The Cow, The Pedagogical Animal (part 2)

Is Color just another Expression For Morphology

Thus what we see here is an epistemological condition; color is tied to morphology, which in turn is tied to perception; distinguishing, as a part of being acquainted with the object, the color factor, is inextricably tied to its morphological condition/state; to nuances like growth and development, color reflect quality and states of being. And the verse (2:69) intends to show how the Israelites, in want of precision, sought not only that which is a natural determiner of the quality of being, but also a specific quality, the color yellow.

Two interesting modifications occur here. As noted, the color yellow, as used in the Quran, is employed in a qualitative sense in reference to crops and how, when they wither and dry out, they turn into a state described as yellow. This shows the reversal of the natural order, confirming the fact that yellow in general denotes the opposite of maturity or ripness (whether this be a state of prematurity or senescence) but in both cases is expressed a view to ripeness and maturity regardless on which side of the spectrum it lies on. the same pattern of functional opposition is being expressed.

Additionally, the color yellow is an abstraction for ‘pastel’ colors,* which generally correspond to aspects of morphology that approach maturity or represent a disjunction from the norm - if by norm we mean 'colors' typically associated with 'ripeness' or 'maturity'. The significance of this, from an epistemological standpoint, is that God intends to formulate the simplest possible conditions of knowledge, at least as it concerns the people of Israel, and more than that, to show them aspects of themselves which is an expression of Haq الحق (what truth or 'statement' can be considered more exact than 'what something - ontologically - is'?). This is shown first by the transitional state of the cow—their orphaned state—and secondly by the morphological state of the cow, i.e., that it’s in its early stage of development.

*Note1:

(In regards to yellow: this may be analogized as the simplest concept, a concept that, because it’s simple, can be determined everywhere (Kant Critique Of Pure Reason B180-3 A141-3). It’s the meaning we obtain when we distill a concept from its multifaceted uses down to that which unifies and justifies its universal application)

*Note 2:

Under color may be included a larger body of morphological categories, such as 'sound'; insofar as it can also be used as a morphological indicator, as for instance, the differences in vocal chord projection between a child and an adult male. these two (color/sound) seem concordant from the standpoint of morphological development.

Continuing the verse, it’s seen that none of these criteria were sufficient to identify the cow. As we read in verse 70, after looking, they still could not distinguish the cow, asking Moses to be even more specific, i.e., narrow down the search criteria.

قَالُوا۟ ٱدْعُ لَنَا رَبَّكَ يُبَيِّن لَّنَا مَا هِىَ إِنَّ ٱلْبَقَرَ تَشَـٰبَهَ عَلَيْنَا وَإِنَّآ إِن شَآءَ ٱللَّهُ لَمُهْتَدُونَ

"Again they said, 'Call upon your Lord so that He may make clear to us which cow, for all cows look the same to us. Then, Allah willing, we will be guided ˹to the right one˺.'"— Quran 2:70

It’s quite apparent from their response and their request to narrow down the search criteria that the ‘variables’ were just too many for an effective identification. What they were doing—i.e., the ‘want of specificity’—would be called ‘falsification’ in scientific epistemology (of which Karl Popper is a known advocate/popularizer). When unacquainted with it as a 'method', It’s generally involuntary, but to the scientist, a powerful instrument of scientific inquiry, and the bedrock of the inductive method. One of the objectives of the test is to introduce and habituate them to this method, for this is what’s properly called the scientific method.

Things change in the next verse; the decisive datum, the eureka moment that changed everything and perhaps defined a moment in the history of this nation, presents itself:

قَالَ إِنَّهُۥ يَقُولُ إِنَّهَا بَقَرَةٌۭ لَّا ذَلُولٌۭ تُثِيرُ ٱلْأَرْضَ وَلَا تَسْقِى ٱلْحَرْثَ مُسَلَّمَةٌۭ لَّا شِيَةَ فِيهَا ۚ قَالُوا۟ ٱلْـَٔـٰنَ جِئْتَ بِٱلْحَقِّ ۚ فَذَبَحُوهَا وَمَا كَادُوا۟ يَفْعَلُونَ"

He replied, 'Allah says, "It should have been used neither to till the soil nor to water the fields; wholesome and without blemish."'"— Quran 2:71

Key terms:

The decisive terms here are Dhalul (ذَلُولٌ), Tuthir (تُثِيرُ), Shi'a (شِيَة), and Musallama (مُسَلَّمَةٌ).

