|
|
|
"Undeniable
Truth " Book By Hashim Qureshi" |
INTRODUCTION
Unprecedented changes have occurred in the world
during past three decades. These are prominently
visible in international relations, geo-
political strategies and social configuration.
Great leaps forward in technological and
scientific advancement has abridged distances,
shrunk time, and opened marvelous opportunities
of economic progress; the quality of life is
immensely improved. While developing countries
had to re-fashion their socio-economic
structures to accommodate and even absorb
imperatives of rapid development,
technologically advanced countries with strong
economic thrust much faster innovative options
on them. As a result, developing societies are
feeling the pressure of transition to
ultra-modernism. In such a prospect many
irritants are likely to surface. In particular,
there is growing demand for social justice and
economic parity.
It is curious that economic progress and
economic deprivation, though contradictory in
essence, have both contributed to the activation
of dormant as well as wakeful social aspirations
among underprivileged segments of developing
societies. Recognition of identity is an urge
and an aspiration.
The most eloquent expression of this phenomenon
is to be understood in the Islamic revolution of
Iran under theocratic dispensation in 1979.
Commentators are still debating why of all the
countries Iran should have chosen to go
theocratic when she had come so close to the
fringe of modernism. We should not forget that
Iran’s urge for recognition of her identity was
articulated, albeit unsuccessfully, way back in
1950s. Did not that failure suggest that Iranian
civil society recognized national identity not
necessarily conditional to modernism? It was
clear that Iran would look for new and effective
options to realize her urge for identity? And
the option was seized even if it came belatedly
and perhaps erratically in a sense ---- after
nearly four decades.
Soviet Union’s incursion of Afghanistan was a
foolhardy act of a totalitarian regime
undertaken at a very wrong time. As Iranian
revolution progressed, Islamic world looked at
it with a mixture of anxiety and an air of
expectancy. In their thinking Islam was pitted
against the greatest power on earth. Evidently,
Soviet recklessness in Afghanistan could not
have produced consequences other than what it
did. It boosted Islamic orthodoxy and it
facilitated casual camaraderie between extremist
religious forces and powerful western democracy.
The Soviet Union had to pay a heavy price; it
broke.
The urge for recognition of identity among the
Muslim world has become almost contagious. Some
commentators try to dig into the history of
western colonialism to look for the causes of
Muslim resurgence. Today the US and her allies
witness with anxiety the harsh consequences of a
movement in whose resurgence they had a pivotal
role. Those whom they once proudly called
mujahedeen are now patently “terrorists” and
“Theo-fascists”. People are divided, societies
are divided and countries are divided on the
basics of this phenomenon and the ways of
tackling it.
Muslims and Islam are at the centre of this
phenomenon. But notwithstanding Iran’s show of
determination, the difference in the resurgence
of Islam in Iran on the one hand and in
Afghanistan-Pakistan on the other is vital. In
Iran, popular Islam rose against theist American
imperialism whereas in Afghanistan-Pakistan,
political Islamic revival emerged out of
opposition to atheist Russian imperialism. As we
see, the Muslim world stands divided between
supporters and opponents of western imperialism.
To put it crudely, one may say that imperialism
became an instrument of causing polarization of
Islamic communities.
This divide has run into Muslim polity in
another form --- revivalists and reformists.
Curiously, the divide exists despite the proviso
of ijtihad or re-interpretation of Qur’an and
tradition. However, the divide is not of recent
history; it has been there since the days of
Caliphate. Exploiters count on this yawning
chasm.
In no other religion do we find a fiercer
controversy like “true” and “counterfeit”
Muslims. Both aspects are variously interpreted.
Essentially, the approach is of attaching purely
ecclesiastical connotation in one case and
economic, social and cultural parameters of
assessment to the other.
