Sexual Ethics in Islam and in the Western World
Chapter 5: Basic Need for Humane Conditioning of Natural Instincts And Desires
The need to refine and condition the raw natural instincts and desires
of individuals in a benign manner is a basic one. Harmonious personal
growth is conducive to wholesome interaction with fellowmen, which in
turn leads to a salutary impact on the humanity at large.
An appropriate conditioning and training of an individual's natural
potentialities brings about spiritual rewards, too. These include a
spiritually balanced personal outlook and intellectual composure,
necessary for any sound and beneficial endeavour. Psychosomatically
balanced persons are emotionally stable and competent to achieve social
harmony and peace.
On the other hand, any unduly inhibited or imbalanced growth of an
individual personality is quite undesirable. So are any adverse external
influences or pressures and strains of a negative kind. For, negatively
conditioned people become susceptible to causing excesses, untold
miseries and cruelties not only to themselves, but to others.
The traditional non-Islamic moralists regarded sex and love as if these
were manifestations of an obnoxious evil to be shunned. In contrast, the
modernistic societies tended to consider free love as not only desirable
but respectable. No doubt, the free love concept began to receive every
preferential treatment and encouragement for its worldwide growth.
With regard to Islamic morals, these can be properly understood with
reference to the following points:
(a) Islamic morals and their compatibility with the objective
requirements of natural growth of sexuality as part of inborn human
instincts and potentialities;
(b) Suppression of human concupiscence;
(c) Modernistic sexual permissiveness as a major cause of sexual or
sex-oriented aberrations or deviations of human behaviour, preventing
harmonious growth of the natural instincts and potentialities of an
individual;
(d) Democratic attitudes towards sexual behaviour;
(e) Sexual morality, as compared to general ethical conduct in the
economic and political fields;
(f) Love and the forlorn condition in which it remains a longing;
and
(g) Love and harmonious growth of human personality.
To begin with, the fact that natural human instincts should be
nurtured, and not suppressed, is to be recognized. At the same time, it
is necessary to conceptualize beyond any simplistic determination in
terms of good and bad.
The Islamic approach takes into consideration the overall need for
promoting a salubrious growth of human personality as an a priori
requirement, based on deductive logic. The premises recognized in Islam
include the factual position that every constituent part of the human
body has a specific purpose or function. The biological purposes and
functions are sustained by a person's will o nurture the same, even
beyond the instinctive motivations. Accordingly, human volition,
intellectual capabilities and similar other aspects of spiritual nature
must be enhanced, too.
We could well imagine a situation where no traditional evolution of
morality is allowed. This would mean that the inborn human
potentialities are either harmoniously cultivated or prevented from such
development. In any case, it stands to reason that human faculty to
discern things and to comprehend the natural order of things, would have
induced the necessary process of harmonization.
A hundred years ago, scholars and social scientists recognized the need
for a psychosomatically balanced development of human personality.
Societies of the time lacked a correct overall human perspective. There
was a markedly deficient realization of the moral traditions. Negative
tendencies affected all-round human development.
In fact, there has never been any doubt about promoting an all round
growth of human personality. This is implicit in the very word
training,, which has always been used to indicate human development.
Any correct and effective approach to training of human beings must aim
at overcoming tendencies leading to disturbances of personality and
morbid conditions of disorder and indiscipline, affecting the body, the
mind and the spirit. A naturally harmonious and spiritually balanced
human growth should include the training of the sex instinct in
particular.
In the above context, Islam offers the most appropriate guidance. This
position is intended to be clarified and established in the discussion
that follows.
At the outset, we must stipulate that any preconceived or ill conceived
notion concerning Islamic ethics must be avoided.
For instance, some people appear to harbour the notion that Islamic
morality inhibits, rather than promotes, any free growth of human
faculties. They wrongly believe that the Islamic explanations carry no
intrinsic significance in the matter of refining and improving the
natural human instincts.