Thingness, Entelechy & Islam

Is the expression of ‘thing’ more than a semantic device with no other use but as a filler? Can you isolate among the strata of ‘being’ a mode of ‘being’ pertaining to nothing but simply ‘being’?

Yes, (شيء) refers precisely to this mode, a term that characterizes the most ‘elemental’ and ‘primal’ stratum of physical - but to a greater extent - intellectual activity. Shay (شيء) does, indeed refer to a simple 'thing', but 'thing' in the metaphysical sense; this is a thing after everything else is been subtracted from it, body, identity, form, shape, color, etc.. a pure intellectual being, a monad is engendered, it characterizes the most ‘elemental’ and ‘primal’ stratum of intellectual activity

Now, Shiata (شِيَة), is an inflection of Shay (شيء), but adds something to it.

Could it be argued that what determines one's orientation and way of being is something as basal, as undetectably crude as this? or that such a thing exists?

Yes, and this crude stratum is not only real, but to determine it as active is to make an inclusive and categorical judgment regarding the thing of which it is. In fact, this is where anything is defined in the first place; for the term Shay (شيء), which Sheyata (شِيَة) is an inflection of, is the equivalent to the Aristotelian ‘entelechy,’ and it’s what we really mean when our want of ‘generality’ and vagueness leads us to use terms like ‘thing’ or ‘something.’ we want to describe the most basic sense of our object.

Thus, it would be a big mistake to consider an expression like ‘thing’ to be an indication of vagueness; though we might think it so, we’re in fact trying to define something fundamental about the object of expression—something, that is, the definition of which sets the tone for everything that follows. But when modified into Sheyata (شِيَة), Shay (شيء) seems to acquire something immediately subsequent to Shay (شيء)—a mode of being arising from and operative at a level to which one has no direct access, but expressions of which can be noted on the surface, psychology calls them 'complexes', this is the what someone identifies with in the deepest sense, but of which he/she themselves may be unaware. Thus, we want to express acts nested in a level of being that’s so defining, so significant a part of one’s constitution as to be mistaken for one’s nature.

إِنَّمَآ أَمْرُهُۥٓ إِذَآ أَرَادَ شَيْـًٔا أَن يَقُولَ لَهُۥ كُن فَيَكُونُ

"All it takes, when He wills something ˹to be˺, is simply to say to it: 'Be!' And it is!"— Quran 36:82

Thus, when contrasted with the expression Musallama (مُسَلَّمَةٌ), it shows how pure a concept Islam (الإسلام) is, that it can be ascribed to something non-human. It shouldn’t be strange at this point, knowing that Quranic concepts are natural concepts. We can thus understand Islam in this natural sense, to mean the opposite of but also equivalent - in the sense that it covers the same stratum of being - of Shay (شيء), i.e., the directive and ethos that one acts out automatically or involuntarily. That it’s automatic and involuntary expresses its lofty place in the hierarchy of being.

That this is a quality that’s attributable to the cow has to do with all that’s been said about it so far; that it’s neither Farid (فَرِيضَة, tasked), nor Bekr Awan (بِكْر عَوَان, off duty), and that it’s yellow. These are descriptions reflecting overall fertility, and now in the expression Tuthir al-Ard (تُثِيرُ ٱلْأَرْضَ), whose meaning we’re coming to, a precociousness, an etymologically fitting expression.

