Iqbal and the anti-blasphemy law in Russia

Picture from See It Through My Eyes 

Russian MPs have given initial approval to an anti-blasphemy law with tougher jail terms or fines for anyone found guilty of offending religious feelings... The bill says blasphemy could incur up to three years in jail or a fine of up to 300,000 roubles ($9,700;£6,300). (BBC News)

The anti-blasphemy law passed by the lower house of the Russian parliament is making headlines these days. This may remind us of what Iqbal wrote long ago, at a time when Russia was the stronghold of Bolshevism and a role model for the atheists. In an open letter to the British author Sir Francis Younghusband, published in The Civil and Military Gazette on July 30, 1931, Iqbal wrote:

I do not myself believe that the Russians are by nature an irreligious people. On the contrary, I think that they are men and women of strong religious tendencies and the present negative state of [the] Russian mind will not last indefinitely, for no system of society can rest on an atheistic basis. As soon as things settle down in that country and its people have time to think calmly, they will be forced to find a positive foundation for their system.

Whether or not the present anti-blasphemy law is a step towards "a positive foundation" for the Russian system, the bill contains a reference to religions that are "an integral part of Russia's historical inheritance" (i.e. Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism). Indirectly, this assertion corroborates Iqbal's basic assertion that Russians are "men and women of strong religious tendencies".

Two perceptions about Islam

I have received very encouraging response to the emails about spiritual democracy. Before I share my understanding of this concept, I would like to clarify a basic point. There are two different perceptions about Islam today, and spiritual democracy is relevant only to the first.

The first version dominated the Muslim thought from 1887 to 1953. Its followers included Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Syed Jamaluddin Afghani, Muhammad Ali Jauhar, Iqbal, Muhammad Ali Jinnah and many others. On their behalf, Iqbal summarized the purpose of Islam in these words:

“Give man a keen sense of respect for his own personality, let him move fearless and free in the immensity of God’s earth, and he will respect the personalities of others and become perfectly virtuous.” (Iqbal, 1909)

This, according to Iqbal, was the unique idea which Islam contributed to human thought and which did not exist before the advent of Islam.

Since 1953, a different perception has gradually become dominant in Muslim thought and has also been recognized by the academia in the West. We may call it conservative Islam, but whatever name it is given, the basic idea behind it is that a human being cannot be let alone and needs to be constantly supervised by authority figures.

This is actually an antithesis of the spirit of Islam. It is a recycling of the pre-Islamic worldview, if we are to believe Iqbal, who said:

“The opposite view, the doctrine of the depravity of man held by the Church of Rome, leads to the most pernicious religious and political consequences. Since if man is elementally wicked, he must not be permitted to have his own way: his entire life must be controlled by external authority. This means priesthood in religion and autocracy in politics.”

It should not surprise us that this pre-Islamic “doctrine of the depravity of man held by the Church of Rome” manifested itself in the Muslim world soon after independence: some of our religious elite must have been influenced by the European masters during the long night of colonialism (and Iqbal anticipated this as “the religion of slaves” in 1927, in Persian Psalms).

The difference between these two perceptions of Islam is important to be remembered. “Spiritual democracy” is “the ultimate goal of Islam” only according to the first perception. This needs to be clarified before any meaningful discourse on this issue can take place.

A syllabus for "Marghdeen"

As suggested in a previous post, it appears that in every domain of knowledge the current perceptions are just the opposite of Iqbal's. In 2017: The Battle of Marghdeen, I have tried to make a list of five key differences, for those who may be interested.

My contention is that our perception of our world changes drastically if we adopt these changes. In my understanding, much of what has been written about the ideas of Iqbal has suffered from the fact that writers, especially after 1953, passively accepted the academically accepted premise in every domain of knowledge and attempted to interpret Iqbal accordingly. Whereas, I believe, Iqbal questioned those very positions.

Further details can be found in 2017, and the supporting evidence for these statements is abundantly available in my third biography of Iqbal recently published by Iqbal Academy Pakistan in Urdu. Each statement forms the main objective of an online course at Marghdeen Learning Centre.

1. History:

• We are usually told that the present times are an age of spiritual decline (a view which was originally articulated by Oswald Spengler and H.G. Wells during and after the First World War).
• We need to know that Iqbal believed the world to be already on the verge of “a great spiritual and cultural revolution” in 1923. He believed that Nature was “building up in the depths of life a new human being and a new world for him to live in” and therefore the spirit of modern times is fully consonant with spiritual advancement.

2. Art and Literature:

• We are usually told that pessimistic art and literature are more worthy of respect and attention than those products which present a desirable fantasy (an idea popularized by the French poet Charles Baudelaire in 1857, who called his poems The Flowers of Evil and described hypocrisy to be his ideal).
• We need to know that art and literature are collective dreams that come true, according to Iqbal. Therefore, they should present the world as it should be, and not as it appears to be.

3. Politics:

• We are usually told that democracy is against the spirit of Islam (a point of view popularized by scholars like A. J. Arberry, who pioneered an intellectual movement against Islam, Pakistan and Iqbal in 1953).
• We need to know that “Democracy, then, is the most important aspect of Islam regarded as a political ideal,” according to Iqbal, as he stated in a seminal paper in 1909 (all his political views, which he offered subsequently, were elaborations on this basic idea).

4. Religion and Science:

• We are usually told that religion and science are locked in a perpetual conflict.
• We need to know that Iqbal observed in 1930, “The day is not far off when Religion and Science may discover hitherto unsuspected mutual harmonies.” By that estimate, we should be able to discover those mutual harmonies now.

5. Education:

• We are usually told that education is either an end in itself or preparation for a career.
• We need to know that “Education, like other things, is determined by the needs of a community,” according to Iqbal. Chief among these needs is to achieve “a real collective ego” by passing on the common ideals of the society from generation to generation.

The Meaning of God in Human Experience

[The following is a passage from The Meaning of God in Human Experience: A Philosophic Study of Religion (1912) by William Ernest Hocking. A smaller excerpt from this passage was quoted by Iqbal in the first lecture of The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (1930-34).]

Religious passion, at length, is the best illustration of all this: for this is the mark of religious passion, that a specific view of the whole makes conscious connection with one's practical ultimata. The “deepest of all inborn impulses,” says Professor Pratt, “is the ‘instinct for self-preservation’”: and what is to set that impulse trembling? “a belief in the impossibility of real annihilation.” Belief founded on what? founded back on the instinct itself? doomed then to death and silence. Founded on vision perhaps? If ever upon the stupid day-length time-span of any self, or saint either, some vision breaks to roll his life and ours into new channels, it can only be because that vision admits into his soul some trooping invasion of the concrete fulness of eternity. Such vision doubtless means sub- conscious readiness, and subconscious resonance too, but the expansion of unused air-cells does not argue that we have ceased now to breathe the outer air: the very opposite!

No. The so-called wisdom of feeling is of the same stuff and substance with other wisdom, positive, objective, belonging to our world of ideas. The religious vista is large and open: in integral continuity with the field-lines of our overt existence (not narrowly caught by peering up back-chimney-flues of consciousness). Whatever is thus continuous with the real known in idea is itself known in idea, not otherwise. There are vague ideas, and unfinished ideas, uncertain predicates, qualities only dimly divined known most certainly by their difference from others, their negative bearing but none of this haze and floating outline affects the intent and category of the scene-contents. Whatever is, or can be, predicate of idea is itself idea-stuff, whether or not yet successfully defined and connected.

Remembering Hazrat Ali

Shrine of Hazrat Ali in Najaf

On 19 Ramazan, 40 AH, the Kharijite Ibn Muljam sneaked a poison-coated sword into the grand mosque of Kufa, where the caliph Ali was supposed to lead the morning prayers. The assassin stood in the first row when the caliph led the prayers, and struck him on the head when he went down in prostration.

The attacker was caught, bound in ropes and brought before him. Suffering from the pain of a fatal wound in his forehead, Ali was still quick to notice that the ropes were so tight that they were cutting into the flesh of his assassin. He ordered the knots to be loosened, and the assassin be treated humanely. 

He also ordered that in the case of his death, only the assassin should be punished and no harm must come to the culprit's family. Of course, if Ali survived, the attacker was going to be pardoned because Ali did not believe in personal revenge.

Ali passed out three days later. Ramazan 21 is the anniversary of his martyrdom. Translation of the famous verses of Iqbal about Hazrat Ali are being shared on this occasion (the original are in Persian):

ALI is the first Muslim and the King of men,
In Love's eyes Ali is the treasure of the Faith.
Devotion to his family inspires me with life
So that I am as a shining pearl.
Like the narcissus, I am enraptured with gazing:
Like perfume, I am straying though his pleasure garden.
If holy water gushes from my earth, he is the source;
If wine pours from my grapes, he is the cause.
I am dust, but his sun hath made me as a mirror:
Song can be seen in my breast.
From Ali's face the Prophet drew many a fair omen,
By his majesty the true religion is glorified
His commandments are the strength of Islam:
All things pay allegiance to his House.
The Apostle of God gave him the name Bu Turab;
God in the Koran called him "the Hand of Allah."
Every one that is acquainted with Life's mysteries
Knows what is the inner meaning of the names of Ali.

Pakistan on the Night of Destiny

Recitation of Surah Qadr
with text, transliteration and translation

Laylah tul Qadr, or "the Night of Destiny" is one of the odd-numbered nights among the last ten of Ramazan (it is also translated as the night of Power, Majesty or Grandeur). According to Chapter 97, 'al-Qadr', the  Quran was revealed ("bestowed from on high") on this night. According to a common Muslim belief, this was 27 Ramazan, 13 years before migration to Madinah (some authorities suggest alternate dates).

Someone who reads the Quran after absorbing the spirit of Iqbal's message cannot help observing the connections which this brief surah establishes between Quran, Destiny and the mysteries of Time:

1. Behold, from on high have We bestowed this on Night of Destiny.
2. And what could make you conceive what it is, that Night of Destiny? 
3. The Night of Destiny is better than a thousand months: 
4. in hosts descend in it the angels, bearing divine inspiration by their Sustainer's leave; from all that may happen 
5. does it make secure, until the rise of dawn.  

(This is approximately how Muhammad Asad translates the chapter). In Pakistan, this chapter of the Quran is also a reminder of a happy coincidence. Pakistan was "the final destiny" of its people, according to Iqbal, and it was also described by him as "an unborn world of the Quran". This unborn world of Quran came into being on the same night which was the anniversary of the revelation of Quran itself: 27 Ramazan (coinciding with the midnight of August 14-15, 1947).

Pakistan was born on the Night of Destiny. Can the country also work as a clue for showing us how destiny works in our lives? "Never did I, for a single moment, doubt that Pakistan would survive," said the first Prime Minister of Pakistan. "For I think, indeed I believe, that we had not done anything to deserve so high a boon as Pakistan, and that God will not deprive us of this boon unless and until we prove ourselves, by our misdeed, to be unworthy of it."

Let's remember this when we celebrate the Independence Day this year. The electronic edition of my new book will also be released on that date. The print edition will follow later. The book is in English, and is approximately 80 pages. It is called 2017: the Battle for Marghdeen. I hope that it will offer some more explanation of issues which I have briefly touched upon in this post.

Fear is the key

Emperor Alamgir is attacked by a tiger:
in Secrets and Mysteries, Iqbal used this parable
for illustrating the point that belief in the Unity of God
puts an end to fear.
Read in the original Persian or translation)

In order to have practical value for everyone in society, the message of a thinker must include some straight-forward answers to some of the basic questions about life. One such question can be, "What is the source of evil in our soul?" Iqbal's answer is: "Fear."

It would be interesting to see how this central proposition was applied by him for understanding religion, politics and the destinies of nations.

1. The central proposition in Islam

In his seminal paper 'Islam As A Moral and Political Ideal' (1909), Iqbal offered a comparative study of Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Islam from the perspective of "a critical student". There, he defined the distinctive trait of Islam in these words:

The central proposition which regulates the structure of Islam then is that there is fear in nature, and the object of Islam is to free man from fear. This view of the universe indicates also the Islamic view of the metaphysical nature of man. If fear is the force which dominates man and counteracts his ethical progress, man must be regarded as a unit of force, an energy, a will, a germ of infinite power, the gradual unfoldment of which must be the object of all human activity. The essential nature of man, then, consists in will, not intellect or understanding.

Hence we may see that "fear" is not just a psychological issue for Iqbal. It has ethical, political and even metaphysical implications and its elimination is the objective which defines the very structure of Islam, even as a religion.

2. Elimination of fear, a political ideal
The same concept became the cornerstone of the manifesto of Muslim nationalism nine years later. In 'The Mysteries of Selflessness' (Secrets and Mysteries), published in 1918, the concept was elaborated in three chapters, the first of which was titled, 'Despair, Grief and Fear are the Mother of Abominations, destroying Life; and Belief in Unity of God puts an end to those Foul Diseases.' (Read in the original Persian). There, Iqbal went a step further and suggested that fear breeds dissension and discord, since it grows weak when a people are united. 

3. Fear causes the loss of herd-instinct
In 1910, Iqbal had jotted down in his private notebook:

To my mind, governement, whatever its form, is one of the determining forces of a people's character. Loss to political power is equally ruinous to nations' character. Ever since their political fall the Musalmans of India have undergone a rapid ethical deterioration. Of all the Muslim communities of the world they are probably the meanest in point of character.

Harsh as this criticism of his own community may sound, it is interesting to notice that here again the decisive psychological factor was fear - or to be precise, how the loss of political power creates insecurity, and that in turns leads to meanness in character. Consistent with the proposition he made in 'The Mysteries of Selflessness' (i.e. fear breeds dissension), Iqbal may have later arrived at the conclusion that political insecurity diminished the collective instinct in his community. In 1930, he stated in his famous Allahabad Address:

The second evil from which the Muslims of India are suffering is that the community is fast losing what is called the herd-instinct. This makes it possible for individuals and groups to start independent careers without contributing to the general thought and activity of the community. 

4. Fear of majority in Europe
The right to vote was extended to some of the working class males in Europe in the middle of the 19th Century. This led to a hostile reaction from intellectuals such as Stendhal, Charles Baudelaire and Matthew Arnold (to name just a few). Consequently, an "intellectual elite" came into being whose purpose was to create a dichotomy between "high" and "popular" culture (which had been regarded as a unity by the best minds of the past). Iqbal must have understood that the elite in Europe reacted against democracy because they had a fear of the majority in their hearts, and this fear did what fear does: it bred dissension and discord within the European society itself. In his private notebook he wrote in 1910:

The reaction against Democracy in England and France is a very significant phenomenon. But in order to grasp the meaning of this phenomenon the student of political sciences should not content himself merely with the investigation and discovery of the purely historical causes which have brought it about; he must go deeper and search the psychological causes of this reaction. (See also 'Reaction against democracy in the West'). 

5. Fear of Islam in the mind of Europe
We have seen how Iqbal traced the evils in the political lives of his own society as well as in the societies of Europe to be rooted in various forms of fear. He observed the same to be the major reason why it was becoming increasingly difficult for the representative spokespersons of Islam to engage the intellectuals of the West on terms that might be acceptable to both societies, and may lead to joint efforts for the empowerment of the masses. Responding to one of the critics of his poem 'The Secrets of the Self' soon after the publication of its English translation in 1920, he wrote:

I am afraid the old European idea of a blood-thirsty Islam is still lingering in the mind of Mr. Dickinson. All men and not Muslims alone are meant for the Kingdom of God on earth, provided they say good-bye to their idols of race and nationality, and treat one another as personalities. 

6. Postscript: "Dare and Live"
A very useful and succinct summary of Iqbal's thought from this angle was offered by Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah when he summarized the message of Iqbal in a single phrase, "dare and live". Jinnah said:

Iqbal... rises above the average philosopher, as the essence of his teachings is a beautiful blend of thought and action. He combines in himself the idealism of a poet and the realism of a man who took practical view of things. In Iqbal this compromise is essentially Islamic. In fact it is nothing but Islam. His ideal therefore is life according to the teachings of Islam with a motto, "Dare and Live."

The Jews

In the development of universal civilisation the Jewish factor cannot be regarded as a negligible quantity. The Jews were probably the first framers of the principles of business morality summed up in the idea of righteousness. 

Iqbal, Stray Reflections (1910)

Post your comments at Selfless Devotion 

An Outline of History

The following is an outline of the framework which is being used in ‘The DNA of History’, the online course offered at Marghdeen Learning Centre.

History may be divided into three phases: (a) Input (ancient world); (b) Transition (the advent of Islam); and (c) Output (the world since then). Since the transitional phase is less than two centuries, it can be more conveniently counted with either of the other two, leaving us with two broad phases of history: ancient and modern. 

The Ancient World

This phase may be divided into seven stages (based on the first chapter of Javid Nama).

THE AGE OF INQUIRY: PRE-HISTORY (Adam/the Cave of Vishvamitra). In whatever manner the human beings appeared on this planet, they are likely to have been preoccupied at first with finding the means of survival. That involved the ability to become acquainted with the inner nature of things.

THE AGE OF DISCOVERY: PRE-HISTORY TO C.2000 BC (Noah/the Music of Sarosh). Once the survival was ensured, the humanity may have found time to appreciate things beyond their utility and to enjoy interacting with them for their own sake. This may have given birth to art and music, and helped aesthetics by triggering the functions related to the right brain.

THE AGE OF TRANSCENDENCE: C.2000 BC TO C.1300 BC (Abraham/the Poetry of Sarosh). Aesthetics puts us in touch with our higher self. “If I can become acquainted with the nature of things, invent tools, give birth to civilizations and even enjoy the beauty of Nature as well as artifact, why should I bow down before stars and planets?” This theme persists through the ages in the most popular masterpieces of literature – an activity associated with the left brain. 