Actually, the Holy Qur'an is replete with instances of emphasis on
human refinement, such as when it asserts that a conscientiously
righteous person is one who has been able to refine, discipline and
purify his natural instincts and desires.
قَدْ أَفْلَحَ مَن زَكَّاهَا
“He will indeed be successful who purifies it” (Sura ash-Shams, 91: 9)
This quotation further implies that human conscience is liable to
pollution. At the same time, it suggests that human beings can improve
their individual conscientiousness by overcoming any polluted state
affecting the same. Above all, the Holy Qur'an considers pollution-free
conscience to be indispensable for attaining righteousness and
happiness.
There can be no denying the intrinsic meaning and significance of the
moral values taught by the Glorious Qur'an. The aforementioned teaching
and its explanation pinpoints a conscientious approach to the problem of
human refinement.
No school of thought or moral procedure rules out human susceptibility
to pollution of the conscience or psyche and the consequent need to
purifying and ameliorating the undesirable condition. Human psyche is
vulnerable to prurient desires, moral aberrations and psychopathological
disorders, just as the human body or organs are liable to disease.
An individual can feel within himself or herself the specific nature
and extent of any physiological or psychological or spiritual ailments
of his or her own. An individual does this to an extent far more real
and complete with regard to himself or herself, than in respect of other
persons, or for that matter, even in the case of any environmental
pollution.
Thus, it is possible and necessary to ensure righteousness and rectitude
on an individual basis, through a psychosomatically and spiritually
harmonious personality development. The Holy Qur'an makes this point
thoroughly clear.
There is another Qur'anic description of the raw, natural self of an
untrained person: بالسوء اماره (ammaratu bissu’). According to
this description, a person's untamed or inappropriately trained self is
referred to as a commander of evil (thoughts and deeds). Does it mean
that a non disciplined self can be wicked by nature, according to the
Qur'an?
The reply to the abovementioned question cannot be positive. this is
because, theoretically speaking, a human being, if born malignant,
cannot be expected to be amenable to any training that seeks to
metamorphosize him into becoming naturally benign. On the contrary, the
very existence of naturally malignant beings deserves to be treated as
undesirable, since they are potentially harmful. They ought to be
prevented from growing and assuming menacing proportions. Their
malignant impact would require to be curbed even by occasionally
eliminating them!.
So, the correct answer is that there is no wickedness built into the
very nature of a human being. Only, in particular situations, and in
specific circumstances, an individual becomes vulnerable to wickedness
and nurturing it, developing a malignant disposition in the process.
Any negative representation of man's basic nature as a source of evil
and wickedness is not implied in the Qur’anic philosophy, as already
indicated above.
Then, one may as well ask two more questions. Firstly, what can be the
particular circumstances or specific causes, which lead human beings
toward becoming wicked and corrupt? Secondly, how can the depraved and
corrupt be rendered harmless and brought back to the righteous path of
sanity and moderation?
Answers to the above questions require a comprehensive and positive
understanding of the relevant Qur’anic teachings. For, they lie beyond
any wrong and narrow minded interpretations, such as arising from any
literally isolated or absolute or negative understanding of the Qur'anic
description of human self as commander of evil. Actually, according to
the Holy Qur'an. the self can be not only a commander of evil, but a
conscientious reprove, (النفس اللوامه, an-nafsu-l-lawamah).
Elsewhere, the Qur'an, refers to the self also as an abode of human
peace and excellence (المطمئنه النفس , an-nafsul-mutma’innah).
The Qur’anic descriptions of self indicate that human nature can have
different stages of growth and manifestation. At one stage, it can be
prone to mischief and wickedness. Where anything undesirable is already
perpetrated, it can also ruefully blame itself. Above all, it is capable
of attaining the most desirable stage of human excellence and composure,
beyond vulnerability to anything bad or wicked.