The other description for the cow is that Wala Tasqi al-Harth (وَلَا تَسْقِى ٱلْحَرْثَ), which says that it’s not grazing cattle. Tasqi (تَسْقِى) in particular is used in the Quran to mean provisioning or ‘rationing’; it does not have to do with watering or irrigation as such, but with land management in general, insofar as the land is a resource, or rather the resource of resources.

وَٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِىٓ أَرْسَلَ ٱلرِّيَـٰحَ فَتُثِيرُ سَحَابًۭا فَسُقْنَـٰهُ إِلَىٰ بَلَدٍۢ مَّيِّتٍۢ فَأَحْيَيْنَا بِهِ ٱلْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ ٱلنُّشُورُ

"And it is Allah Who sends the winds, which then stir up ˹vapor, forming˺ clouds, and then We drive them to a lifeless land, giving life to the earth after its death. Similar is the Resurrection."— Quran 35:9

The use of the term in this verse shows this; God carries the clouds to a dead land, like a government sending supplies to an area that has a shortage of something.

Take, for example, Joseph’s interpretation of the inmate’s dream: The inmate who later becomes a cupbearer for the king. Note that this is more than that—Cupbearing in this case would involve 'handling' the things that 'pertain to wine service in general, supplementing, and managing, stocking and restocking the king's wine provisions. The term primarily denotes that cyclic manner with which something is required, consumed and replenished.

يَـٰصَـٰحِبَىِ ٱلسِّجْنِ أَمَّآ أَحَدُكُمَا فَيَسْقِى رَبَّهُۥ خَمْرًۭا ۖ

"O my fellow-prisoners! ˹The first˺ one of you will serve wine to his master."— Quran 12:41

Applying this meaning to the cow, we see that it does not constitute part of the grazing stock, as must logically be the case if it’s not to be Farid (فَرِيضَة, in duty) or Bekr Awan (بِكْر عَوَان, off duty).

Causality & Precociousness

This leads directly to the term Tuthir al-Ard (تُثِيرُ ٱلْأَرْضَ). Where Tuthir (تُثِيرُ) is used to describe the interaction between the winds and the clouds (35:9), or as proof-criterion for divine knowledge that’s not from God (46:4), or to describe the heights to which some previous civilizations, no longer in existence, have reached (30:9), it shows something of the ‘intricacies’ involved in the manner in which effects—namely, ‘benefits’—are derived from causal interference.

In shaking the tree to get the berries to fall, the bear acts out this idea. When the farmer tills the soil to stimulate the earth, when you water the plants by your window, when a company manager gives an encouraging talk to his employees to get them to work harder, or when you're baking—the water catalyzes the yeast that catalyzes the sugar that catalyzes the flour, which then causes the dough to rise. You consume this, and the energy released instantiates the same process in you. Tuthir (تُثِيرُ) is simply ‘catalysis,’ the general term for this causal process, "But you can do with this concept what analytic geomatry does with hers; a triangles, for instance, and produce different 'kinds' and 'iterations' of it - applicable in many areas.

A pure concept such as we find in the Quran in general, or this one in particular are 'magnitudes' afterall, they are meant to be 'identifiable' in all domains, because, they represent 'activities' of the intellect inhering in our own cognition, i.e in the شيء shay that is our 'bottommost' stratum of intellectual activity.

But there’s a reason why we want to note this about something—that is, why this particular aspect of the cow’s being is of interest. If the cow were fully tasked, would we take note of this, or not? Under normal circumstances, we don’t take notice of these causal features, especially not for a farmer who manages hundreds of cows. Only if the condition were so exceptional, so out of the ordinary, would we take notice and talk about how ‘this or that happened.’

In other words, there must be something truly extraordinary about this cow. Think about it: when there’s an inexperienced player on the pitch among other experienced players, we notice aspects of his or her performance that we don’t necessarily see in the experienced players (he comes out more. We begin to notice every little thing about them, to the point of exaggeration often). Somehow, because it’s irregularities that we see— which is all that an inexperienced player or thing is capable of showing— and somehow, irregularities become expressible in causal terms. The case is likewise if the player shows skills and flashes of brilliance that were not expected of them. This is what scouting in sports is built around: they look for the extraordinary.

