Why Pray (by the Interfaith Youth Team)
Why Pray?
Introduction
Immanuel Kant once said, “Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe… the starry heavens above me, and the moral law within me” (Kant et al., 1956, p. 47). Indeed, to pray, to make a prayer that is worthy for oneself and the rest of mankind, is the utmost exemplification of these two ideas that Kant mentions, which, as this essay shall argue, are imperative for us to live in the best of possible ways. This paper defines prayer as a repeated act of communication, connection, and reverence for a Divine power that instills moral values. Indeed, there are many different forms of this practice; this paper, however, aims to generalize them into one, as is labeled in the aforementioned definition. The term Divine is used frequently, for indeed, there are many different forms of a higher power which one can believe in, and thus the singular term “God” may not provide a properly holistic theological argument. A large number of faiths can be encompassed here, largely labeled as one, as it is asserted that prayer has the same fundamental moral framework that is not bound to a singular creed. The definition of prayer clearly states that it only exists when a Divine power is instilling moral values, for there are some spiritual affiliations that may employ tactics purely meant to harm one in an explicitly physical or psychologically dangerous way, negating the form of prayer that this essay seeks to argue for. Lastly, when certain ideas from philosophers are considered, they are used as a means of strengthening the argument and considered as valid forms of thought. This doesn’t mean, however, that this essay wholly subscribes to any particular philosophy.
On Moral Law and Prayer
How shall one seek the best path in this worldly life? This essay considers Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia, roughly translated as "living well" or "flourishing", sought through continuous rational and virtuous activity, as a proper way of doing so (Aristotle, 350 B.C.E.). What is known as the highest form of eudaimonia is when one seeks to live a life of contemplation, achieving rationality and virtue in the process (Aristotle, 350 B.C.E.). For so many, however, lives cannot be devoted to such a task. Individuals are busied with personal duties that prevent them from living with pure contemplation, thus mitigating a constant application of rational thought and virtue. Instead, society is often led by emotion, a justified result of struggle, hardship, and anger, which have driven much inconvenience and conflict. Even if learning great concepts of proper morals, like eudaimonia, for example, adhering to such principles without a strong basis for doing so has a severely low probability, for doing what’s right is among the gravest challenges in this world. However, if one has a structure, enforced by a spiritual leader or scripture, for example, which prescribes them to pray, an act of Divine connection, then such ideas of morality shall indeed be enforced, as prayer helps exemplify moral law. When one seeks a connection with the Divine (through prayer), they affirm the morals that the Divine has impressed upon them. They are placed in a position of remembrance for their greater purpose, and in turn, how they were meant to achieve it. For example, one may consider something of the following: “If I am to achieve this, then I mustn’t act in ill-advised ways. I shall give to the poor, act kindly to my family, neighbors, nature, and the rest of this world. I shall follow the Divine will.” Engaging in defined spiritual practice allows for the reiteration of the values taught to one and those before them. In doing so, one is instilled with rationality and virtue, for religion is fundamentally based on moral principles, even if one may find them in their scripture, and another, in theirs. Additionally, if such a prayer is consistent, one is frequently placing themselves in this position of contemplation: of life, of death, and of the Divine, in turn achieving the highest form of eudaimonia. With great rationality and virtue, one can transcend the difficulties that life insistsently provides. No longer shall one fall witness to the clutching nature of emotions, swaying them to pursue regrettable decisions.
All prayers, however, do not grant the believer the same contribution to their state of eudaimonia. Indeed, some prayers may be done as ritual and habit, without deep understanding. It is only rational, however, for one to pray if they are actively seeking divine connection, and in the process, pursuing rationality and virtue in the form of contemplation. One shall only pray with purpose, therefore, or the prayer lacks meaning as it does not contribute to one's morals, which is the global reason for why one shall pray. The term “global” is used here, as to certain spiritual affiliations, justification for prayer may stem from achieving an afterlife, for example. As a collective society, however, achieving morality through prayer shall benefit all. This would lead us closer to what Kant labeled as the highest good, which is an ideal society that is collectively driven by proportionate virtue and happiness (Rohlf, 2024). Though the concepts of eudaimonia and Kant’s highest good are distinct, this essay argues that they can be synthesized, for even if the philosophical theories behind if one can achieve them differ, if society were to collectively achieve eudaimonia, indeed, it would get closer to Kant’s description of the highest good, which is why they are used together. If society prays, society becomes moral and, in turn, happy. Verily, a society that is moral is happy. Thus, prayer leads us to a flourishing society and closer to the highest good.
