Episode Transcript
[00:00:12] Speaker A: Salaam. And hello listeners. You're listening to History Speaks, and I'm your host, Roshanikbal. Today is a really special day for me because I finally get to meet and speak with Dr. Sara Taleli, whose work has deeply impacted me. And I'll share more about that a little bit later. But first, let me introduce her. Dr. Taleli is a Tunisian American scholar and associate professor of Arabic language and Literature at the University of Florida.
She earned her PhD in Arabic and Islamic Studies from the University of Pennsylvania. And her research explores something truly fascinating, the place of animals in Islamic thought, especially in the Quran. She is the author of Animals in the Quran, a groundbreaking work which has also been translated into Arabic that has inspired scholarship in Islam, ethics and the environment.
At 250 pages with two appendices, one listing animal species in the Quran and the other outlining animal categories, Dr. Talili's book is rigorous and deeply scholarly. I could not find another book entirely dedicated to animals in the Quran, which is. Which makes her work even more remarkable. The uniqueness of her work and analysis cannot be overstated.
What I love about her book is that in a time of unnecessary and criminal animal suffering, collapsing ecosystems and a rapidly warming planet, Dr. Talili tells us that the Quran is not anthropocentric, it is theocentric.
To say that the Quran is not anthropocentric is to say that it is not human centered.
And it is to say that humans are not automatically the most important or superior species.
The Quran doesn't place humans above other creatures. It speaks to and about all creatures, humans, animals, jinns, angels, and even unknown beings.
Dr. Talili challenges the usual human centered reading which puts humans at the center and treats all other creatures as background actors in our drama.
To say that the Quran is theocentric is to say all of creation, humans, animals, jinns, angels and more are called to turn towards and submit to the divine God. Consciousness becomes the center of life, guiding us to learn about God's wisdom and care for the world around us.
Humans may carry God's trust, but as Dr. Talili emphasizes, that makes us distinct, the not superior.
Now, confession time.
Even if someone had offered me a million dollars or 100 million, or metaphorically pointed a gun at my head and said Russian, think differently about the Quran, I still would not have arrived at Dr. Talili's insight.
After a lifetime of religious sermons and academic lectures, I never questioned humanity's starring role. Reading her book entirely changed the way I see myself and the world around me. And I cannot be more Grateful to her for this learning. So in this conversation we'll explore her book and what a theocentric Quran really looks like. I also want to dedicate this episode, with Dr. Taleli's permission, to the life and legacy of Jane Goodall.
Born in 1934 and passing just days ago at 91, Jane remained a tireless advocate for the living world.
Her work with the chimpanzees in Tanzania reshaped how we understand animals and ourselves, breaking the illusion that only humans think, feel or grieve.
As we turn to Dr. Talili's animals in the Quran, it feels fitting to honor Jane. Both women invite us to look beyond the human, to listen to the voices of creation. Jane showed us that animals are not objects of study, but companions in existence. Dr. Talili shows us that the Quran speaks to this kinship calling not only humans, but all beings to God. Centric awareness, reverence and a moral life.
In Jane Goodall's spirit, we dedicate this episode to the creatures often unseen and to the hope that listening closely as Jane did as the Quran asks can change how we live in the world.
Let's begin our conversation with the question that started it all. The moment of discovery. Dr. Talili, tell us about the spark behind your book. Not the scholarly gap though since your book is one of few full length studies on animals, it can hardly be called a gap, rather it is a void. But that aha moment.
Was there a point when you thought, hold on, the Quran doesn't put animals on top. Most of us are particularly drowned in human centered thinking. How do you break through that mindset?
[00:04:59] Speaker B: Thank you very much Roshan. I'm very grateful for this opportunity. And thank you also for dedicating this episode to Jane Goodall. It's an honor for me to have this episode dedicated to her.
I discovered the importance of animals in Islamic tradition during my graduate studies. I wrote an annotated bibliography and I was struck by the like, the depth and wealth of information about animals. And I was surprised that this topic was not explored before.
So I thought it's something that I wanted to explore further. And of course any work, you know, like on any theme in Islamic studies starts with the Quran, which is at the center of the tradition.
There wasn't an aha moment, there was a gradual transformation. I started my work on the Quran totally convinced that humans are more valuable to God than other creatures.
But you know, like, the more I kept looking for that justification, the more I was struck, it's not there. We are not, you know, the idea that humans are more important to God. Could have been, you know, could have arisen from the fact that the Quran is directed to humans, it speaks to humans, you know, and it is deeply preoccupied with humans, with humans, destiny, behavior, morality and all of that.
But, but when we listen to what the Quran says, you know, for example, the word for insan. The word insan for humans occurs about I think 65 times in the Quran and the connotation is overwhelmingly negative.
[00:06:45] Speaker A: That was amazing. When I read that in your book, it really made me kind of.
[00:06:49] Speaker B: Yeah, and that's, you know, like it's looking into all of these things, like one thing at a time. It changed me. So it was a gradual transformation. You know, I did not begin the work as an animal advocate. I just begun the work as someone interested in an academic topic, you know, and that transformation has, you know, like exploring the Quran, reading it deeply, looking for what is it that makes us special. And not finding it made me realize, well, it may be we are not that special after all.
[00:07:24] Speaker A: Let me just like at least tell you of my experience of reading your book.
For the first time I feel reading your book felt to me like reading like the first time when I read Edward Said's Orientalism when suddenly the world flips right side up, comes into focus and there is a life saving and life changing paradigm shift.
Your book opened a window into the Quran for me at least that is wider, deeper and profoundly humbling.
I don't think that your work just teaches, it transforms how you see the text of the Quran, the world and our place within.
I'm so grateful for this book and for you.
Now that we've sort of traced the initial insight, let's turn to the root of human centered thinking in the Quran itself.
Let's begin at the beginning and look at reasons for human reasons why humans might feel central and how the Quran could be read as anthropocentric. At first glance or before reading a book, the Quran seems very human focused. For example, in surah Baqarah verse 2 it calls itself a guidance for humankind. In Surah ala Ahzab verse 7 to 2 it describes humans as bearers of God's amana or sacred trust. In Surah al Nisa, verse 113 speaks to God's infinite Fadl, God's grace towards humans. And in Surah Atheen verse 4 it says indeed we created humankind in the best form.
Then in both Surah al Hijr verse 29 and Surah Saad verse 72, God speaks about breathing his spirit into humans, highlighting their special status. Given these and many other similar verses, and I collected all of these from your book, how do you challenge the idea that humans are not naturally central and superior? In your chapter Humans in the Quran, you first explore what the Quran actually says about humans and then the criteria it uses to assign superior status.
Could you walk us through these questions?
[00:09:34] Speaker B: Thank you.
The Quran affirms time and again that the entire non human creation worships God.
For example, in verse 44, Surat Al Isra Surah number 17, it affirms that there isn't a thing in the cosmos that does not sing the praises of God.
And it says also that non human beings pray to God, they prostrate themselves to God.
So it affirms the devotional dimension of non human creation. When you look at humankind, Engin actually like these two species, they are really lagging behind when it comes to this. In fact, Quran repeatedly says that most humankind do not believe most humankind are ungrateful to God.
And what is it that the Quran values more? You know, like I think that by the Quran's own criteria, the thing that it values more is devotion to God and submission to God. Submission to God is something that the Quran ascribes to the entire creation. It says, so everything in the heavens and on earth have submitted themselves to God.
What is the point of the Quran? The Quran invites humans to submit to God.
So in this sense it's clear that you know what the Quran is inviting us to do is what the rest of creation is already doing. And I believe in this. We have a creation affirming ethic that fits more with the theocentric dimension of the Quran than the anthropocentric.
I could of course talk more about these things, but you have raised many points. Let me just give you one example of how certain things can be read through an anthropocentric lens to lead to anthropocentric interpretations. You've mentioned the verse in Surah, we have created humankind in the best stature.
This actually can be invoked as something that proves human special status only through a selective reading. Because if we continue with the same Surah it says, then we have turned him, the human being, into the lowest of the lowest, except for those who have faith and do good deeds.