THE AGE OF FREEDOM: C.1300 BC TO 559 BC (Moses/the Tablet of Buddha). Ancient rulers derived authority by claiming to be gods or descendants of gods, and subjugated the people in the name of these gods. Such kingdoms and empires could not remain legitimate once the belief in false gods had been questioned: internal freedom means external freedom too. 

THE AGE OF ACTION: 559 BC TO 4 BC (Zulqarnayn/the Tablet of Zarathustra). Civilization tends to move towards unification of humanity. Once it became impossible to create empires in the names of false gods, Zoroastrian visionaries from Persia found ways of building empires by giving religious freedom to those who believed in the Unity of God (such as Jews, Hindus and Buddhists) and fighting those who ascribed partners to God – such as Egypt, Greece and Rome.

THE AGE OF EXPANSION: 4 BC TO 610 AD (Jesus/the Tablet of Jesus). Before the unification dreamed by some visionaries could become a reality, the humanity needed to undergo a phase of wonderment – a stage when it should learn to “give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar and unto God what belongs to God.”

THE AGE OF CREATION: 610 AD TO 750 AD (The Prophet/the Tablet of the Prophet).  The Prophet of Islam seemed to stand between the ancient and the modern world: the source of his revelation belonged to the ancient world, the spirit of his revelation belonged to the modern world. The birth of Islam was the birth of inductive intellect: prophecy reached its perfection in discovering the need of its own abolition, in order to achieve full self-consciousness, the humanity must finally be thrown back on its own resources.

The Modern World

This phase may be divided into three stages so far (based on various observations found in the writings of Iqbal).

THE PERSIAN REBIRTH: 750-1258 (The Wisdom of Adam/God is Eternal). 

• Literature was usually aimed at entertaining through stories of highly inspirational nature – this was the heyday of epic stories placed in historical settings but drawing freely on mythology and folklore. Examples: Arabian Nights, Beowulf, Ferdowsi, Nezami, Attar
• The Persian model of delegating maximum authority to regional governments under a liberal center was restored. Small kingdoms gradually became important and eventually autonomous. Examples: Abbasids, Ghaznavids, William the Conqueror, Fatimids, Saljuqs, Khwarism.
• Inductive reasoning came to dominate all sciences: experiment replaced pure speculation and ancient superstitions began to fade out. Examples: Ibnul Haitham, Az-Zahravi, Ibne Sina
• Sufi masters emphasized that everything in the world is subject to decay and annihilation: God alone is eternal. Examples: Hasan Basri, Rabia Basri, Junaid Baghdadi, Mansur Hallaj, Ali Hajveri, Ibn Arabi

THE CHINESE REBIRTH: 1258-1747 (The Wisdom of Angels/God is Powerful).

• Literature was mainly focused on depicting the principles of personal development as well as the relationship between the individual and the society. Examples: Rumi, Saadi, Ameer Khusrau, Chaucer, Hafez, Jami, Urfi, Shakespeare.
• The Chinese model of centralized empires was followed almost universally. This led to strong emperors who very often had absolute power. Examples: Kubla Khan, Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals, Tudors, Louis XIV
• In science, revolutionary steps were taken for discovering the principles operating in the universe. Example: Francis Bacon, Galileo, William Harvey, Newton.
• Sufi masters formulated rules for the relationship  between mentor and disciples, and hence distinct schools appeared. Examples: Abdul Qadir Jilani, Mueenuddin Chishti, Mujaddid Alf Sani

THE AFGHAN REBIRTH: Since 1747 (The Wisdom of the Soul: God is Knowing).

• Literature acceptable to entire societies has invariably shown tendencies to “think globally, act locally”: reflecting universal principles through distinctly regional forms. Examples: Bhittai, Mir Taqi Mir, William Cowper, Wordsworth, Robert Burns, Goethe, Charlotte Bronte, Iqbal, Ibne Safi.
• The Afghan model of nation state invented by Ahmad Shah Abdali is being visible almost everywhere – states are based on common ideals and/or shared ethnic traits, and rulers are required to abide by custom or constitution.
• In science, the focus has shifted from principles to potential: the heyday of inventions leading to such times when the virtual has become as important as the real. Examples: James Watt, Michael Faraday, Morris, Graham Bell, Edison, Einstein and latter inventors.
• Masters widely accepted as representatives of spiritual wisdoms in their own societies have been encouraging dissemination of this wisdom among the masses and also its fusion with politics and science. Examples: Shah Waliullah, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Jamaluddin Afghani, Iqbal

Further reading: the revised edition of Topline Secondary Social Studies written by me is now available in Pakistan. It is a series of three textbooks for secondary schools.

Noah and Abraham: a comparative study

Cenotaph of the grave which is believed
to be Abraham's. 

I am not going to argue whether Noah and Abraham were historical figures or not (although I personally believe that they were). Here I just want to share a single observation: the portrayal of these characters in the Quran makes it possible to observe a very interesting difference in their presentation of a common message, and I presume that this difference might be meaningful.

Both prophets preached the Unity of God, and both were opposed by the elite. The Quran tells us that the elite in the society of Noah resorted to personal criticism rather than discussing his message, and from an unrelated discussion they arrived at the conclusion that the ideas presented by Noah could not be sound:

“We can see that you are nothing but a mortal like ourselves, and it is clear to see that only the lowest among us follow you unthinkingly. We cannot see how you are any better than we are. In fact, we think you are liars.”

So just because he was human and people from the lowest classes subscribed to his ideas, those ideas could not be true? This is the kind of thinking which fails to make logical connections between things because it cannot rise above personal likes and dislikes.

To this type of mind, Noah responds by appealing to the appreciative self rather than the efficient self. He tries to show them that although it seems to you that your logical mind is accepting or rejecting evidence, the truth is that your heart and your will have already told your minds what should be accepted as convincing and what should be rejected: “My people, think: if I did have a clear sign from my Lord, and He had given me grace of His own, though it was hidden from you, could we force you to accept it against your will?” (all above quotations are from Chapter 11 of the Quran).

