesh piece-meal." In the midst of his tortures, being asked weather he did not wish Mohammad in his place while he was in his house with his family, the sufferer cried out that he was gladly prepared to sacrifice himself his family and children and why was it that these sons and daughters of Islam not only surrendered to their prophet their allegiance but also made a gift of their hearts and souls to their master? Is not the intense faith and conviction on part of immediate followers of Mohammad, the noblest testimony to his sincerity and to his utter self-absorption in his appointed task?

And these men were not of low station or inferior mental caliber. Around him in quite early days, gathered what was best and noblest in Mecca, its flower and cream, men of position, rank, wealth and culture, and from his own kith and kin, those who knew all about his life. All the first four Caliphs, with their towering personalities, were converts of this period.

The Encyclopedia Brittanica says that "Mohammad is the most successful of all Prophets and religious personalities".

But the success was not the result of mere accident. It was not a hit of fortune. It was a recognition of fact that he was found to be true metal by his contemporaries. It was the result of his admirable and all compelling personality.

The personality of Mohammad! It is most difficult to get into the truth of it. Only a glimpse of it I can catch. What a dramatic succession of picturesque scenes. There is Mohammad the Prophet, there is Mohammad the General; Mohammad the King; Mohammad the Warrior; Mohammad the Businessman; Mohammad the Preacher; Mohammad the Philosopher; Mohammad the Statesman; Mohammad the Orator; Mohammad the reformer; Mohammad the Refuge of orphans; Mohammad the Protector of slaves; Mohammad the Emancipator of women; Mohammad the Law-giver; Mohammad the Judge; Mohammad the Saint.

And in all these magnificent roles, in all these departments of human activities, he is like, a hero..

Orphanhood is extreme of helplessness and his life upon this earth began with it; Kingship is the height of the material power and it ended with it. From an orphan boy to a persecuted refugee and then to an overlord, spiritual as well as temporal, of a whole nation and Arbiter of its destinies, with all its trials and temptations, with all its vicissitudes and changes, its lights and shades, its up and downs, its terror and splendor, he has stood the fire of the world and came out unscathed to serve as a model in every face of life. His achievements are not limited to one aspect of life, but cover the whole field of human conditions.

If for instance, greatness consist in the purification of a nation, steeped in barbarism and immersed in absolute moral darkness, that dynamic personality who has transformed, refined and uplifted an entire nation, sunk low as the Arabs were, and made them the torch-bearer of civilization and learning, has every claim to greatness. If greatness lies in unifying the discordant elements of society by ties of brotherhood and charity, the prophet of the desert has got every title to this distinction. If greatness consists in reforming those warped in degrading and blind superstition and pernicious practices of every kind, the prophet of Islam has wiped out superstitions and irrational fear from the hearts of millions. If it lies in displaying high morals, Mohammad has been admitted by friend and foe as Al Amin, or the faithful. If a conqueror is a great man, here is a person who rose from helpless orphan and an humble creature to be the ruler of Arabia, the equal to Chosroes and Caesars, one who founded great empire that has survived all these 14 centuries. If the devotion that a leader commands is the criterion of greatness, the prophet's name even today exerts a magic charm over millions of souls, spread all over the world.

He had not studied philosophy in the school of Athens of Rome, Persia, India, or China. Yet, He could proclaim the highest truths of eternal value to mankind. Illiterate himself, he could yet speak with an eloquence and fervor which moved men to tears, to tears of ecstasy. Born an orphan blessed with no worldly goods, he was loved by all. He had studied at no military academy; yet he could organize his forces against tremendous odds and gained victories through the moral forces which he marshaled. Gifted men with genius for preaching are rare. Descartes included the perfect preacher among the rarest kind in the world. Hitler in his Mein Kamp has expressed a similar view. He says "A great theorist is seldom a great leader. An Agitator is more likely to posses these qualities. He will always be a great leader. For leadership means ability to move masses of men. The talents to produce ideas has nothing in common with capacity for leadership." "But", he says, "The Union of theorists, organizer and leader in one man, is the rarest phenomenon on this earth; Therein consists greatness."

In the person of the Prophet of Islam the world has seen this rarest phenomenon walking on the earth, walking in flesh and blood.

And more wonderful still is what the reverend Bosworth Smith remarks, "Head of the state as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was pope without the pope's claims, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without an standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue. If ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine It was Mohammad, for he had all the power without instruments and without its support. He cared not for dressing of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life."

