Almighty, Freedom, and Love: Toward an Islamic Open Theology

1 Introduction: Two Conceptions of God

In the wake of the 22-year-old girl’s death in morality police custody for allegedly breaching veiling rules for women, Iran has witnessed a protest against a conception of theology which has been dominant during the past several decades.^[1] Embedded in the protest’s slogan: “Woman, Life, Freedom,” I think there is pressure for a reform in our theology according to which the new Iran can reestablish the Woman(Man)–God–World relation in order to rebuild an ethical free society. In this article, based on the demarcation between two conceptions of theology, namely, classical theism and open theology,^[2] I shall try to illustrate how open theology can be interpreted as a suitable provider of background social norms which can regulate the Iranian struggle for justice and liberty.

It is well known that there are several different interpretations regarding the nature of God, His attributes and His existence to the extent that some mystics believe that there are as many different ways to understand and approach God as there are individuals. But in order to categorize this amalgam of views that prevail in the history of theistic religions, we can demarcate between two main sets of viewpoints, which we refer to as classical vs open theologies. Classical theology is supported traditionally by an understanding of God as infinitely sovereign who lives outside of time and space and independently of all His creatures. He is immutable, meaning that he never changes, and impassible, meaning that he is never affected by the changes of the material world. From too lofty a vantage point He has eternally foreknown all past and future, including actual and contingent events and facts. God as the most perfect possible being has created and realized the actual world as the best possible world. God is the ultimate master and the King of the world. As Rice explains,

In his infinite power, God brought the world into existence in order to fulfill his purposes and display his glory. Since his sovereign will is irresistible, whatever he dictates comes to pass and every event plays its role in his grand design. Nothing can thwart or hinder the accomplishment of his purposes. God’s relation to the world is thus one of mastery and control. … From his lofty vantage point, he apprehends the whole of created reality in one timeless perception: past, present and future alike appear before him. But though he fully knows and cares for the created world, he remains essentially unaffected by creaturely events and experiences. He is untouched by the disappointment, sorrow or suffering of his creatures.^[3]

This classical view toward God is widely accepted in traditions of all monotheistic religions. In the Islamic world as well, the philosophers and exegetics try to answer the rising philosophical problems and to interpret the Sacred text and the Sunnah according to this theological viewpoint. The political order of the ancient world also supports this view, with kings of the time asserting their sovereignty as the caliphs of the sovereign God and calling themselves His shadow. The hierarchy of the social order from family relationships in nuclear families, to the relationship between lawmakers in an oppressive state, and the relation between ordinary people in the kingdom have been influenced by the theological views most highly developed by Jurisprudents and power-oriented clerics in the history of Islam. It is noteworthy that this hierarchy of social order finds exegetical and textual support as well. Many texts, in Abrahamic religions, of course, affirm the majesty and glory of God: “Who is he, this King of glory? The Lord Almighty – he is the King of glory” [Ps 24:10]; “I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the templ” [Is 6:1]; “God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see” [Tim 6:15-16]. God transcends all creaturely reality. He is unique and utterly incomparable: “Who among the gods is like you, O Lord? Who is like you – majestic in holiness, awesome in glory, working wonders?” [Ex 15:11]; “You shall have no other gods before me” [Ex 20:3]; “Who is God besides the Lord?” [Ps 18:31]; “You alone are God over all the kingdoms of the earth” [Is 37:16]; “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me” [Is 46:9]. He is above all creatures and incomparable to them. The classical view also confirms the doctrine of divine immutability: “I the Lord do not change” [Mal 3:6]; “Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows” [Jas 1:17].

There are also several verses in the Qur’an that the proponents of this controlling view can rely on for support. “He is the Supreme above His creatures; and He is the Wise, the Aware” [Q 6:18]. “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when God and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys God and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in to a plain error” [Q 33: 36]. And your Lord creates whatsoever He wills and chooses, no choice have they (in any matter). “Glorified is God, and exalted above all that they associate (as partners with Him)” [Q 28: 68]. “He to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and Who has begotten no son (children or offspring) and for Whom there is no partner in the dominion. He has created everything, and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements” [Q 25: 2].

All of these textual propositions can literally be seen as shaping a magnificent, glorified and prosperous almighty whose sovereign is the entire earth and heaven for whom there is no partner in the dominion. God is omnipotent and extremely powerful. From this point of view, the power of God is associated with and corresponds to His control over the world. Everything past or future, tiny or immense is in His control. The controlling conception of the almighty God introduces Him as the greatest King ever.