On Spirituality in Prayer (or The Love For The Starry Heavens)
But how shall one be kept accountable? Even if prayer is more structured and strict than simple tellings, does that really prevent immoral action in society? As previously mentioned, not all forms of prayer are the same, and only with one of great contemplation can true moral benefits be gained. Under the same principle, only such a prayer leads to strong accountability. If one is to truly connect with the divine in prayer, and ponder over connection, and fate, and life, and death, then the concept of Divine obligation shall be greatly prevalent in their minds. One who prays is responsible to the Divine, a responsibility capable of transcending all worldly matters. If someone prays, therefore, their love for the Divine, who (in accordance with the religious belief of many) created the starry heavens above them, shall abate their desire for moral transgression.
Though perfect morality may never fully be achieved, spirituality that comes with prayer to the Divine shall keep accountability strong, and thus lead to a greater amount of it, making society flourish, and bringing it closer to the highest good, as is argued in the last section.
It is important in this section of spirituality to note that if one is simply spiritual, that is, believing in the Divine, but does not pray, simply their love for the starry heavens, or the Divine and his creation, shall not suffice. As the philosopher Al Ghazali reasons, “The human soul has to undergo constant training and needs to be disciplined similar to a young horse that needs to be broken in, schooled, and treated well” (Griffel, 2020). Prayer is the greatest way to do this, for it constantly trains the soul to excel through consistency, as opposed to inactivity in seeking divine connection.
On Petitionary Prayer
Prayer specifically based upon seeking direct reward (health condition, material gain, etc), or petitionary prayer, is subject to much theological debate. Even the strongest believer may find it difficult to epistemically justify whether a prayer that they have made is answered. Suppose one makes a prayer for rain. If there is no rain, then does the Divine not hear them? If there is, how shall one know if this result was from their prayer, or from Divine will unaffected by it? Several statistical studies have been conducted to approach this topic, testing the effect of those who were subject to prayer and those who were not (Zalta, 2021). However, as Brumer (2008) argues, such a methodology lacks validity, as it would be implausible to suggest that a lack of prayer was truly controlled, as those who know the subjects of the study may pray for them regardless. Such questions and issues are approached with reason from many religious and or philosophical perspectives, but they do not constitute an argument for why all should pray, that is, without the nuances of different theological forms of thought affecting their conclusion (Zalta, 2021). Thus, this essay reasons that using a petition as a sole means of justifying prayer is flawed. Arguing, for example, “one should pray so they can get the rewards which they desire” and reasoning how such a claim is plausible, does not consider the open-ended nature of this question (Why Pray?), as it would be difficult for such logic to encompass all the differing forms of thought regarding petitionary prayer without forming a bias towards a specific religion. Instead, this essay finds that the answer to this question is one that delves into the very nature of praying in itself, which is argued as a form for developing rationality and virtue rooted and cemented by spiritual belief, ultimately resulting in the good of society. This does not in any way mean that this essay asserts that one should not engage in petitionary prayer. Indeed, if that is a part of one’s spiritual affiliation, then in doing so, they shall actively engage in contemplation of the Divine, perhaps thinking about the following: Is this part of my fate? How have my previous actions resulted in the state I am in now, and the state that I desire to be in? Will the Divine accept my prayer if I have not fulfilled what He has told me to? Certainly, such engagement helps bring one to greater morality, and if done collectively, closer to societal flourishing.
Conclusion
Immanuel Kant once said, “Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe… the starry heavens above me, and the moral law within me” (Kant et al., 1956, p. 47). Certainly, if one prays, as this essay has argued, they are, through the accountability that the Divine has provided (because of their reverence for the starry heavens above), actively seeking rationality and virtue, fulfilling eudaimonia within, and when done so collectively, pushing society closer towards the highest good.
I pray. I pray for morality, like the stars, to gleam even in the darkest of hours.
References
Aristotle (350 C.E.). Nicomachean Ethics (Ross, Trans.). https://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.10.x.html
Brümmer, V. (2017). What Are We Doing When We Pray? On Prayer and the Nature of Faith (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315234151
Griffel, F. (2020). Al-Ghazali. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2020). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/al-ghazali/
Kant, I., Beck, L. W., & Kant, I. (1956). Critique of Practical Reason (10th printing). Bobs-Merrill.
Rohlf, M. (2024). Immanuel Kant. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2024). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2024/entries/kant/
Zalta, E. N. (Ed.). (2021). Petitionary Prayer. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/petitionary-prayer/