The cow we read about was engaged in some form of activity, but it need not be, so to speak, in active duty. This is the perfect background to express the idea of precociousness, which we believe Tuthir (تُثِيرُ) means in this context. In fact, this is the definition of precociousness. How else do you show signs of ‘talent’ or ability if not by being engaged in the activity itself, albiet at an unofficial capacity? In our case, the cow would be one showing early indicators of strength and maturity.

Precociousness is a perfect term that captures activities that are flashes or predictors of great potential; they are thus as brief as a cause but as enduring as an effect. The fact that it’s the earth that’s the recipient of this is a reference to the overall sphere of activity. Again, for the farmer, the earth is the chief resource, thus the domain which the concept Tuthir (تُثِيرُ) covers in this verse has to do with the domain in which cattle have their function.

Complementing this aspect, we find the term Dhalul (ذَلُول). We find an expression of this process everywhere. Gold, when extracted from the earth, is purified before it can be used. The petroleum that we put in our cars, electricity, must be converted and regulated in order to make it usable. Textile must be cleaned, spun, and woven into fabrics before it can be used for clothing or furnishing.

Taming a horse is difficult, takes time, experience, and patience. The same thing applies to cattle: they too need to be tamed and made comfortable before they can be worked. Dhalul (ذَلُول) is a term used for this purpose—to modify or transform something in such a way as to render it usable or ready for some task. We read in this verse that the cow is one that’s not yet been subjected to this transformation, which is consistent with the fact that it’s not yet been tasked with anything, as only when a cow has been sufficiently tamed can it be tasked/worked.

What do we take away from this? Why did these two criteria work as opposed to those of color and the cow’s work status?

Two main concepts: Muslima (مُسَلَّمَةٌ) and La Shay'ata Fiha (لَّا شِيَةَ فِيهَا).

These two concepts are the defining characteristics because they pertain directly to the purpose of the cow. We know that there can be cows that are uncooperative—having a peculiar temperament, stubbornness, or aggression—that greatly diminishes their productivity on the farm. Some of these issues range from:

• Breeding Issues: Cows might be uncooperative during the breeding process, either through natural breeding or artificial insemination. They might resist mating behaviors or simply be unresponsive to attempts at breeding, making the process more difficult for farmers.

  
  

• Feeding Resistance: A cow may be uncooperative if it refuses to eat or drink. This could be due to illness, environmental stress, or dietary preferences, and it complicates the farmer’s efforts to keep the animal healthy and productive.

  
  

• Aggression: Aggression toward other cows or farm workers can make them challenging to manage, particularly in confined spaces like barns or pens.

  
  

• Handling Difficulty: Some cows can be uncooperative when being moved or handled, such as when they are being herded from one pasture to another or into a trailer. Certain cows can be stubborn or skittish, making it harder to manage them during routine activities like health checks or vaccinations.

  
  

The expression Muslima (مُسَلَّمَةٌ), as said, hits the very marrow of one’s purpose of being, and this context makes this all the clearer. A cow that has these issues is one whose purpose on the farm is greatly reduced to the point that her obsolescence becomes an ontological matter and strikes at the very purpose of the cow’s existence. The concept of Islam thus links the spheres of being and role/function to the point of inseparability. La Shay'ata Fiha (لَّا شِيَةَ فِيهَا), tells us that the Calf is pure in this respect by not having the property in question, which is 'شِيَةَ', which as indicated would mean that there's something innately wrong with the calf, in other words, to say لَّاشِيَةَ فِيهَا, in which the negation is applied, is another way of saying that the calf is 'Musallama', i.e, pure. And to justify why the calf is musallama, we simply affirm by negation --> by saying لَّاشِيَةَ فِيهَا, i.e the tautology we observed time and again, arises once more in this context.

This is a case of affirming by negating, which is a logical technique used to establish the truth of a statement by negating the opposite.