On the other hand, there are several verses in the Bible and in the Qur’an that support a different view, a more liberating one named the open view according to which God is open to the future decisions of free agents.^[4] According to open theology, the conception of divine love is the most central attribute of God upon which we ought to understand His nature and interpret His actions, words, and other attributes. In the open theological view, God does not control every event of the past and future but instead, because of the manifestation of His love through His power, He bestows freedom to all of His creatures to choose their path according to the degree of self-consciousness they partake. This change of centrality from God’s sovereignty to His love and mercy is crucial. Accordingly, divine love as beneficence toward all creatures in an agapeic form is the essential attribute of God based on which we ought to understand all of His other attributes including God’s power; Love is not something God happens to select, and it is the one divine activity that most fully and vividly discloses God’s inner reality. Love, therefore, is the very essence of divine nature. Love is what it means to be God. While in the classical conception of divine, God’s power and sovereignty are the essential and central attributes of God, the open conception instead emphasizes divine love as the central attribute.^[5] This change of focus and presumptive consideration is very important in understanding the divine–human relation and religious worldviews.

In the Islamic world, this conception of theology has been developed by Muhammad Iqbal.^[6] Although several commentators of his works label him as a proponent of process theology^[7] rather than open theology, I think we can fairly read him as a proponent of open theology as well. Iqbal’s theology despite his metaphysical affinity with Whitehead’s philosophy of organism is in a crucial way in contrast with process theological canonical doctrines. Iqbal supports an individualistic conception of God.^[8] Iqbal limits God’s foreknowledge in favor of His freedom.^[9] According to him, God limits Himself in order to make room for human beings to act freely.^[10] He says, “If history is regarded merely as a gradually revealed photo of a predetermined order of events, then there is no room in it for novelty and initiation.”^[11] As Mir Sadri says, “According to Iqbal, God does not have a future foreknowledge, not because he is limited by any outer factor(s) – as the process thinkers hold – but rather out of the rationale that the future is nothing but an ocean of possibilities, within and flowing from the divine reality, that are not yet actualities for God to have knowledge of them.”^[12] So it seems that Iqbal is a thinker that in the project of developing Islamic Open Theology we ought to consider his thoughts seriously.

In this article, I shall argue in favor of the Open conception of divinity and theology. In the next section, I shall demonstrate the essential elements of this theology. Then I shall explain a different meaning of God’s power as freedom bestowment. Next, I will argue that open theology can be supported rationally by helping us to dissolve some philosophical concerns of theism. I shall conclude that in the modern era, human beings changed their position in the world consciously. This change in the position of the man-world state definitely affects our epistemic position toward God, which is our theology. It seems to me that Islamic theology has to follow the path toward being more open in order to answer the newly raised questions concerning (Wo)Man-God relation in the modern world.

2 Love and Mercy as the Essential Attributes of God

From the Open point of view, God’s revelation is His “self-revelation” through the personality and words of the prophets: God reveals Himself in the Bible and the Qur’an through the words articulated by the prophet and preserved by disciples as the text (Albeit there are several main differences between the nature of revelation in each of the Abrahamic books. The Quran from its first days of revelation was interpreted and expressed as direct words of God introduced to Prophet Muhammad, while the Bible contains different books written by different authors. However, I think that these different methodologies of explicating the revelation do not affect the common element among all revealed books in Abrahamic religions. All of them have been revealed by God who manifests Himself through the words, situations, narrations, and actions mentioned in the books.^[13]) From the classical point of view, God’s revelation is understood as commands to be obeyed or sentences to be listened to, or orders that are declared, but based on the open view revelation tells us that God has manifested Himself in order to be known and beloved. As Karl Barth says, God is “He who, without having to do so, seeks and creates fellowship between Himself and us.”^[14] God is not the center of infinite power who happens to be loving; He is loving above all else. Precisely, through love, we can know the divine attribute of omnipotence as caring as having sympathy and bestowing freedom to His creators. All creatures enjoy freedom according to their capacity to become free. Consider the material world. It has been theorized that the material world evolves according to indeterminate laws of physics. This indeterminacy exists on the most fundamental levels and can be interpreted as a sign of freedom in the material world. The randomness inherent in evolutionary processes is also a sign of freedom which the biological systems enjoy. Human beings are the result of billions of years of activity in the material world and biological evolution toward reaching self-consciousness and freedom. Of course, God the Almighty is the creator and designer of this freedom-oriented world. God as the most powerful bestows freedom to the entirety of His creatures based on their capacity to acquire consciousness and then freedom. This conception of power as freedom-bestowing is central to changing the social/political hierarchy of a world where people are oppressed by any sort of self-alienating system according to which the model of government and social order is copied from a theological order of sovereign divinity whose commands have to be obeyed without questioning. My aim in this article is to demonstrate that not only the open conception of divinity has some good support from the Bible as well as the Quran, but also we can redefine the role and the position of humanity in the world as responsive to God’s announcement for love to the extent that every human being has the potency to be the caliph (successor) of God and in direct love-relationship with God through an I-Thou firm relation.