This is a remarkable dialogue: an appeal for temporarily suspending the judgemental efficient self, so that one may sink deep into the holistic appreciative self. Essentially, the message of Noah can be summed up as this: trust your deeper self to be correct about the external world. 

It is quite significant that the society whose elite rejected this call met its nemesis in a natural disaster about which an early warning had been received through intuition. The masses had paid heed and were saved; the elite denied and perished. The writers of The Epic of Gilgamesh presented the Great Flood as a vengeful act of whimsical deities but the Quranic version makes it possible for us to interpret the event as a "reminder" about the natural consequence that would probably arise whenever people make the kind of mistake which the elite made in those times.

The message of Abraham is also the Unity of God, but civilization seems to have moved on a bit and this development is reflected in the dialogue ascribed to Abraham in the Quran.

The Quran offers anecdotes from various phases of the career of Abraham. Interestingly, in almost all glimpses from his early life we find him engaged in arguments, and in every argument his opponents are denying the evidence of sense-perception: the idol-worshippers of Ninenvah ascribe divinity to idols, stars, moon and sun; and the king (possibly Nimrod) claims divinity for himself because he thinks that he has the power to “grant” life and death just like God.

Hence, the arguments presented by the opponents of Abraham can be understood as a misrepresentation of the message of Noah. It is almost as if the followers of Noah had set up a civilization based on his message that intuition could be trusted. Then, in the course of time, they forgot that sense-perception also had a role to play. This mental lethargy has made a mess of the whole point about connecting with one’s inner self. Now injustice is being perpetuated in the name of esoteric wisdom.

Quite understandably, a poetic appeal to the evidence of sense perception is the common strand in Abraham's dialogue with all these opponents: he rejects idols because they cannot hear and speak; he argues that the celestial bodies could not be gods because they go down; he denies the divinity of the king because the king cannot change the course of the Sun.

Thus in the transition from the message of Noah to the message of Abraham, civilization comes full circle. Noah had shown that the reports of our deeper self could be true about the external world. Abraham preached that the evidence of the external world could also be true about our souls.

This video from Youtube may not be
directly relevant but it is not
completely irrelevant either: enjoy!

Systems: science fiction about the Unity of God

Systems is the debut novel of Saleena Karim, the author of Secular Jinnah and Pakistan (2010). I have read it and liked it very much, and strongly recommend it to all those who are interested in the issues usually discussed on this blog. I intend to review the book soon, but just now copying the email sent out by the author through her mailing list:

Hello Folks,

I'm delighted to announce the release of my novel, Systems. Many of you will have heard me mention that I've been working on it for a long time; others of you won't have known anything about it. But it's finally done, and it went into print on 14 January, exactly two years before the key characters of the novel ... well, die.

It's already available to buy in paperback at Amazon.com, and will also become available at Amazon UK later this week (you can pre-order it already). For those of you who have a Kindle or any ebook reader, you can buy the book (and read the first 10 chapters for free) via this link. The story is a dystopian sci-fi thriller following two time periods: 2014 and 2042. The plot involves reincarnation, psychics, and government conspiracy, but it's really asking questions about humanity's potential and the possibility of an ideal society. At its core is an idea called the 'Cohesive Ethics Theorem'. A fabulous trailer is available to see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x4Cw6WolVo

You'll find the blurb and all other details at our new site: libredux.com (as I mentioned in my last message, CB now redirects to a portal). In addition (after many years) I'm starting - or, I should say, re-starting - a blog for the new book. Here I will be explaining the philosophical content of the novel, how it links to some things that Dr. Muhammad Iqbal said a century ago ... and of course, the theorem.

And finally, some requests: 1) Please forward this email to everyone you know. 2) Even if you don't normally read fiction, make sure you buy and read this book - especiallyif you are in agreement with things I have said in SJ2. 3) And please post your (honest) reviews on Amazon. This will help me more than you know.

All the Best, and Take Care Folks,

Saleena

----------------------------------------------

http://www.libredux.com

http://www.secularjinnah.co.uk

http://www.cyberblurb.co.uk

The central proposition of Islam

"The central proposition which regulates the structure of Islam,
 then, is that there is fear in nature,
and the object of Islam is to free man from fear." (Iqbal)
Illustration from Tabassum Khalid.
Courtesy: Iqbal Academy Pakistan

Excerpt from 'Islam as a Moral and Political Ideal', a paper delivered by Iqbal in April 1909 at the anniversary of Anjuman Himayat-i-Islam, Lahore.

The truth is that Islam looks upon the universe as a reality and consequently recognises as reality all that is in it. Sin, pain, sorrow, struggle are certainly real, but Islam teaches that evil is not essential to the universe; the universe can be reformed; the elements of sin and evil can be gradually eliminated. All that is in the universe is God’s, and the seemingly destructive forces of nature become sources of life, if properly controlled by man, who is endowed with the power to understand and to control them.

These and other similar teachings of the Quran, combined with the Quranic recognition of the reality of sin and sorrow, indicate that the Islamic view of the universe is neither optimistic nor pessimistic. Modern psychometry has given the final answer to the psychological implications of Buddhism. Pain is not an essential factor in the constitution of the universe, and pessimism is only a product of a hostile social environment. Islam believes in the efficacy of well-directed action; hence the standpoint of Islam must be described as melioristic – the ultimate pre-supposition and justification of all human effort at scientific discovery and social progress. Although Islam recognises the fact of pain, sin and struggle in nature, yet the principal fact which stands in the way of man’s ethical progress is, according to Islam, neither pain, nor sin, nor struggle. It is fear, to which man is a victim owing to his ignorance of the nature of his environment and want of absolute faith in God. The highest stage of man’s ethical progress is reached when he becomes absolutely free from fear and grief.

The central proposition which regulates the structure of Islam, then, is that there is fear in nature, and the object of Islam is to free man from fear.

Questions for comparative study of religions

Zoroaster (also called Zarathustra),
the founder of Zoroastrianism

Excerpt from 'Islam as a Moral and Political Ideal', a paper delivered by Iqbal in April 1909 at the anniversary of Anjuman Himayat-i-Islam, Lahore.

To begin with, we have to recognise that every great religious system starts with certain proposition concerning the nature of man and the universe. The psychological implication of Buddhism, for instance, is the central fact of pain as a dominating element in the constitution of the universe. Man, regarded as an individuality, is helpless against the forces of pain, according to the teachings of Buddhism. There is an indissoluble relation between pain and the individual consciousness which, as such, is nothing but a constant possibility of pain. Freedom from pain means freedom from individuality. Starting from the fact of pain, Buddhism is quite consistent in placing before man the ideal of self-destruction. Of the two terms of this relation, pain and the sense of personality, one (i.e., pain) is ultimate; the other is a delusion from which it is possible to emancipate ourselves by ceasing to act on those lines of activity, which have a tendency to intensify the sense of personality. Salvation, then, according to Buddhism, is inaction; renunciation of self and unworldliness are the principal virtues. Similarly, Christianity as a religious system, is based on the fact of sin. The world is regarded as evil and the taint of sin is regarded as hereditary to man, who, as an individuality, is insufficient and stands in need of some supernatural personality to intervene between him and his Creator. Christianity, unlike Buddhism, regards human personality as something real, but agrees with Buddhism in holding that man, as a force against sin, is insufficient. There is, however, a subtle difference in the agreement. We can, according to Christianity, get rid of sin by depending upon a Redeemer; we can free ourselves from pain, according to Buddhism, by letting this insufficient force dissipate or lose itself in the universal energy of nature. Both agree in the fact of insufficiency and both agree in holding that this insufficiency is an evil, but while the one makes up the deficiency by bringing in the force of a redeeming personality, the other prescribes its gradual reduction until it is annihilated altogether. Again, Zoroastrianism looks upon nature as a scene of endless struggle between the powers of evil and the powers of good, and recognises in man the power to choose any course of action he likes. The universe, according to Zoroastrianism, is partly evil, partly good; man is neither wholly good nor wholly evil, but a combination of the two principles-light and darkness continually fighting against each other for universal supremacy. We see then that the fundamental pre-suppositions, with regard to the nature of the universe and man, in Buddhism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism, respectively, are the following:

1. There is pain in nature and man regarded as an individual is evil (Buddhism).
2. There is sin in nature and the taint of sin is fatal to man (Christianity).
3. There is struggle in nature; man is a mixture of the struggling forces and is free to range himself on the side of the powers of good, which will eventually prevail (Zoroastrianism).

The question now is, what is the Muslim view of the universe and man? What is the central idea in Islam, which determines the structure of the entire system?

Quaid-i-Azam’s Concept of Islamic State

The following is my article published in the special supplement of Dawn, December 25, 2011. It may have appeared with a different title in the newspaper (I still haven't seen the print edition, since I am out of country). 

In her explosive book, Secular Jinnah: Munir’s Big Hoax Exposed (2005), historian Saleena Karim wrote: “There has been a long-running debate in the Indo-Pak region on whether Jinnah simply sought independence for the Muslims and wanted a secular state, or whether he sought an Islamic State. To outsiders it seems very strange that there is any debate at all on such a fundamental detail in the history of Partition… However, a closer look at the debate reveals the real issue in question. It is not Jinnah’s objective; it is Islam.”

The long-standing debate may therefore be seen as a blinker that has been preventing us from asking the more important question: what did Quaid-i-Azam mean by an “Islamic state”? The question cannot be avoided because, after all, he did promise on so many occasions that Pakistan was going to be an Islamic state.

There are many interpretations of Islam but they may be divided into two basic categories. In the first category are those interpretations where the masses are considered to be the final arbiters. In other words, since there is no Church in Islam, the functional authority is assigned to the consensus of the Muslim community.

This was the basic ideal upheld by Muslim reformers who exercised the greatest influence on the masses between 1863 and 1953: Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Jamaluddin Afghani, Maulana Shibli Numani, Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar and Allama Iqbal (just to name a few). The names given to this strand of Islam by its leaders themselves was “Muslim nationalism” and “Muslim Renaissance.”

At least in South Asia, one of the most interesting features of this “Muslim nationalism” was how it gradually brought on its platform even those sects of Islam which habitually defer to the authority of a present or absent Imam – the Ismailis and Shias. As suggested by the present writer in the article ‘Think Long-Term’, published in Dawn in 2010, this development was marked most prominently by the birth of the All-India Muslim League in Dacca in 1906.

The second category of interpretations of Islam may include those interpretations where the authority of an expert is regarded as essentially superior to the consensus of the Muslim community, and those who disagree with the expert are relegated to an inferior status within the Muslim community, or may even get expelled. Depending on whom you ask, this authority may be ascribed to a religious scholar, a mystic, a ruler or now even some Western university!

Historically, this was the position of those who were opposed to Muslim nationalism: the Congress leadership of the British India, the secularists in Pakistan, and all those religious movements which did not join the Muslims’ struggle for Pakistan during the 1940s.

Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah obviously belonged to the first category: he believed that Islam was to be interpreted by the whole community and not by any other authority. The campaign slogan of his followers in the elections of 1945-46 in the British India, “Muslim hai to Muslim League mien aa” (“Join Muslim League if you are Muslim”) was as much a cry of defiance against the mullah as it was a rejoinder to the Indian nationalist. The undeniable implication (which has unfortunately been denied since then) was that the masses did not have to prove their faith to any cleric. Instead, the cleric had to earn his status by first submitting to the consensus of the community.

The religious scholars who opposed this proposition apparently believed that Islam could be served better if Muslims were persuaded to become more rigid in following the personal law of Islam in a secular Indian state. 

Out of selfish motives or misguided sincerity, these ulema and reformers perceived an opportunity of becoming “caliphs” once the Muslim state got established, and especially when its founder passed away in September 1948. This may explain why the right-wing political parties in Pakistan promise to turn Pakistan into “an Islamic state” but fail to propose any practical measures except rigorous implementation of personal laws developed by theologians of a bygone era. One can clearly see that this is essentially the same agenda that was originally devised for being followed in the secular United India.

In Pakistan, perhaps the earliest attempt to give recognition to this alternate concept of “Islamic state” inside the parliament was inadvertently made by the opposition leader Sris Chandra Chattopadhya in March 1949. In order to reject the Objectives Resolution, he denied that the elected assembly in Pakistan could have the right to interpret Islam (although a precedent for this had been established in the Muslim world and approved by Allama Iqbal more than twenty years ago). Instead, Chattopadhya quoted a passage from a book by Maulana Maududi and insisted that it should be accepted as the definitive description of “Islamic state”. The idea was vehemently opposed by Sirdar Abdur Rab Nishtar but the argument of Chattopadhya was picked up a few years later by the now-infamous Justice Munir in the famous Munir Report (with the additional attribution of a fabricated quote to Jinnah).

Since then, the right-wing parties in Pakistan have been engaged in a quarrel with the secularists over whether or not Pakistan should be an “Islamic state”, but mutual differences notwithstanding, both factions agree that only the mullah has got the right to tell what an “Islamic state” is.

Therefore, the question we need to ask now is: How did Jinnah perceive an Islamic state when he repeatedly asserted, before the birth of Pakistan and afterwards, that Pakistan was going to be an Islamic state?

The answer cannot be missed. Obviously, an Islamic state according to him was fully compatible with what he stated in the Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947: “Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”

This is an Islamic state, then, according to Quaid-i-Azam. Let’s stop calling it secularism, because Quaid-i-Azam never uttered that word and “Islamic state” could not have possibly meant anything else to him. Let’s now start asking whether we should have an Islamic state as perceived by the Quaid, and who should have the authority to decide that?

If Christ Came to Chicago!

W.T. Stead (1849-1912)

"The lesson to be learned from Mr. Stead's book is that the great evils from which humanity is suffering today, are evils that can be handled only by religious sentiments; that the handling of those evils has been in the great part surrendered to the State; that the State has itself been delivered over to corrupt political machines; that such machines are not only unwilling, but unable, to deal with those evils; and that nothing but a religious awakening of the citizens to their public duties can save countless millions from misery and the State itself from degradation."

This excerpt from an American review of the book was quoted by Iqbal in his article 'Islam and Ahmadism' (1936). The complete title the book by William T. Stead  was If Christ Came to Chicago! - a plea for the union of all who love in the service of all who suffer. It was first published in Chicago in 1894 and was an instant hit: 70000 copies were ordered before the first copy even came out of the press. The author died 28 years later while travelling on Titanic: after helping several women and children get into lifeboats he was last seen sitting in the 1st Class Smoking Room reading a book. Further: see the W.T. Resource Site

KEYSERLING: Peshawar

"And to think that here...
lay the very centre of Buddhistic culture!"

Peshawar

a chapter from

The Travel Diary of a Philosopher (1925)

by Count Hermann Keyserling.

The author was quoted by Iqbal in 1925.

See bottom of this post for details. 

I have really strayed beyond India. Leafless trees, the cold, clear air of winter - broad, dusty high roads on which men wander about, whose physical type is familiar to me. Curious: between Afghanistan and Russia there lies a whole world. Every district of Central Asia is inhabited by different tribes, possessing differing histories and cultures, with different customs and manners; and yet to-day one psychic atmosphere is spread from the Khyber Pass to the Ural Mountains. In this atmosphere all significance disappears. In Peshawar murders take place daily,and gaily coloured Indian shawls are for sale what does it matter? Everything might just as well not happen at all, or happen differently. The meaning of life here is not changed by one event more or less, by one event of this or of another kind. The camels march one behind the other in long, endless rows. Century follows century in one long, unending sequence. Millions of similar people die rhythmically one after another, sometimes violently, sometimes naturally, all with the stereotyped expression of a shrug of the shoulders.

I am seized by that infinite melancholy for which only the Russians possess the right word: Urrynie. I want nothing, lack nothing, I have no demonstrable reason for it, I am just melancholy. My soul is hollowed out, as it were. This Asia knows no vibrations of a mental kind. The rays which I radiate myself disappear in endless space, but I lack the inner power to arrest them. The result is a feeling of emptiness which makes me profoundly miserable. And then, alien, brutal forces enter into me the thoughts and desires which may dwell in the wild hearts of Afghan cattle-thieves. I can hardly resist them, so suddenly do they assail me. And then I recognise in horror that they are not at all as alien to my inner self as I had thought: in me too there is somewhere, deep down, a crude Central Asiatic, and I curse the air which has let him be wakened from his slumber.

Yet this world contains possibilities for unique greatness. When the storm is let loose over the desert, whole mountains of sand are piled up which roll on like waves. Such storm forces have several times been embodied in men. They were beings without souls or sense, without inward aim or feeling for values; they hardly possessed any human consciousness. But on the other hand, the elemental force of the desert storm was in them. Like grains of sand they drove nations before them, burying cultures under mountains of sand. But if these did not remain, then everything was once more as if nothing had happened, as if their invasion had been an evil dream. These conquerors represent intrinsically non-spiritual powers. But greatness, yes, superhuman greatness, cannot be denied to Attila and Jenghiz Khan.