After the fall of Mecca, more than one million square miles of land lay at his feet, Lord of Arabia, he mended his own shoes and coarse woolen garments, milked the goats, swept the hearth, kindled the fire and attended the other menial offices of the family. The entire town of Medina where he lived grew wealthy in the later days of his life. Everywhere there was gold and silver in plenty and yet in those days of prosperity many weeks would elapse without a fire being kindled in the hearth of the king of Arabia, His food being dates and water. His family would go hungry many nights successively because they could not get anything to eat in the evening. He slept on no soften bed but on a palm mat, after a long busy day to spend most of his night in prayer, often bursting with tears before his creator to grant him strength to discharge his duties. As the reports go, his voice would get choked with weeping and it would appear as if a cooking pot was on fire and boiling had commenced. On the very day of his death his only assets were few coins a part of which went to satisfy a debt and rest was given to a needy person who came to his house for charity. The clothes in which he breathed his last had many patches. The house from where light had spread to the world was in darkness because there was no oil in the lamp.

Circumstances changed, but the prophet of God did not. In victory or in defeat, in power or in adversity, in affluence or in indigence, he is the same man, disclosed the same character. Like all the ways and laws of God, Prophets of God are unchangeable.

An honest man, as the saying goes, is the noblest work of God, Mohammad was more than honest. He was human to the marrow of his bones. Human sympathy, human love was the music of his soul. To serve man, to elevate man, to purify man, to educate man, in a word to humanize man-this was the object of his mission, the be-all and end all of his life. In thought, in word, in action he had the good of humanity as his sole inspiration, his sole guiding principle.

He was most unostentatious and selfless to the core. What were the titles he assumed? Only true servant of God and His Messenger. Servant first, and then a messenger. A Messenger and prophet like many other prophets in every part of the world, some known to you, many not known you. If one does not believe in any of these truths one ceases to be a Muslim. It is an article of faith.

"Looking at the circumstances of the time and unbounded reverence of his followers" says a western writer "the most miraculous thing about Mohammad is, that he never claimed the power of working miracles." Miracles were performed but not to propagate his faith and were attributed entirely to God and his inscrutable ways. He would plainly say that he was a man like others. He had no treasures of earth or heaven. Nor did he claim to know the secrets of that lie in womb of future. All this was in an age when miracles were supposed to be ordinary occurrences, at the back and call of the commonest saint, when the whole atmosphere was surcharged with supernaturalism in Arabia and outside Arabia.

He turned the attention of his followers towards the study of nature and its laws, to understand them and appreciate the Glory of God. The Quran says,

"God did not create the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in play. He did not create them all but with the truth. But most men do not know."
The world is not illusion, nor without purpose. It has been created with the truth. The number of verses inviting close observation of nature are several times more than those that relate to prayer, fasting, pilgrimage etc. all put together. The Muslim under its influence began to observe nature closely and this give birth to the scientific spirit of the observation and experiment which was unknown to the Greeks. While the Muslim Botanist Ibn Baitar wrote on Botany after collecting plants from all parts of the world, described by Myer in his Gesch. der Botanikaa-s, a monument of industry, while Al Byruni traveled for forty years to collect mineralogical specimens, and Muslim Astronomers made some observations extending even over twelve years. Aristotle wrote on Physics without performing a single experiment, wrote on natural history, carelessly stating without taking the trouble to ascertain the most verifiable fact that men have more teeth than animal. Galen, the greatest authority on classical anatomy informed that the lower jaw consists of two bones, a statement which is accepted unchallenged for centuries till Abdul Lateef takes the trouble to examine a human skeleton. After enumerating several such instances, Robert Priffault concludes in his well known book The making of humanity, "The debt of our science to the Arabs does not consist in starting discovers or revolutionary theories. Science owes a great more to Arabs culture; it owes is existence." The same writer says "The Greeks systematized, generalized and theorized but patient ways of investigation, the accumulation of positive knowledge, the minute methods of science, detailed and prolonged observation, experimental inquiry, were altogether alien to Greek temperament. What we call science arose in Europe as result of new methods of investigation, of the method of experiment, observation, measurement, of the development of Mathematics in form unknown to the Greeks. That spirit and these methods, concludes the same author, were introduced into the European world by Arabs."
It is the same practical character of the teaching of Prophet Mohammad that gave birth to the scientific spirit, that has also sanctified the daily labors and the so called mundane affairs. The Quran says that God has created man to worship him but the word worship has a connotation of its own. Gods worship is not confined to prayer alone, but every act that is done with the purpose of winning approval of God and is for the benefit of the humanity comes under its purview. Islam sanctifies life and all its pursuits provided they are performed with honesty, justice and pure intents. It obliterates the age-long distinction between the sacred and profane. The Quran says if you eat clean things and thank God for it, it is an act of worship. It is saying of the prophet of Islam that Morsel of food that one places in the mouth of his wife is an act of virtue to be rewarded by God. Another tradition of the Prophet says "He who is satisfying the desire of his heart will be rewarded by God provided the methods adopted are permissible." A person was listening to him exclaimed 'O Prophet of God, he is answering the calls of passions, is only satisfying the craving of his heart. Forthwith came the reply, "Had he adopted an awful method for the satisfaction of his urge, he would have been punished; then why should he not be rewarded for following the right course."

This new conception of religion that it should also devote itself to the betterment of this life rather than concern itself exclusively with super mundane affairs, has led to a new orientation of moral values. Its abiding influence on the common relations of mankind in the affairs of every day life, its deep power over the masses, its regulation of their conception of rights and duty, its suitability and adaptability to the ignorant savage and the wise philosopher are characteristic features of the teaching of the Prophet of Islam.

But it should be most carefully born in mind this stress on good actions is not the sacrifice correctness of faith. While there are various school of thought, one praising faith at the expense of deeds, another exhausting various acts to the detriment of correct belief, Islam is based on correct faith and righteous actions. Means are important as the end and ends are as important as the means. It is an organic Unity. Together they live and thrive. Separate them and both decay and die. In Islam faith can not be divorced from the action. Right knowledge should be transferred into right action to produce the right results. How often the words came in Quran -- Those who believe and do good thing, they alone shall enter paradise. Again and again, not less than fifty times these words are repeated as if too much stress can not be laid on them. Contemplation is encouraged but mere contemplation is not the goal. Those who believe and do nothing can not exist in Islam. These who believe and do wrong are inconceivable. Divine law is the law of effort and not of ideals. It chalks out for the men the path of eternal progress from knowledge to action and from action to satisfaction.

But what is the correct faith from which right action spontaneously proceeds resulting in complete satisfaction. Here the central doctrine of Islam is the Unity of God. There is no God but God is the pivot from which hangs the whole teaching and practice of Islam. He is unique not only as regards his divine being but also as regards his divine attributes.

As regards the attributes of God, Islam adopts here as in other things too, the law of golden mean. It avoids on the one hand, the view of God which divests the divine being of every attribute and rejects, on the other, the view which likens him to things material. The Quran says, On the one hand, there is nothing which is like him, on the other , it affirms that he is Seeing, Hearing, Knowing. He is the King who is without a stain of fault or deficiency, the mighty ship of His power floats upon the ocean of justice and equity. He is the Beneficent, the Merciful. He is the Guardian over all. Islam does not stop with this positive statement. It adds further which is its most special characteristic, the negative aspects of problem. There is also no one else who is guardian over everything. He is the meander of every breakage, and no one else is the meander of any breakage. He is the restorer of every loss and no one else is the restorer of any loss what-so-over. There is no God but one God, above any need, the maker of bodies, creator of souls, the Lord of the day of judgment, and in short, in the words of Quran, to him belong all excellent qualities.

Regarding the position of man in relation to the Universe, the Quran says:

"God has made subservient to you whatever is on the earth or in universe. You are destined to rule over the Universe."

But in relation to God, the Quran says:
"O man God has bestowed on you excellent faculties and has created life and death to put you to test in order to see whose actions are good and who has deviated from the right path."
In spite of free will which he enjoys, to some extent, every man is born under certain circumstances and continues to live under certain circumstances beyond his control. With regard to this God says, according to Islam, it is my will to create any man under condition that seem best to me. cosmic plans finite mortals can not fully comprehend. But I will certainly test you in prosperity as well in adversity, in health as well as in sickness, in heights as well as in depths. My ways of testing differ from man to man, from hour to hour. In adversity do not despair and do resort to unlawful means. It is but a passing phase. In prosperity do not forget God. God-gifts are given only as trusts. You are always on trial, every moment on test. In this sphere of life there is not to reason why, there is but to do and die. If you live in accordance with God; and if you die, die in the path of God. You may call it fatalism. but this type of fatalism is a condition of vigorous increasing effort, keeping you ever on the alert. Do not consider this temporal life on earth as the end of human existence. There is a life after death and it is eternal. Life after death is only a connection link, a door that opens up hidden reality of life. Every action in life however insignificant, produces a lasting effect. It is correctly recorded somehow. Some of the ways of God are known to you, but many of his ways are hidden from you. What is hidden in you and from you in this world will be unrolled and laid open before you in the next. the virtuous will enjoy the blessing of God which the eye has not seen, nor has the ear heard, nor has it entered into the hearts of men to conceive of they will march onward reaching higher and higher stages of evolution. Those who have wasted opportunity in this life shall under the inevitable law, which makes every man taste of what he has done, be subjugated to a course of treatment of the spiritual diseases which they have brought about with their own hands. Beware, it is terrible ordeal. Bodily pain is torture, you can bear somehow. Spiritual pain is hell, you will find it almost unbearable. Fight in this life itself the tendencies of the spirit prone to evil, tempting to lead you into iniquities ways. Reach the next stage when the self-accusing sprit in your conscience is awakened and the soul is anxious to attain moral excellence and revolt against disobedience. This will lead you to the final stage of the soul at rest, contented with God, finding its happiness and delight in him alone. The soul no more stumbles. The stage of struggle passes away. Truth is victorious and falsehood lays down its arms. All complexes will then be resolved. Your house will not be divided against itself. Your personality will get integrated round the central core of submission to the will of God and complete surrender to his divine purpose. All hidden energies will then be released. The soul then will have peace. God will then address you:

"O thou soul that art at rest, and restest fully contented with thy Lord return to thy Lord. He pleased with thee and thou pleased with him; So enter among my servants and enter into my paradise."

