Mamdouh Bitar, Othman Lee:
In general, it can be said that there is much disparity, even opposition, between religion and mind. The foundation of religion is personal, based on absolute faith that nullifies reason, followed by submission, obedience, transmission, and sanctification. mind, on the other hand, represents thought, doubt, freedom, and development, and thus creativity, proof, logic, and the denial of absolute truths, upon which religion is based.
Religion is concerned with the supernatural, while mind is concerned with nature, its reality, and its dynamics. It is concerned with pragmatism, unlike religion, which is concerned with dogmatism. What is reason?
There is no single definition of the mind. In general, it can be said that the mind is perception, interaction, and deduction of what is best for life. The mind is the tool of thought and the substance of will. It is understanding and acumen, which requires an appropriate degree of intelligence, the ability to imagine, remember, keep up with logic, deduce meanings and connotations, and then organize the relationship between cause and effect. Here, we must remind ourselves of the nonsense of the sheikhs, who claim that the mind resides in the heart and not in the brain. They have not noticed that the transplantation of a new heart into a person’s chest is not accompanied by a change in his mind according to the quality of the new heart. Religion, on the other hand, is a system of individual personal relationships that relies on a methodology specific to the individual and their religion. The primary mission of religion is not to regulate relationships between individuals—that is, to engage in social activity—but rather to regulate the individual’s relationship with a hypothetical entity present beyond Earth, namely, God.
Religious methodology, which varies from one religion to another, is based on sanctification, faith, submission, and monotheism, particularly in the Abrahamic religions. Religions generally represent a space of so-called “spirituality.” Some religions, such as Muhammadanism, for example, are not only spiritual, but also materialistic. Muhammadanism emphasizes usury, food, drink, and other worldly matters, as if they were spiritual matters. Furthermore, they are sacred, given the impossibility of developing them and the concept of their validity for all times and places.
Regarding the relationship between religion and mind, some argue that religion encourages a rational understanding of the universe. Others claim that a person’s mere acceptance of the unseen is indicative of the activation of mind. Without an active mind, religion would not have been able to attain that status—that is, acceptance. In other words, there is no religion without reason! On the other hand, there are those who do not see this relationship between mind and religion, and who believe that religion entered hearts not with the help of mind, but rather despite reason’s opposition. Personally, we do not see any acceptance by religion of mind, or vice versa, nor do we see a call by religion to accept mind or follow its lead. Religion has been able to occupy some positions by force, despite reason’s resistance. Ignorance has made the balance of power between reason and religion tilt in some regions and groups toward religion. Consequently, religion has progressed gradually. This progress is not the end of history, but rather a stage within its stages.
Religion is complex, and mind is even more complex. The mere mention of the term “mind” in some verses cannot be considered evidence of religion’s respect for mind, or of religion’s acceptance of mind… Do you not understand? mind cannot be trusted over religion, and religion cannot be trusted over mind. The dominance of mind means the abolition of religion, and the opposition of religion and reason cannot be combined into a single concept, unless such a combination is superficial and hypocritical.
It is very difficult to understand approaches such as the rationalization of religion or the religiosity of mind. This may become possible when mind (Mohamed Arkoun) is divided into the philosophical mind and the religious mind. The division here is formal. The philosophical mind remains reason in general, which refuses to operate within closed cages. The religious mind, on the other hand, is the opposite of the philosophical mind and reason in general. The religious mind operates within cages and within the framework of religious axioms, absolute truths, and dogmas, as well as its ready-made, rigid knowledge, which does not need to be developed or changed because, in the form in which it was created or found, it was valid for all times and places. We cannot discover any rationalization in religion, nor can we discover rational religiosity, nor can we discover religion in mind, which does not recognize absolute truth. mind is incompatible with the absolute, and religion, whatever its nature, does not require reason, since it is linked to and fundamentally relies on transmission.nind has no functions in the shadow of transmission, the sacred, and dogmatic, definitive faith!