The essential conception of God in Christianity is definitely love. Eberhard Jüngel believes “God is love” [John 4:8] is the most influential expression of the Bible as Christian theology has always given it pride of place among the many descriptions of God.^[15] “Love” in this verse is a translation of “agape” which has the same root as “hobb” in Arabic and “אהבה” in Hebraic languages. Agape is a sort of love that is unlimited, immeasurable, incomparable, unconditional love toward all human and non-human beings. In contrast with Eros, as the love in Greek texts which is conditioned upon beauty, power or wealth of the object of love, agape in the bible is unconditional, a sort of rain of divine grace for all beings regardless of their faults, deficiencies or sins. On the other hand, God’s anger is temporary: “In overflowing wrath for a moment I hid my face from you, but with everlasting love, I will have compassion on you” [Is 54:8]. But his love is permanent: “His anger is but for a moment; his favor is for a lifetime” [Ps 30:5]. This sort of divine permanent favor and agapeic love is a central conception that preserves and drives the open conception of God among mystical traditions in the Judo-Christian world and also for the Sufi mysticism in the Islamic world.^[16]

Also, in the Qur’an, one can find several verses containing God’s unlimited mercy and beneficence toward His creatures, especially human beings. Each Surah of the Quran begins with, “In the name of God the compassionate the merciful.” “And ordain for us that which is good, in this life and in the Hereafter: for we have turned unto Thee.” He said “with My punishment I visit whom I will; but My mercy extends to all things” [Q 7: 156]. “Those who sustain the Throne (of Allah) and those around it sing Glory and Praise to their Lord; believe in Him; and implore forgiveness for those who believe: ‘Our Lord! Thy reach is over all things in Mercy, and Knowledge. Forgive, then, those who turn in repentance, and follow Thy Path: and preserve them from the Penalty of the Blazing Fire’” [Q 40: 7]. In both of these verses, the Qur’an emphasizes God’s through and global mercy that extends to everything. God introduces several names of Himself in the Quran such as forgiving, patient, guide, responsive to prayers, and near. Also in another verse, the Qur’an explains the purpose of sending a messenger to people so as to teach them wisdom and knowledge [Q 96: 1-4]. The prophet and the messenger of God are so lenient to people that they call him an “ear” who listens to the voice of all [Q 9: 61]. “And by the Mercy of God, you dealt with them gently. And had you been severe and harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about you; so pass over (their faults), and ask (God’s) Forgiveness for them; and consult them in the affairs. Then when you have taken a decision, put your trust in God, certainly, God loves those who put their trust (in Him)” [Q 3: 159]. In this verse, also the Qur’an ascribes the messenger as a gentle, forgiving and noble man.

Now, we face the difficult question of how to interpret these two different attributes of God who loves and who wraths, who is merciful globally and who punishes people severely. Is God an authoritarian king or a freedom donator? Philosophers speak of God’s “great making” properties. A God with compassion who forgives those who stray from the path and gives them enough freedom to choose their way and to build their future world is greater than the deity who tightly controls everything in order to achieve His own goals.

In the next section, I shall deal with the problem of how to evaluate these two distinct theologies, open vs classical theology both of which have textual supports.