Islam does not presuppose any inherent wickedness of human nature. So,
it is at variance with the speculative philosophies and systems of human
training evolved in India, or those enunciated by some ancient cynical
philosophers. Furthermore, it differs from the teachings of Manes, of
ancient Persia. The Islamic approach is distinctive from that evolved in
Christianity, as well. Islamic code of moral conduct does not evidently
subscribe to any denial, or suppression, of human instincts, nor does it
prescribe anything reminiscent of penal servitude in overcoming carnal
desires.
The ancients might not have clearly realized that under specific
circumstances or in certain situations or at some stage of personal
disciplining, human nature could get awry and become vulnerable to
wickedness or evil that is capable of assuming dangerous proportions.
However, in modern times, when a scientifically investigated basis of
human personality development has been arrived at, there can be no
longer any doubt about the need to discipline one's own self.
The Holy Qur’an significantly reveals and pinpoints various aspects of
human personality development. Identification of the negative tendencies
of human nature is meant for emphasizing the positive aspects that can
lead to an excellent flowering of human personality.
Even where the self has been described as commander of evil ”
(الداعيه بالسوء, ad-daiatu bissu’i), the contextual inference is
to the effect that human self is capable of inviting evil.
This distinction is important, in that human beings are made aware of
their predominantly raw instinctiveness which, unless refined and
trained, is naturally forceful enough to overwhelm any humanely
cultivated qualities conducive to spiritual enhancement. This seems to
be an aspect yet to be fully identified by modern psychologists.
Nevertheless, it is widely accepted today that emotional disorders can
occasionally lead to mental illness. This can happen in some mysterious
and arbitrary manner, in which the faculty of conscious perception is
not involved. Consequently, the mind functions in an aberrant manner, so
as to carry out the dictates or impulses of emotional origin.
The positive and negative factors in human personality development are
further examined later on herein, in the context of modernistic sexual
permissiveness. Meanwhile, an explanation of the meaning and connotation
of suppressing carnality is desirable.
With regard to suppressing human concupiscence, Islam does not envisage
it in any way. This is true for other instincts, too. Then, what is
meant by suppression of carnal desire? Does it mean elimination of
causes leading to it?
In the Islamic context, it signifies effective and moderate coping with
the human concupiscence. This is emphasized also in many scholarly
explanations of Islamic morality. Islam teaches human beings to overcome
the natural predisposition of the bodily sensuality to rule over any
sensibility of the mind. In other words, an individual must not be led
by his natural instincts نفس آماره but manage the same in a
wholesome manner. As mentioned earlier, Islam does not preach any
ascetic suppression of concupiscence or natural desires.
To elaborate on the above point, it may be noted that, when a person is
commanded by his instincts, he or she evidences a disorderly
manifestation of human personality, a disruptive and overwhelming
influence capable of affecting human conscience. Not allowing instincts
to sway one's conscience necessarily implies pacifying and quenching the
natural outpourings of carnal desire, or offsetting the palpability to
temptation, emotional disorders or even sexual promiscuity.
Of course, eliminating temptation means taming the animal-like
instincts. This is possible when temptation is avoided in a natural and
harmonious manner. This necessitates overcoming tendencies leading to
social evils and psychological ills. Thus, eliminating temptation does
not require casting out the external forces, human or otherwise, which
may be causing it.
On the contrary, what is required is to eliminate the internal causes
and tendencies. This is necessary to avoid malignant development of the
libido. Vulnerability to any undesirable external influences is also
overcome in the process. A wholesome development of human instincts is a
process requiring either a salutary compliance or a moral inhibition of
their negative upsurge depending on their nature and content.
Incidentally, it is notable that the phrase: killing the carnal
desire, does not occur in any specific teaching of Islam. Any reference
to it is only by way of explaining the need for a salubrious growth of
personality.
Towards satisfying natural instincts and desires, any one-sided
approach entails shortcomings, which are not often removable
subsequently Since the last century, sex-oriented psychological research
achievements concentrated on proving that suppression of the natural
instincts and desires was fraught with many adverse consequences to
individuals. The microscopic investigations and findings proved to be
valuable in themselves.
For one thing, traditional thinking to the effect that the more the
baser instincts are suppressed the greater the scope for enhancing the
higher faculties (such as the intellectual) has become valid. There is
growing realization that extraordinary and far-reaching consequences,
affecting individuals and their society both, underlie suppressed or
unsatisfied instincts and desires, which are often hidden from the
conscious mind.
The question of satisfying carnal instincts and spontaneous desires
could well be left to one's own judgment. For, only human intellect can
prevent any untoward instinctive development. One can purposefully
manage one's own natural promptings and ensure that they are not
negativated or harmed or frustrated in an unwholesome manner.
Many nervous and mental disorders affecting individuals, and even
society as a whole, have been traced by psychologists and psychiatrists
to personal feelings of deprivation, especially with regard to the
sexual instinct. They have proved that emotional deprivations give rise
to psychological complexes. The psychological afflictions can assume
even dangerous proportions, resulting in sadism, morbid insolence,
extreme jealousy, becoming a recluse or a cynic and similar others.
These findings concerning human instincts and desires represent some of
the psychologically significant discoveries and successes achieved by
mankind.
An increasingly popular awareness of and interest in the nature and
content of the human senses may lead to further research and findings.
The discoveries are likely to be of a kind that conforms to the needs of
technological and industrial progress. These may be conducive to better
identification and greater employment of the natural, especially
inorganic, forces. However, psychological and spiritual aspects of
problems may not receive popular attention. Thus, their awareness may be
confined to learned men and the wise.
Psychosomatic integrity in human personality development has been
emphasized since the beginning of recorded history. Islam, too, has
significantly pinpointed its need. Traditional moralists, as well as
behavioural scientists, have always tried to reflect the cumulative
knowledge and wisdom evolved in the past in one way or the other.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that the psychosomatic approach has been
scientifically established only during the last one hundred years or
so.
Now, let us see how best the principle of psychosomatic wellbeing can
be practised. Evidently, it cannot be used as easily as penicillin. It
is an abstraction that requires a certain ability to comprehend.
Moreover, it is suggestive of the intricacy and diversity of
psychological and other problems, which often have been investigated
in, a microscopic perspective. At the same time, obscuring
considerations of morality and underrating personal character
development have come to be the order of the day, which apparently suits
many ease-loving and hard-pressed people of modern societies.
Worst still, the genuine need for promoting a wholesome fulfilment of
natural instincts and desires, of a harmless kind, has been
misinterpreted or misapplied in actual practice. Thus, an unrestrained
gratification of human sexuality has come to be prescribed, ostensibly
for avoiding their undesirable frustration. Consequently, the
psychological complexes and tensions have tended to increase rather than
decrease.
Statistics often indicate a virulent growth of psychological diseases,
mental disorders, suicides, crimes of passion, anxiety, mental anguish,
or restlessness, hopelessness, pessimism, jealousy, malice, or
malevolence and similar other psychosomatic manifestations of
unwholesome human personality development. The inhumane development of
an ever-increasing number of individuals has been explained to be
arising from the modernistic permissiveness with regard to natural
instincts and desires, including uninhibited or unrestrained sex.
For centuries there has been widespread and insistent opposition to any
permissiveness towards lust and sensuality. This was mainly in order to
avoid the baneful effects of human sensuality or deviation, on
individual morality, spirituality and activities, as well as on the
peace and integrity of society. All this has been sought to be reversed
in a sudden and arbitrary manner by the protagonists of a modernistic
permissive society.
The reversal was sought, as if eschewing lust and subjecting oneself to
chastity, rectitude, endurance, moral and social restrictions or limits,
is capable of disturbing a person's spiritual wellbeing and his own
society's peacefulness. Above all, the reversal was sought as if
morality and avoidance of lust or sensuality are actually irrelevant to
any benign personal conduct, or a positive development of human
personality.