*

And to think that here, and not even at such an immeasurable distance of time, lay the very centre of Buddhistic culture! That the Valley of Kabul was the holy land of Mahayana doctrine, longed for by every searcher from the land of the five streams to the Japanese sea, the scene of the blending of the Hellenic and Indian spirits in art, culture and religion, to which all the later developments of the Far East can originally be traced! Central Asia was, for thousands of years, the source of all spiritual influences on earth. But as the waters dried up and the gardens withered to the dust of the desert, the spirit vanished irretrievably from this parched atmosphere, and the extremest forms of barbarism became the heir to the extreme of culture. - My thoughts wander back to my geological days and the way in which I then regarded the world; in the Alps, I beheld the ocean, liquid lava in basalt, and life itself in the rigidity of stone. The archaeologist beholds Central Asia with a similar vision. But, it seems to me, both overlook the really significant factor. This is the change in itself. Anyone who has ever been a farmer knows what 'history' means: one year of culture more or less represents cosmically an absolute entity; it cannot be taken away nor retrieved; such time is real before eternity. For such time creates change. Where growth is guided by conscious volition, development takes place; everything progresses, marches onward, further and further, and no end is in sight. If, for any reason, volition fails, all events change their being. Development diverges, branches off, or even ceases, and the casual takes the place of the rational. Thus the desert follows upon the garden, the wilderness upon culture, lack of all spirit upon spirit, eternal death upon brief life. What folly to believe in a Providence which guides life on earth from outside! Life could, of course, progress in accordance with a high purpose, no principle is opposed to such a course; we men will perhaps one day bring about such a state of affairs. But what happens on earth seems a matter of complete indifference to God. Spirit yesterday, none to-day, to-morrow perhaps spirit again; sometimes garden, sometimes desert, sometimes the primeval forest, sometimes the sea: I dare say He delights in aimless change, as the tired Maharajah delights in the Nautch, so that eternity should not become too tedious for Him.

*

None the less, it is stimulating to live for a while among such wild fellows as the Afridis. They are magnificent -  like beasts of prey in their primitiveness, their instinctive irresponsibility. The Government does not like to see people going unprotected and without a guide through the bazaars: suddenly one of these gentlemen might dig a dagger between one's ribs, the Government would have to interfere, which, in its wisdom it prefers not to do, because murdering means nothing worse to them than the polite expression of a differing opinion does among us. Could I bear the Afridi a grudge who sought my life? Hardly. At any rate, no more than a tiger. And as I wend my way through the narrow streets, I look out whether I cannot spy the beginnings of a quarrel. These men must look magnificent when fighting. As long as peace reigns, the best in them is asleep, in the same way in which the best sleeps in the Spanish fighting bull while he chews the cud.

All at once I must laugh: the Afridis are the very embodiment of that ideal of supermen to which a fair proportion of our young poets cling! Great men who are cruel because they must be so, who fulfil their destiny although it ruins them whose passion knows no limit who are never led astray by reasonable considerations: yes, indeed, the description befits them. It is droll to think to what manifestations the need for hero-worship leads over-civilised townsmen. Undoubtedly originality is necessary: but is it not possible to conceive a higher kind than that of the animals? It is hardly conceivable that the Athenians who surrounded Plato looked up to Achilles and Diogenes as ideals; it needed the modern decadents to lower the ideal of humanity so much to the animal level; even Nietzsche, the gentle pastor's son, never intended anything of this sort, no matter what he may have said. But to-day we have really reached the stage at which originality and primitiveness in the animal sense appear identified. I am quite prepared, and why not, to honour the candour of the cow; only, I stipulate that she shall not write; this form of expression is only suited to cultured human beings. I refuse in the same way to honour savages as heroes. The Afridis are really the supermen worshipped by our modern literary youth. It amuses me to examine them from this point of view. Formerly it used to be said: he who controls himself is strong. To-day: he who must let himself go. Of course, to anyone who has no passion at all, its mere existence implies an ideal. But it is not true that all modern men are emasculated; only those who write are for the most part in this state, the canaille ecrivante, cabalante el comwlsionnaire of Voltaire, the most unreal people of all, and to-day, it is more fatal than ever that they have so much power. The ideal of the emaciated, the impotent, the weakling, drives healthy individuals into barbarism. Literary cows are magnified, savage churls are honoured as heroes: thus more and more cows begin to write, and more and more men capable of culture become savage. How good it would be for the young men of to-day to imbibe a little Indian wisdom ! To learn that it is a sign of weakness and not of strength if a man has to be cruel, if he succumbs to his fate, if he is not master of his passion, if he is impervious to the considerations of reason, and that not only the superman of the newest, but also the tragic hero of the classical pattern, embodies a barbaric condition! No doubt the modern condition of humanity is not worth much; but the ideal which we should strive after lies in the direction of transfusing life with spirit, not with animality. Not only the cow, but God also, is natural, and we should simulate the latter, not the former. All the more so as we are already much nearer to Him. As I regard these Afridis, I realise very clearly how far their nature is removed from ours. Perhaps it is due to this change of perspective, as opposed to the conditions of antiquity, that the animal seems to us above everything worthy of reverence, just as God seemed to the ancients. . . .

Hermann Alexander Graf Keyserling
 (1880–1946)

The excerpt is from the chapter 'Peshawar' in The Travel Diary of a Philosopher by Count Hermann Keyserling (published in 1925 and available in English translation online: Volume One and Volume Two). 

In his 1925 essay 'Self in the Light of Relativity', Iqbal quoted an excerpt from this book: "The impulse which drives me into the wide world is precisely the same as that which drives so many into monastries - the desire for self-realization... I want to let the climate of the Tropics, the Indian modes of consciousness, the Chinese code of life, and many other factors which I cannot envisage in advance, to work their spell on me, one  after the other, and then watch what will become of me." Iqbal regarded this view of self-realization as one-sided: "The intellectual self is only one aspect of the activity of our total self." 

About the author, the official website of the School of Wisdom founded by him tells us: "Count Keyserling is the first Western thinker to conceive of and promote a planetary culture, beyond nationalism and cultural ethnocentrism, based on recognition of the equal value and validity of non-western cultures and philosophies. He founded the School of Wisdom in Darmstadt, Germany in 1920, based on the original Schools of Wisdom which prospered over two thousand years ago in Northern India under Buddhist rule. Unlike other spiritual leaders of the day, he did not set himself up as a guru, or establish any kind of personality cult. Instead, he encouraged the equal participation of many others." (This last proposition has been  questioned in the light of the private assertions of Rabindranath Tagore, one of the chief beneficiaries of the Count's generosity; for instance. see  the paper by Martin Kämpchen in Asiatic).