3 God’s Power as Freedom Bestowal

In this section, I shall argue from three different perspectives that in order to build a new social order free from oppressive and paternalistic hierarchies, in which the Muslim society can feel freedom and respect for human rights, we ought to prioritize and prefer the open theology rather than the classical one. But in order to reach a criterion for prioritizing between these two points of view, we ought to understand the nature of God’s power and reinterpret the meaning of divine sovereignty and control. Almost all of the theists believe that God is the greatest and the most perfect possible being. The concept of power is associated with control. A most powerful being is one who has the most control over other people’s lives and relations and actions. Most dictators try to dominate their own preferred lifestyle and thought in society and treat people as tools toward fulfilling their own desires, ambitions, and wills. This view about the nature of power penetrates the understanding of theologians regarding the nature of God’s power. However, it should be noted that God’s power is totally different from this sort of totalitarian conception. When we look closely at recent psychological studies, we find that the nature of dictatorship is not a sense of power but a need to accommodate one’s weakness instead. Irvin Yalom in his famous novel, The Schopenhauer Cure, illustrated this point in a very nuanced manner.^[17] A dictator like Hitler is not a true symbol of power but rather embodies profound weakness when he exploits people’s lives as mere instruments to further his own ambitions. This misunderstanding of the nature of real power in human beings may also affect our understanding of divine power. God is powerful not in the sense that we mistakenly see an oppressive dictator as powerful but truly as a nobleman who helps other people to live freely and flourish. The real power is, as Nietzsche finely explained, a force in the soul of the nobleman who has respect for the dignity and freedom of people.^[18] Surprisingly, Nietzsche’s thoughts can help us to rebuild our Islamic theology. Power is associated with nobility and respect for freedom rather than control and dominance. The more powerful a person is, the more freedom she gives to other people in her territory to grow their own inner treasures. So, God’s omnipotence is not like the superficial power of a sovereign king but rather resembles the compassionate influence of a noble teacher who guides and inspires her students to grow and flourish, winning their hearts through love and respect. So, the relation of the powerful God with his creature is a love relation, and the omnipotent is the most freedom bestower, a true Lover. John Sanders says:

Authoritatives believe that fear of punishment is necessary so that people follow the rules. Fear maintains order in society. Nurturants, on the other hand, believe that love empowers others to do what is right. 1 John says “God is love” (4:16) and that fear-based religion is contrary to who God is. John writes: “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love” (4:18). In short, John says that Authoritative religion does not imitate the God of Jesus.^[19]

Proponents of the authoritative conception of God according to the psychological and social scientific research which Sanders appealed are highly suspicious of others, more aggressive about their own religious ideas, less concerned with outsiders, supporters of a master–slave relation between believers and non-believers, and less tolerant to different views.^[20] Unfortunately, we can see that this type of view about God is prevalent among various groups within the Muslim community, including common Muslims, politicians, and even scholars. In the Islamic world immediately after the death of the prophet, we see the struggle for power between Muslim different tribes and groups. The territory of the Islamic system dominated very soon from North Africa to Iran and to the boundary of China and the Roman Empire. The governance of such a great state in the name of Islam required enough support from Islamic theology. I think that the authoritative (classical) conception of God as a great king allowed the Islamic dynasties of Umayyad and Abbasid to rule their dictatorship form of governance in the name of Islam for hundred years. One might wonder why we do not refer to ancient Muslim theologians in support of an open view of God. The reason it seems to me that the dictatorship model of governance in the Islamic world supports the form of authoritative theology and except for some Mystics and Sufis who lived outside of and isolated from the system of power, most theologians and philosophers consciously or unconsciously graduated in the atmosphere of cooperation between tyranny and theology. Only in recent years, we can hear some different voices demanding change in our classical authoritative theology.^[21]

As mentioned, one of the most influential philosophers and intellectuals in the contemporary Islamic world who is concerned with the relationship between classical theology and its influence on the situation of modern Muslim societies is Muhammad Iqbal. Iqbal in his seminal book titled Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam demonstrates his concern regarding the inferior position of the Islamic world in relation to the Western world as a result of forgetfulness of our Selfhood (Khudi) and our conscious understanding of our very situation in the world. But to come to this self-consciousness Islamic world requires changing its view toward God, man, and the world. According to Iqbal, our traditional Hellenistic conception of God who is immutable, impassible, timeless, impersonal, and exists completely out of the world and looks at our natural world from an eternal and aloof point of view, is problematic. This view subsequently reaches “the notion of a transcendent God, prior to the universe, and operating upon it from without.”^[22] Iqbal argues that our theology shapes the normative structure of our society to the extent that even our understanding of ourselves depends on our theological point of view.^[23] As Mir Sadri explains:

During his intellectual endeavors in order to find the roots of the problem – of stagnation and backwardness –in the Islamic world, Iqbal found the theological conception of God – his nature and his relation to man and to the world – as the major and serious impediment to the Islamic speculative and, as a result, social progress. As Iqbal rightly detected, the static God of the traditional Islamic thought with a substance-based world of matter, established through a once-created and determined act of creation leaves no room for action and dynamism, in the world or for human persons.^[24]

Iqbal thinks that when our understanding of divinity has been changed then we can truly understand our role as human beings and His successors in the world. Our prayers and actions receive new meaning as the effective cause in the world which change the history of mankind and the path through which we pass on.^[25]

There is a central concept in Shiism that differentiates Shia theology from Sunni theology, which is unfortunately highly misunderstood even by Shia theologians and clerics. The doctrine of walayah that misunderstood mainly by some Shia exegetics as the doctrine about the mundane government. As I understand this concept which seems to be the central pillar of Shia Islam it refers not to a mode of government but to the power of the Imam to guide people through influencing their hearts and to show them the true way toward Truth. God, the prophet, and imams are wali not in the sense of a controller or governor but they are wali as lovers who help people to find their way freely and hearted-fully and in a kindly manner. Wali is our helper who has sympathy and empathy with us during our suffering. Wali heals our pains, listens to our prayers, and asks God to forgive us and accept our imploration. He helps us, not forces upon us. The meaning of walayah as Allameh Tabatabaii explains:

Some of the exegetics of the Qur’an take the concept of walayah in the famous verse that mentioned Abraham’s degree of imamah and walayah (‘And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled; He said: “I will make thee an Imam to the nations.”’ [Q 2:124]) as the caliphate or successorship, or king, or governor, or as political authority but none of these conceptions is the true interpretation of the verse since imamah and walayah points to the state of the man to the extent that people themselves want to follow him and his actions and accept his thoughts freely, otherwise it would be meaningless for a prophet like Abraham whose stance is so high to order people to follow him. People knew his high stance and when he reached the stance of walayah and imamah after his prophet-hood this new position means something more than a command to people to follow Abraham. Caliphate or successorship is a sort of beneficiary and this conception is far from the concept of walayah that is God’s bestowment. But imamah or walayah does not mean “bossing” in this-worldly political matters or even religious matters that require obligatory subsuming. Accordingly, this phrase of the Qur’an that “I will make thee an Imam to the nations”, is referring to an important position which Abraham has been appointed to by divine mercy. Here there is a point that requires serious attention. In the Qur’an whenever we see the word “imam” the notion of “guidance” is proceeding. For example, ‘We made righteous men of every one (of them). And We made them leaders, guiding (men) by Our Command, and We sent them inspiration to do good deeds, to establish regular prayers, and to practice regular charity; and they constantly served Us (and Us only)’ [Q 21: 72-73] or, ‘And We appointed, from among them, Leaders, giving guidance under Our command, so long as they persevered with patience and continued to have faith in Our Signs’ [Q 32:24]. In both of these verses the description of imam associated with a guidance that constrained by God’s command. It demonstrates that the guidance that undertaken by Imams is not a matter of defining the rules of Shari’ah or normal guidance but it is a guidance that firmly related to the concept of divine command referred to the command of creation: ‘Verily, when He intends a thing, His command is “Be” and it is!’ [Q 36:82]). So the guidance undertaken by Imams is a sort of guidance that metaphysically and existentially relates people’s heart to their creator and Lord, it is the open guidance while the prophets’ guidance is exoteric, they relate people with God through the rules of Shari’ah. ^[26]

Allameh Tabatabaii’s view shows that we are totally mistaken if we think that the prophet and Imams are pursuing to establish a government in this world. The prophet pursues primarily to establish a government to remedy our hearts not to oppressively govern our mundane lives.^[27] Our decisions for actions are motivated by our intentions which are ultimately influenced by our emotions. So by guiding our hearts, the walis may guide us to construct our lives here and hereafter according to the freely chosen laws which we ourselves are confirmed as the lawmakers. They teach us how to be a moral person, a free and responsible agent, who autonomously decides to act in accordance with and for the sake of the universal good of humanity. Instead of being the controller and oppressive ruler the wali in true Shia theology is a guide towards self-constitution and a teacher of freedom. Any misunderstanding of Shia main doctrine might lead some scholars to interpret the character of the prophet as an authoritarian,^[28] while when we reform our theology and accept an open point of view we correct our understanding of God’s power as a lover and then His prophet as the mercy toward all creatures. One can argue that this way of leading is more perfect than controlling others. God is the more perfect being who empowers and encourages others to follow the straight path, rather than a being who forces them to follow. Hence, successors who lead this way are superior to authoritarian rulers.

Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the follower of Allameh Tabatabaii and renowned Shia scholar, confirms the same idea about the concept of walayah:

Actually, walayah in this context, which should not in the technical language of Islamic gnosis be considered identical to walayah in the ordinary sense having to do with the state of wall or saint, means the presence of this inner dimension within Islam which the Prophet inaugurated along with a new Shari’ah and which will continue to the end of time. Thanks to its presence, man is able to renew himself spiritually and gain contact with the Divine although a new revelation is no longer possible. It is due to this esoteric dimension of Islam and the grace or barakah contained in the organizations which are its preservers and propagators that the spiritual force of the original revelation has been renewed over the ages and the possibility of a spiritual life leading to the state of sainthood, that purifies human society and rejuvenates religious forces, has been preserved.^[29]

The role of the prophet as declared in the Qur’an is informing, mentoring, and helping people to find their true way toward flourishment, teach wisdom, and purify and sanctify them [Q 62:2]. To accomplish this crucial role, the prophet went toward freeing people from being hostages of mundane oppressions and vain inclinations. He bestows freedom upon us. But nowadays Islam has been diseased by Islamic foundationalism and totalitarianism which give support from some Islamic authorities. Islamic intellectuals try to demonstrate that Islam is a religion of mercy and it respects human rights not as a matter of chance but in its nature, according to the true understanding of the Qur’an and the prophet’s Sunnah. Mustafa Ruzgar, following Iqbal argues that a Muslim intellectual’s main mission nowadays is to liberate humanity from the clutches of both fundamentalist tradition and individualistic modernity, and from the superstitious mysticism of the East and the mundane reason of the West.^[30] According to him, the sensationalistic, materialistic, and atheistic threads of modern science created irreconcilable dichotomies such as natural/supernatural, mundane/sacred, matter/mind, and science/religion that Iqbal tries to reconcile them and suggests that the Qur’anic conception of the universe does provide a better alternative. Following this line of thought, I think this intellectualist libertarian conception of Islam is preferable as the God of Islam introduced Himself essentially and primarily as the most merciful, the most beneficent. In the next section, I shall demonstrate how the open conception of Islam can help us to solve some difficult philosophical and theological problems.

4 Some Philosophical Reflections in Favor of Open Conception of Divinity

There are two philosophical problems that are always interwoven with the classical conception of theism: the problem of evil and the problem of libertarian free will.

5 Conclusion

In a teleological process from a billion years ago (or even from eternity), our world has reached the point in which now and here we are reflecting on the human–God relationship. It seems that our world is developing toward increasing self-consciousness through a freely chosen way of opening itself: the process of becoming. This process of becoming can be seen as God’s manifestation of Himself as the Free Being through the creation to manifest His freedom and His mercy toward His creatures. The process of manifestation of freedom, or in a better word the manifestation of self-love has been traditionally misunderstood as a single moment of existential relation between an eternal subject who creates, sustains and controls the world. We instead of seeing the world as the manifestation of God that endures in history, see it separate from God as a material entity which cannot be in touch with the divine realm. This separation and demarcation between mundane and spiritual, between material and abstract, between immutable and mutable world, between sacred and secular… are the source of misunderstanding the relation between human and God and especially our misunderstanding of the nature of God. Human being in the modern era, in contrast with many interpretations that accuse her as secular and free from divinity or demystified subject, is as I understand her, the nearest form of humanity to God since she experiences freedom and seeks for her special role in the world. This freedom-seeking and life-seeking process which is mainly announced by women in their motto “woman, life, freedom,” I think is a Love-seeking or in a better world God-seeking process since humanity by experiencing freedom can choose to respond to God’s announcement for love. This social movement may make us ready to put aside any paternalistic theology which sees God’s attributes from the point of view of His sovereignty. Instead, we are now ready to read the Qur’an: In the name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful.