“We see and understand things not as they are but as we are.”
Knowing and understanding are the words which could be highlighted in discussing this question. Is there any difference between those words? For further discussion, let us first start with a situation. You know that you have $200 in your pocket but you do not understand the value of it. The goal now is to use $200 for buying delicious meals for a week. And you would not get more money for the week except that $200. There will be possibilities that you will be hungry if you do not understand the value. Based on this scenario, is it important for us to actually understand things to make it achievable. Do we really understand things that we think we know? In fact, there is no ending to the questions. And we cannot really say that we understand things as the more you learn, the more you know. And the more you know, the more you realize that there is more that you don't know, more that you do not understand, thus, more never-ending questions to be asked. However, understanding only is not enough for us to participate a living. We should actually interpret how we understand things, either based on neutrality or prejudice. Are they as we are, according to our subjectivity? Or are they as the nature of themselves, according to their objectivity?
‘I see’ often means ‘I understand’. Why don’t we say ‘I taste’ or ‘I smell’ instead? This is common in any conversation. People will say that in agreeing with things. Everything would be seen with the sight sense, which is from the eyes, then followed by other senses. This relates to one way of knowing, such as perception. Perception is also an interpretation or opinion judged on our experience. It is a knowing through senses. Every person has their own perspectives and different styles of thinking. For example, beggars, as we understand, are people who are lazy enough not to work but instead beg money from people for a living. However, let us put ourselves in their shoes. They might want to do decent work, but with their appearance, they might never pass an interview. Thus, what we see is not really what they are. We might know their position but we do not actually understand them from the bottom of our heart.
Historians make claims largely based on their own interpretation of past events. Looking back at history from the present time, it is difficult to argue about the validity of these interpretations. A large part of what we call history could be more accurately described as legends or made up stories. For example, based on history in Malaysia, Mahsuri laid a curse on Langkawi islands following the wrongful accusation that she had committed adultery while betrothed to the Sultan of Kedah. When a soldier pierced a kris (dagger) into her bosom, he drew white fluid instead of blood, this viewed as a sign of her innocence. However, the part where the soldier drew white fluid instead of blood does not make any sense scientifically and also logically. The part does look like a made up story. Scientifically, blood consists of; plasma which makes up about 55 percent of the blood, blood cells (white and red) and platelets which make up the remaining 45 percent. In fact, human body always spurts out red fluid if being wounded, and it is quite impossible to have more white fluid than red fluid in the body unless the person himself has an illness called leukemia. However, in this case, the existence of Mahsuri as a past history could not be questionable too because we could actually visit the heritage site of Mahsuri and it is also proven that she has the 7th generation descendent called Wan Aishah Nawawi.
Language used in describing and clarifying claims also plays an important role as a way to understand things. Most languages make use of sound in representing words. There are words that make same sounds to pronounce in different languages but they carry different meanings and sometimes, people who could not understand one language, will perceive things they heard differently. That happened to my Japanese friend named Yuki Okada when she was in Turkey. While her back was being massaged by a Turkish woman, she was screaming in Japanese as it was painful, and people around her just laughed at her. When Yuki asked her Turkish friend, she said that the word Yuki used just sounded like mother in Turkish language. This incident shows that even through language we could understand things differently, as Yuki understands as the way she is, and others just understand it the way they are.
However, this claim could not be argued in natural science. It is a study of the phenomena of the physical universe. Science is reliable, precise, objective, testable, and self-correcting. We cannot change the facts or the principles as they happen naturally. Therefore, we have to understand it as the way it is, but the way to understand it, is the way we are. Bishops during the renaissance era were looking at science as they understand it and not as they are and as the bishops tend to connect the science to the religion. They had stated that the earth is the centre of the solar system and not the sun, like we know now. Therefore, understanding the facts as we do, not as they are, will lead to the wrong outcome. Language used to describe it would then become an important factor. For example, in text books, the use of scientific terms may sound complicated, but they are chosen to be fit scientifically. However, to make things understandable, learners may use analogy as it is logic, a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects. For example, as the common analogy used to understand a physics concept, the direction of the magnetic field formed by a current carrying straight wire can be determined by the Right Hand Grip Rule.
Faith and emotion are related in a way to find the truths in spiritual belief because it depends on us. The way we were brought up, too, affects the way we know and understand the spiritual beliefs, especially when living in a multicultural environment and community. My friend, Tashi Wangmo from Tibet and I once had a conversation about the existence of God. She is a Buddhist and I am a Muslim. In Buddhism, there is no God, and the way they believe something is based on their faith, the things that they see conventionally, and things that they do practically. In Islam, we do believe the existence of Allah, without seeing Him, but with the strong faith inside, implemented by Hidayah (guidance) . The distinction between beliefs in God in two different religions make me realize that if the faith is strong, whatever the outsiders would say, we, as the believers, would keep upholding things that we understand not as the nature of things as it is said in the holy book of Islam which is the Quran. It has been quoted in Chapter 2, verse 256 and 257 which says
“Allah — there is no God but He, the Living, the Self-Subsisting and All-Sustaining. Slumber seizes Him not, nor sleeps. To Him belongs whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that will intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He pleases. His knowledge extends over the heavens and the earth; and the care of them burdens Him not; and He is the High, the Great.” (256)
“There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become distinct from wrong; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing”. (257)
In conclusion, there is objectivity in claims but, as a knower, we also have our own objectives in understanding them. Therefore, things can be understood according to our subjectivity thus changing the claims to be subjective. It is fair to say as living in a community, we should communicate with each other to understand what others are going through. Thus, global understanding should be promoted through channels such as education, and world summits, so that real conclusion can be achieved instead of just one way of understanding.