The volte face has come about as if there has always been a great and
insistent demand for lifting the moral restraints or limits. The social
change was sought as if it were really necessary to absolve people of
their moral scruples, duties arid obligations and thus liberating them
from assumed malevolence.
The reformist motivation seemed to be geared to some imaginary need to
let people enjoy themselves to their hearts' content, irrespective of
any moral compunction or conscious commitment to chastity and rectitude.
All these are supposed to be conducive towards peacefully maintaining
whatever social order has come to prevail, while purporting to free the
people from psychological disorders!
Evidently, the seductive concept of freeplay of natural instincts and
desires has been offered as a reformatory safeguard against moral and
social constraints, as if these have a corrupting impact! Furthermore,
the concept has readily appealed to many young and single persons,
including a substantial number in our own country.
From what we have noticed, the supporters of a permissive kind of
society have a peculiar way of thinking. They seem to believe that
nothing is better for an individual than placing himself or herself at
the disposal of the sweet dictates of the heart, while allowing the
latter to be dominated even by lust.
At the same time, they apparently rationalize that the actions
resulting from their way of thinking can be construed as both human and
moralistic to the point of their being accepted as potential experts in
sophisticated social behaviour. They apparently suggest that their
thinking augurs them well, even if it represents a subject of ridicule
to others. Furthermore, they profess to seek both self-gratification and
service to their kind. They mean to ensure satiation of every bodily
urge and to cope with any spiritual need, as well.
In other words, they seem to equate good or normal conduct with
sensuality. Their imagination is not totally dissimilar to the
metaphorical use of love by some mystics, in the manner of Sufis. They
apparently sought communion with whatever images of female beauty and
love they could visualize, even in Divine terms!!
Consequently, the modernistic freeplay with the natural instincts and
desires failed to replace psychosomatic illnesses or neurotic disorders
by any spiritual contentment. Human afflictions continued to spread,
bringing one misfortune after another in an increasingly pernicious
manner. No wonder, some promoters of uninhibited sexual development,
such as Freud, were sensible enough to retract from their original
claims, or subsequently modify or clarify the same.
They reiterated the position that there was no easy way out of the
traditionally evolved social norms and constraints. They clarified to
the effect that human sexual concupiscence is not a programmable
quantity, or a self-contained input, for any complete or instant
satisfaction. They also referred to the need for sublimating it, so as
to channel human energies directly towards intellectual enhancement in
solving problems of educational, scientific, cultural, socioeconomic and
technological significance.
New morals of the kind advocated by Bertrand Russell, are supposed to
be conducive to a positive development of human personality. At the same
time, it is alleged that traditional morals inhibit human development.
The fact that, in the wake of the new morals, human afflictions and
distress have become aggravated disproves the abovementioned claims, so
that they deserve to be subjected to the same allegations as they make
against traditional morals.
Today, social scientists are microscopically endeavouring to cope with
particular manifestations, as well as specific difficulties, found in
their societies. In the present social conditions, young persons are
consciously avoiding marriage. Pregnancy and upbringing of children are
becoming somewhat abhorrent to many women, who seem to be less
interested in even housekeeping.
Marriages are in evidence more in the traditional societies and
conservative families than in the modern ones. On the other hand,
neurotic conflicts in persons of both sexes are on the increase
evidencing unusual psychosomatic and spiritual ailments.
Some among the social scientists opine that the traditional social
values have been fundamentally overtaken and superseded by the manpower
requirements of the modern industrial revolution. Actually, however,
morals, traditional or otherwise, ought to remain the same in their
intrinsic values and connotations. They are not affected by any changing
patterns of human living from an agricultural setting to an industrial
one.
Changes in any familiar patterns of human living and social interaction
are only construed to be fundamental in some revolutionary intellectual
way! The seemingly revolutionary thinking is attributable to some
individuals with whom must lie the grave responsibility for any
consequent misfortunes befalling humanity.
