wealth which his All-Generous Lord has stored up for him in the hereafter, and he is strong since he relies on his Master’s infinite power. And he acts and strives only for God’s sake, for God’s pleasure, and for virtue.
Thus, the training the two give may be understood from the comparison of the two students.
The training philosophy and science and Qur’anic wisdom give to human social life is this:
Philosophy accepts ‘force’ as its point of support in the life of society. It considers its aim to be ‘benefits’. The principle of its life it recognizes to be ‘conflict’. It holds the bond between communities to be ‘racialism and negative nationalism’. Its fruits are ‘gratifying the appetites of the soul and increasing human needs’. However, the mark of force is ‘aggression’. The mark of benefit – since they are insufficient for every desire – is ‘jostling and tussling’. While the mark of conflict is ‘strife’. And the mark of racialism –since it is nourished by devouring others– is ‘aggression’. It is for these reasons that it has negated the happiness of mankind.
As for the Qur’anic wisdom, its point of support is ‘truth’ instead of force. It takes ‘virtue and God’s pleasure’ as its aims in place of benefits. It takes the principle of ‘mutual assistance’ as the principle of life in place of the principle of conflict. And it takes ‘the ties of religion, class, and country’ to be the ties bonding communities. Its aim is to form a barrier against the lusts of the soul, urge the spirit to sublime matters, satisfy the high emotions, and urging man to the human perfections, make him a true human being. And the mark of ‘the truth’ is accord. The mark of virtue is ‘solidarity’. The mark of mutual assistance is ‘hastening to assist one another’. The mark of religion is ‘brotherhood’ and ‘attraction’. And the mark of reining in and tethering the soul and leaving the spirit free and urging it towards perfections is ‘happiness in this world and the next’.
If you want to understand the Qur’an’s superiority among all the Divine scriptures and its supremacy over all speech and writings, then consider the following two comparisons:
The First: A king has two forms of speech, two forms of address. One is to speak on his private telephone with a common subject concerning some minor matter, some private need. The other, under the title of sublime sovereignty, supreme vicegerent, and universal rulership, is to speak with an envoy or high official for the purpose of making known and promulgating his commands, to make an utterance through an elevated decree proclaiming his majesty.