So this actually confirms the theocentric dimension of the Quran, you know, and however, if you just focus on the first verse of these three verses, it may appear that the Quran promotes anthropocentric positions.
[00:12:19] Speaker A: When I was reading that section in your book, I was thinking to myself how conveniently we privilege certain parts and sort of skip, like don't think about certain parts. So it was sort of really interesting. But moving on, I do remember that later in your book you draw a distinction between earned and conferred status which is connected to your lexical analysis of the word tafdeel.
Could you explain these three concepts and why they matter?
[00:12:50] Speaker B: Thank you. This is actually one of the most important themes in the Quran.
So the verse that has been invoked the most in support of human special status is the one that says, you know, like we have favored or we have like it's the tafdeel. Like we have, like God has faddal humankind over other creatures. What does tafdel mean?
When you analyze the word, you know, like lexical analysis, contextual analysis, in the Quran itself, you discover that tafdeel is not about preferring liking more or elevating the status of one creature above the other. It is rather about giving more good things to a creature than another one.
We find this, for example, in the context of gender.
The verse which says that God, you know, like men and women, he favored some above the others.
What this means is that he gave good things to men that he did not give to women and vice versa. He gave good things to women that he did not give to men.
God does this across the board with creation, for example, he gives some people more wealth. Does this make us superior?
Well, in the domain of this claim, yeah. Yes, yes. Like if you have more money, you are superior in that dimension. In that respect, does this make you superior across the board? No. You know, you could have more money than me and then you are superior in that respect.
I could be healthier than you and I'm better in that respect. So this is how it works, you know, like God, when God gives someone more of something good, does this make that person dearer to God? Let's look at wealth, for example. God has given the Pharaoh and Korah immense wealth status and all of that. Did it make them superior in that restricted area? Yes, but they are not superior in the sense that matters to God.
Right.
What matters to God is the status that we earn.
So here, whatever comes from FADL and tafdeel is conferred status. It's what God creates, gives to creation. It's a sign of his goodness, his generosity, how we react to that, whether we are grateful or ungrateful, this is what will determine our status. And this is the earned status. And this is what matters to God. Someone who has that type of status? The Quran does not actually speak about it in terms of tafdeel, but in terms of better and best, you know. And when he talks about, you know, like Muhammad and his companions, he says, you were the best nation that, you know, was given to humankind and this is because of their faith and good deeds. So this is the distinction between earned and conferred status and how it is linked to tafdeel.
[00:15:56] Speaker A: I really sort of enjoyed thinking about this distinction that you make. I do have a couple of comments here.
You say that the Quran is not anthropocentric, and I agree.
But I would like to add that a deeper issue may not just be anthropocentrism, but androcentrism. A male centered reading of the Quran. For most of human history, men have been the ones interpreting and elaborating on the Quran. We have, to this day, only three complete works of Quranic commentary written by women. This is astonishing in a really bad way. And it's a problem we haven't really been willing to look squarely in the face or sit with.
Now I want to be like, really clear. I don't mean to suggest that Muslim male scholars were doing anything wrong intentionally. In fact, so much goodness and wisdom has come to us through them. I truly believe they were sincere and did the best they could within the worlds they inhabited. But I also believe it is the unfinished work of Muslim scholars today, male and female, to name the limits of that legacy and to begin expanding the interpretive space.
And I also want to point out part of the resistance to feminist reading of the Quran has a real historical basis. During the colonial period, colonizers often appropriated the language of women's rights as justification for conquest. And this has left a deep wound in the Muslim intellectual and spiritual imagination.
Finally, of course, androcentrism isn't unique to Muslim scholarship. It's a human problem, one that has shaped interpretation, authority and knowledge across time and place. We see this everywhere, right? Even today, even in science, which we like to think as the most objective and rational of human pursuits.
For decades, female bodies were excluded from medical research because they were considered too complicated in quotes.
And the result has been devastating treatments and dosages designed around male physiology, often with harmful effects for women.
To further continue with the tongue twister word around anthropocentrism and androcentrism, we are now officially in the Anthropocene, described as the age in which human activity has become the dominant force shaping the planet. The climate, ecosystems, and life itself.
And unfortunately for the worst, reading the Quranic verses I did above, it is easy to see why humans might feel central. But when you step back, you realize that the entire era of environmental disruption can be traced to reading the world and even the Quran through the distorted human centered lens. The outcome of the Anthropocene alone feels like a strong evidence that an anthropocentic needs rethinking. These passages could give the impression of a world centered on humans, with the land and the sea, the mountains and the animals existing primarily for our benefit. So how would you address this?
[00:19:03] Speaker B: Right, so yes, I agree there are certain themes in the Quran which create the impression that animals are, you know, like somehow, you know, like flawed.
But again, like if you presume that the Quran is not a text that contradicts itself, which is a premise that I accept, you know, as a Muslim, I accept, I believe the Quran does not contradict itself, then it gives you a pause like you know, like you can. So the Quran affirms that the entire non human world knows about God, has faith in God, worships God, et cetera.
And then it says that, you know, like livestock could be astray. So how could it be that on one hand they are believers in God and on the other hand they are astray.
In fact, we find that some Muslim exegesis say that they are not astray in a spiritual sense. They can get astray in a physical, empirical sense. And the way they account for the, I mean, they give many interpretations. This is just like one of the interpretations that some of them propose.
It's that being astray in this case is like when livestock cannot go back home and how it endangers their lives. Like they become vulnerable and they could be attacked by predators.
So it's comparing the misguidance, if you want, at the empirical level of livestock to the spiritual misguidance of human beings to give a kind of concrete visual image of what it means to be astray. When you talk about some humans being punished as by being turned into apes and pigs, Razi, one of the most prominent exegetes of the Quran, says the point here is not that, you know, turning them into these animals makes them below because like, you know, apes and pigs do not think of themselves as being unhappy or somehow, you know, unnatural. So he says this is simply a form of imprisonment. It's an extreme form of imprisonment. It's as if you take the soul of one creature and puts it in, in the body of another and deprive it from, you know, like the skills that it usually has.
So this is how he interprets this. In any case, for me, the fact that the Quran already affirms the spirituality of like non human beings, that in itself rules out the possibility that they can be spiritually misguided.
[00:21:47] Speaker A: I hear you and I just want to keep pressing the point, not because I am not convinced, but because maybe the listeners will have questions. So I wanted like turn to more examples in the Quran. The Quran seems to say that everything is in service to humans. And that lends itself to a particular kind of understanding of humans in relation to animals. For example, in Surah Nahal, verse 5 to 7, God talks about grazing livestock, providing warmth, food, and carrying loads across difficult terrain, all in the service of humans. In Surah al Nahl, verse 8, God mentions horses, mules, donkeys for riding and splendor again for humans. Moving further, verses 14 say that the sea is subjected so humans can eat from it, take ornaments and use ships on it to seek God's bounty. In Surah a Zakhraf, verse 13, humans can settle on the backs of these creatures and recognize God's favor. The Quran also makes clear humans may eat animals for sustenance. Sorry. As in Surah al Baqarah verse 173 and various other verses mention the same thing. Of course, always with care, with restraint and gratitude, but still in the service of human needs.
So my question is, are animals not subjected to humans in this way? In your book animals in the Quran, specifically in the chapter are they animals inferior, you ask why God puts animal in the service of humans and how the Quran describes this serviceability.
Could you unpack that and explain how understanding these terms challenges human superiority? Could you also discuss the term taskeer, which refers to the subjugation and service of animals? And how does that factor into your interpretation?
[00:23:35] Speaker B: Well, thank you. This is actually a complex idea, so let me give it a try.
[00:23:39] Speaker A: Sure.
[00:23:40] Speaker B: The fact that the Quran says that everything is at the service of humans does not mean that everything is at the service of humans only, you know. So like for example, the Quran says that the sun and the moon and the day and the night, the alternation of the day and the night, are at the service of humans. Does this make them. Are humans the only ones who benefit from these, you know, like, phenomena and creatures?
The fact is that we are all at the service of one another. You know, if you have animals, if you own domestic animals, if you have a pet, you are at the service of that pet. You attend to their needs, you take them to the vet, if they're sick, we are all at the service of one another, you know? Yes, we, you know, like we ride animals, we ride horses, camels, et cetera. We can even kill them for food.
Are we the only ones who kill animals for food? What about predators? Aren't they also killing for food?
[00:24:43] Speaker A: And we get killed by them too, right?
[00:24:45] Speaker B: And we get killed by them.
Nonetheless, the Quran actually highlights that Tashir, or the serviceability of creation to humankind more than it does this with other creation. And the point is to remind humans of God's favors toward them so that they can be thankful to God. But this does not mean that God has put things at the service of humans and only humans, right? In fact, the way the word tashir has been translated usually is like subjugation, you know, like, usually like it's translated as God has subjugated the world to humankind. And this is not a correct translation. God has not subjugated anything to humankind because the control of Tashir remains with God. You know, like God for example, says, like the Quran says that God Sakhara, the day of the night. Do we have any control over the alternation of the day of the night?
[00:25:45] Speaker A: We do not.
[00:25:45] Speaker B: We do not, right? Not yet. But you know, like the Quran says that this is Musakhar to humankind, which means it is adapted to the needs of humankind. This does not mean that it is adapted to the needs of humankind only, you know, Although the Quran emphasizes that more because it's like the point is to awaken humans to the favors of God, to let them recognize and see God's favors toward them.
But there are indications in the Quran also that God has, you know, like, made the world at the service of other creatures. For example, it says about the bee that God has made the paths in a way subjugated or easy or smooth for the bee to navigate. So, you know, like it does tell us about this as well.
It tells us about how the birds can move in the air. So like the air. In fact, some exeges say that the way God has designed the space is to make it easy, to make it Musakhar, to make it the subject or like of service to birds so that they can fly easily in it. So everything actually in the world is Musakhar to one another. And tashir is not a sign of privilege as much as it is a sign of mutual need and mutual interdependence.
Also, the other thing that we need to remember is that the fact that everything is Musakhar or adapted to humankind does not mean that it is like this forever. In fact, if human persists in disobeying God, the same things that are Musakhar to them or put at their service can turn against them. And we see this in the example of wind. Wind is one of the things that God has made serviceable to humankind. You know, like it makes them move in the sea, you know, like it helps like the ships to travel in the sea, etceter.
But for the people of Faad, when they persisted in disobeying God, the wind was Musakhar against them.
So those very things that God has made serviceable to humankind then can turn against them if they persist in their disobedience. And by the way, out of all the instances of Tashir in the Quran, the last one, actually the last time the Quran uses this word, this notion, it is, you know, like when it mentions how wind is turned against the people of Ad, it is as if this is a reminder that if we don't interpret Tashir correctly and if we don't show enough gratitude, you know, it's like a hidden warning, you know, implicit warning that that very, you know, like fact can turn against humankind.
[00:28:30] Speaker A: Listening to your answer and you know, even as I was reading your book, it made me think about the moral cost of this hierarchy that anthrocentrism has created and how the Quran invites us to read the world itself differently. I feel the danger of an anthropocentric understanding of the world goes far beyond how we treat animals. It begins with constructing a prototype, a hierarchy where humans stand at the top and animals fall beneath.
From there, we extend the same logic to other humans. Some people, some races are dehumanized, turned metaphorically or even literally into animals. And once that happens, anything becomes possible. They can be killed, hunted, tortured, displaced, made to disappear, just as we do with animals and without any thought.
The same underlying idea, the myth of superiority, of human exceptionalism, of being the chosen one, has paved the way for some of the darkest moments in our human history.
It is what made the holocaust possible.
It is what allows us in our own time today to witness the slaughter in Gaza. That to me is a real danger of anthropocentrism, the profound moral distortion it creates.
I want to move on to one of the other concepts that your book introduces, which is theocentrism.
Could you walk us through what theocentrism means in your work and how this concept elevates the status of animals and other creatures?
[00:30:05] Speaker B: Thank you, this is a great question.
So I believe actually that the Quran resists any form of centrism except theocentrism, except the centrality of God.
And the reason is because actually it.
There are many indications which tell us then any form of centrism other than the centrism of God is dangerous. Eventually it can lead to these destructive phenomena that you have described. And this is why androcentrism also is ethically problematic.
It's in a way a form of shirk or associating like deities with God which the Quran resists more than anything else. You know, like the shirk is the biggest sin in the Quran and for a good reason. You know, like, so anthropocentrism has now led to the Anthropocene, you know, and any form of centrism that is not, you know, around God is dangerous. And this is why actually I am careful not to call my reading of the Quran ecocentric. Although I believe that an egocentric reading fits more with the Quranic worldview than an anthropocentric one. In what sense? In the sense that the Quran presents creation as obedient to God and having faith in him.
So whereas like, you know, like it does not talk about humans quite favorably, you know, like they have the potential of becoming faithful and obedient, but. But it's not a guaranteed status. They have to earn it. It's where the earned status comes in.
But with the non human creation, it's already there. It's already obeying God. Right. Traditionally we have tried to minimize this or to de. Emphasize the value of humankind. Like assuming that because we have reason, this elevates us above other creatures. This idea is not Quranic. It's not Quranic at all. You know, reason is a good thing. You know, rational faculties are a good thing.
They do not translate in status in the same way that wealth does not automatically translate in status. Right? It depends on how you use it.
Right. Whereas for the rest of creation, at least how the Quran presents them overall, they are obedient to God. So an egocentric reading fits more with the Quranic anthropocentric tendency. But the Quran is not ecocentric either. You know, in fact, it does resist that as well. You know, like anything that you take idol in nature as an idol in nature is also anti Quranic. It's inconsistent with the Quran's worldview.
[00:32:54] Speaker A: Thank you for that. When I was reading your chapter and you know, thinking about theocentrism, I found myself thinking about faith action in The Quran's call to right relationship with all creation. Creation and to your idea of theocentrism. I'm not sure if I'm adding to it or showing you through the Quran one way of how to achieve it. But let me go back to that feeling I mentioned earlier of being turned right side up when I read your book. There was another moment in my general readings on the Quran when I felt something similar. And this is when I came to see how closely the Quran binds Iman or faith with Amal Salihat righteous deeds.
The phrase Aladdin wa Amilu salihat, meaning those who have faith and act righteously, appears together 36 times in the Quran. That repetition makes it unmistakably clear. In the Quran, faith and righteous conduct are intertwined. To separate faith from good action would be completely untenable, even absurd. Where there is iman or faith, there is salehat good deeds.
I want to be like intellectually honest. If Iman and faith and Amal Salihat good actions were the same thing, they would share the same word and they don't. But I do think iman requires salihat. Even if salihat doesn't necessarily require iman. Though in a Muslim worldview you can only know what the salihahat or good actions are through iman or faith.
What your work makes so strikingly clear, Dr. Talili, is that the Quran is not human centered, but theocentric, calling all of creation to recognize and respond to Iman of faith in God. Too often humans reduce iman to rituals alone, praying, giving Zakat, going to Hajj without realizing that the Quran's theocentric vision calls for right action towards all God's creation.
By drawing attention to animals. Your book reminds us that Amal Salehad righteous deeds are not limited to human interactions. Faith in a truly theocentric reading of the Quran is, is inseparable from acting justly and compassionately towards every living being.
And of course I want to move on to my last question, but we can't end this conversation without bringing it into our own time, like your work into our own time, into the environmental crisis that defines our age.
How might this theocentric reading reshape Muslim attitudes towards today's environmental crisis?
[00:35:28] Speaker B: Well, I think it all comes down to this.
In the end, you know. Yes. Knowing that the Quran is theocentric first, knowing that it values non human creation second, you know, understanding all of this, if it does not translate in a concrete impact, then what's the point?
Especially as you say, like in our time, the time that you know, like one of our, the most distinctive features of our times is the damage that we have inflicted on the non human creation.
There is a verse in Surat Al Furqan which talks about the servants of the merciful. Ibad Al Rahman, it says.
The servants of the merciful are those who walk gently on earth. I find this actually verse, I find it like having a, you know, like an environmental or ecological dimension.
You know, like if you walk even on earth, you work gently, you're not going to hurt non human creation, right? You are going to be kind to every creature. The, you know, like how all of this translates in concrete ethics is mostly left to Hadith. You know, like it's Hadith that tells us how to treat animals. For example, you cannot overload animals. You cannot take hit them in a way that hurts them. You cannot, you know, like you cannot separate a mother animal from her younger one. Like you know, a cow from the calf for example, because that inflicts pain on it. You cannot when you milk a cow or a, you have to clip your fingernails because it may hurt her. All of these teachings are in the Hadith, not in the Quran. The Quran has some, you know, like things to say about this, but mostly it leaves it to the Hadith.
But I mean it says still it's you know, like I think like when it says that those like the servants of the merciful are those who walk gently on the earth. If you are going to walk even on the earth very gently, you are not going to hurt any of God's creation, right?
The Hadith also, you know, like there are many narratives in the Hadith which explain how the non human creation, not only that it has a sense of well being, that they feel the impact of humankind, but they are also kind of issuing moral judgment on what we do and they will bear witness to all of this in the afterlife and we are going to be held accountable for the way we treat them in the afterlife. You asked earlier whether in Islamic tradition in the Quran non human creation has an afterlife.
This is a, you know, like a very clear theme in the Quran and Hadith. Yes, they do have an afterlife. They will be resurrected, they will be held accountable for their own deeds, but they will also hold us accountable for what we do to them.
So it is like for a Muslim this is a very serious thing. It has been forgotten from modern Islam. But I think it's something that we really need to remember. The way we treat non human creation, especially animals, but also other creation is not ethically neutral. It's actually ethically charged, like we are going to be held accountable for what we do in the afterlife. Also there is another verse which I believe in Surat Taqman. It says.
Corruption has appeared in the land and in the sea through what people have done so that God will make them taste some of what they have been doing.
So in this life also when we mistreat non human creation, whether in the land or in the sea, there are going to be consequences. And although God through his mercy does not let us taste all the consequences, he lets us taste some of the consequences. So there is accountability. That kind of happens automatically in this life as well.
And this is happening right now through the Anthropocene. We see the impact of our extreme exploitation of other creatures. It is happening. We are seeing it, you know, and I don't think that we are seeing the full fledge of it because God is not like, is protecting us from that. But if we persist, it's going to happen, right? But what is more important is that for Muslims, they have to know. We have to know as Muslims that what we do to other creatures, especially animals, especially when we inflict pain and unjustified pain, pain that we were not authorized to inflict, we are going to be held accountable. The Quran and Hadith clearly say that we may kill for food, but there are so many restrictions that apply to that. I don't think as Muslims nowadays we are, you know, paying enough attention to this and I think we should as we close.
[00:40:50] Speaker A: Dr. Taleli, thank you for sharing your time with us here at Maidaan and with our listeners. Reading your work has brought a deep in personal dimension to how I understand both myself and God.
Your insights reminded us that when we read the Quran through an anthropocentric lens, we risk forgetting our responsibility to care for animals and the natural world. As you mentioned, as part of of God's creation, we were given a sacred trust to reflect divine mercy. And a theocentric understanding brings us back to that truth, that God's kindness towards us calls for gratitude. And that gratitude is best expressed through kindness to all of God's creatures. When we don't, the consequences, as you said, are becoming more and more visible. Suffering animals, collapsing ecosystems and an escalating ecological crisis.
And I turned to Jane Goodall in the end who said, every day you live, you make an impact on the planet. You have a choice as to what kind of impact you want to make. Her life reminds us that moral awareness demands action.
May her courage and the Quran's call to mercy towards all beings. Guide us towards a gentler, more mindful living. Thank you so much.
[00:42:05] Speaker B: Thank you.