Even Bertrand Russell speaks of the pitfalls involved in speculative
thinking, including his own. For instance, he favours an unrestrained
gratification of the sexual instinct on one hand, and concedes the
necessity of adhering to a time-tested system of its self-regulation, on
the other. However, it is not intended, at this stage, to elaborate
further on the pros and cons of modernistic thinking concerning human
sexuality.
In reality, any appropriate compliance with the natural instincts,
instead of suppressing them, does not mean the same thing as liberating
sexuality by denouncing the age old moral restraints and constraints.
The natural instincts and desires are not incompatible with chastity and
virtue. In fact, they are adequately satisfied only within a chaste and
virtuous regulatory framework, which avoids the evils of promiscuous
behaviour, enforced celibacy or self-denial and the resultant emotional
disturbances.
In other words, appropriate nurturing of human instincts means nothing
different from overcoming lust and baser inclinations. The basic
distinction between human beings and animals is that the former are
capable of two kinds of desires: one is a genuinely natural urge and the
other is a pseudo-desire.
Genuine desires conform to the naturally essential requirements, such
as the desires for food, survival, self-protection, the sexual drive,
the inclination for aggression or domination and similar others.
Everyone of tire genuinely natural desires have a specific function,
which they serve with a definite purpose. Aside from the fact that they
are limited to their specific functions and purposes, all these are
individually capable of forming a basis for a pseudo-desire, such as the
well-known false appetite.
Most natural desires are amenable to complete satisfaction. Satisfying
the others, including the sexual drive, involves psychological
complications. For, the mind and the human spirit is at times capable of
sustaining bodily desires beyond the natural limits of physiological
satisfaction. Some intellectually sustained cravings never reach a
saturation point!
Accordingly, it is quite misleading to suggest an uninhibited
gratification of carnal desires, by prescribing freedom from moral
restraints and curbs on the natural instincts. Those who prescribe it
fail to distinguish between the qualities of human beings and animals.
They ignore the fact that there can be no end to human desire or
craving.
Human beings are prone to seize every opportunity towards self
satisfaction. They unceasingly avail every occasion to advance their
own interests. This is equally true in matters of acquiring wealth,
economics, politics and government, as well as in seeking to dominate
others or to intensify sexuality.
To suggest that relieving the sex urge is like attending to one's call
of nature, such as urination or defecation, is quite misleading, too.
Any question of evacuating from one's self his or her own moral scruples
or conditions, in the process of obtaining instant sexual relief, does
not arise. Conversely, safeguarding one's morality cannot mean the same
as accumulating urine. For, unlike moral continence, retention of urine
is bound to cause bodily comfort and disease.
For a better appreciation of the above point, let us assume that a
person finds, along the avenues and streets he frequents, several clean,
well-kept and even cost-free public urinals. Yet, one could not use them
to his or her heart's content to an extent beyond what one's bladder
permits! Accordingly, these nice urinals could not (or should not)
unduly attract a person (to urinate).
Some modernistic people assume that all human inclinations,
irrespective of whether or not these concern sex, aggression, domination
or mammon worship, should be freely allowed to be satisfied. This is
supposed to be capable of eliminating human deprivation, frustration or
dissatisfaction, in the process of satisfying one's desires. Their
reasoning is based on a false assumption. For, as pointed out earlier,
complete gratification of all human desires is not possible.
Human capacity to seek gratification of the natural and acquired
desires is not instinctively limited, as in the case of animals. Had
this not been the case, there would have been no need for any human
regulation of not only the sexual intercourse, but socioeconomic and
political interactions, as well. Even moral restraints would have been
unnecessary where natural constraints made it impossible for anyone to
seek excessive satisfaction, .or indulge in excesses. The very
limitation of natural capacity (to commit any excesses) would have
served the purpose, as in the case of animals.
However, ethical limits and procedural regulations are necessary for
promoting just practices and fair transactions in the socioeconomic and
political fields.
Likewise, limitation on, and regulation of, sexual behaviour and the
related activities, consistent with the needs of chastity and rectitude,
should also be acceptable to everyone