This is the final goal for man; to become, on the, one hand, the master of the universe and on the other, to see that his soul finds rest in his Lord, that not only his Lord will be pleased with him but that he is also pleased with his Lord. Contentment, complete contentment, satisfaction, complete satisfaction, peace, complete peace. The love of God is his food at this stage and he drinks deep at the fountain of life. Sorrow and defeat do not overwhelm him and success does not find him in vain and exulting.
The western nations are only trying to become the master of the Universe. But their souls have not found peace and rest.

Thomas Carlyle, struck by this philosophy of life writes "and then also Islam-that we must submit to God; that our whole strength lies in resigned submission to Him, whatsoever he does to us, the thing he sends to us, even if death and worse than death, shall be good, shall be best; we resign ourselves to God." The same author continues "If this be Islam, says Goethe, do we not all live in Islam?" Carlyle himself answers this question of Goethe and says "Yes, all of us that have any moral life, we all live so. This is yet the highest wisdom that heaven has revealed to our earth."

Azmat N. Khan

taken from Ma3ali forums, by aseerat al sajoon

Hoping that you enjoyed reading

If anybody would like more information just let me know nnstraightnn@hotmail.com ( I'm not sure if we're allowed to put our e-mail addresses, sorry!)

Re: UAE culture

nona the brit — Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:52:32 GMT

Nichole you need to talk to your fiancee about this.

It may not even have crossed his mind. He may just be assuming that all marriages are the Arabic/Islamic/eastern way, or he may be assuming that you know all about this and as you are going to live in UAE you accept it, or he may want a more western style marriage. You can only find this out from him. You will probably have to make a few compromises though, this is the way he has been brought up to believe is the right way, same as you have grown up in a culture which expects and encourages female independence and not obedience. I'm sure he is a nice guy and you love each other; but you seriously need to get agreements on all this stuff before you go. There may be a lot of things he thinks of as so everyday he has never thought about the impact on you. You need to ask a lot of questions; who is the head of the household? Do you both have an equal say in family decisions or does he get the final decision? How would any children be raised? what environment will your daughter be growing up in? Are you permitted to speak or look at men other than their husband? Are you expected to do all the cooking?
Are you expected to do all the household chores? If so, what happens if you are ill, tired, pregnant, nursing etc? Are you expected to do all childcare? Are you able to travel alone? Can you able to travel without permission? Can you work outside the home? Can you go shopping alone? Can you go visiting friends alone? Are you allowed male friends? etc etc....

I would find out as much as you can about it and his attitudes before getting married. You should also make enquiries with a lawyer regarding the legal situation of whether you and your daughter would be free to leave the country without his permission as we have all heard of cases where women have become trapped, or been allowed to leave but without their children.

I don't want to sound negative but be careful. the previous poster's attitudes sound pretty outrageous to you and me but it is a common one across the world, not just in the Arab countries, and reflects that culture. You won't be able to fight it in general. He is right in saying that this 'stubborness' (from which I also 'suffer') is a western woman cultural thing. I am in a relationship with a man from another culture which is not as strict as the Arabic one but still considers the man the head of the household, the woman must do all domestic work, etc etc. He is quite westernised though and it is still a struggle at times and we have plenty of rows about things. I have had to swallow my pride on one or two areas and somewhat grudgingly go along with it, but then he tries to come halfway and is certainly less chauvenistic than most of his peers. I know I couldn't have seen any of his friends or family for more that a couple of weeks as they expect the women to literally wait on them hand and foot non-stop in a way that just turns my stomach. He is not like that but he is still a product of his culture. He refuses to shop, cook or wash up for example, but then he does other chores around the house instead so I guess it ends up equal. He cleans the bathroom, does the ironing, chucks the hoover round and takes out the rubbish so I don't mind...I have no idea why some things are acceptable and other things not. Most of the men in his culture would not do any of those things. I've been to a house where the husband would offer you a drink and then call his wife to go get it. I've been to a house for a weekend where the husband offered us breakfast early - then went and woke his wife up and got her out of bed to make it. He would not even lower himself to putting on a kettle. The women bow to the men and even get down on their knees before them. And these are highly-educated women, living in the UK, who work outside the home, wear western clothes, and appear quite western in behavour until they start doing all this stuff. There is no way on earth I would go and live in their country....