How and why did this debate rise in Muslim
scholastic circles? A very vital issue of
far-reaching consequences was raised by
the great Muslim historian-scholar Ibn Khaldun
in late 13th century in Baghdad. Known as father
of the science of Philosophy of History, he said
that Arabs had conquered and Islamized a vast
part of Asia where established societies with
splendid civilizations existed prior to the
advent of Arabs and the faith brought by their
Prophet. A day would come, he asserted, when
Muslims will have to consider how to adapt
Islamic teachings, traditions and ways of life
too many healthy and pragmatic ocio-cultural
trends of the conquered people. Ibn Khaldun was
a profound scholar of social history and a
visionary, who shuddered at the thought of
Muslims, not willing to come out of their
cocoon, and bask in the prospective synchronized
civilizations that would inevitably take shape
in Islamic empires, kingdoms and satrapies.
In all probability, Ibn Khaldun took the cue
from Isma’eli thinkers and outstanding
philosophers of the 10-11th century A.D. who
attached supreme importance to logic as the
instrument for arriving at the truth. Foremost
among these great Islamic intellectuals was Abu
Ali ibn Sina (Avecinna), the
philosopher-physician from Turkistan, and the
celebrated author of al-Shifa and al-Qanun. His
al-Shifa is part of the syllabus of medical
studies at Sorbonne University of France today.
Ibn Sina debated the truth of even the most
sensitive subjects like the prophet-hood, the
divine message; the revealed book etc,. which he
said could be brought out through inductive and
deductive process. This revolutionary idea
indirectly challenged the entrenched attitude of
blind faith. Ibn Sina initiated the great debate
on the subject of belief and reason, which has
seized the mind of the Muslims ever since. This
takes us a couple of centuries back in Islamic
history, and we mean the days of the Abbasid
Caliphate. (7/8th century A.D). In the days of
Haroon ar-Rashid, a bureau called baitu’l-hikmat
(meaning the House
of Knowledge) was established in Baghdad.
Actually it was a bureau where the works of
great Greek masters like Plato, Socrates,
Aristotle, Galen, Hippocrates and others were
translated from Greek into Arabic. Great
scholars not only Muslims but of different
faiths, too, particularly the Jewish and
Zoroastrian, who were polyglots, assembled at
the bureau to make their contributions. Mansoor
ar-Rashid ordered that remuneration for each
great work translated into Arabic would be gold
equal to its weight. This priceless fund of
knowledge passed on to the Roman Empire, and
later on, got disseminated to various European
societies. Renaissance of mid - 16th century in
Europe was a sequel to this transfer of
scientific fund of knowledge.
On that basis, ultimately came up the powerful
and magnificent structure called modern European
or western civilization.
The crux of this unique service of the Muslims
to human civilization was to establish fecundity
of the faculty of reason and rationality in
comparison to blind faith. Ibn Sina tells us
that he had access to this great fund of
knowledge at the library in Khwarazm, and he
rummaged box after box of manuscripts to drink
deep from the works of great masters.
In centuries that followed, Muslim scholars of
eminence took up the challenging task of
interpreting the thoughts of great Greek masters
now available to them in their own language. At
Alexandria (Iskandariyah) in Egypt, scholars
engaged themselves in mighty debates on basic
issues touched upon by the masters. It was here
that differences of opinion on various issues
surfaced among Islamic scholars, theologians and
liberals. This phenomenon was not too
surprising. Controversy on crucial issues had
raged for a long time till Ibn Sina pronounced
the historic judgment. He said that there was no
controversy over the thoughts of Aristotle and
Plato; the problem was with the interpreters who
interpreted according to their understanding.
Reverting to the theme of logic versus blind
faith, the logjam that gripped Muslim society in
early Middle Ages (11 – 14 century A.D.), the
rise of dominant satraps in Khurasan (11-12th
century A.D.) --- the semi - autonomous but
crucially important
eastern province of the Caliphate --- and their
support to and dependence on feudal structure of
society came as a shot in the arm of Islamic
orthodoxy. Thinkers following Greek school of
thought, or the logicians (istadlaliyun) became
the target of the wrath of traditionalists, the
upholders of the ideology of blind faith (muttakallimun).
Ghazali, the traditionalist, wrote
Tahafatu’l-Filasafa in which he strongly
underrated those who called logic the mother of
all sciences. Thus from 12th century A.D.
onwards, feudalism and orthodoxy became
complementary to each other establishing
inseparability of religion and politics for the
inheritors of Caliphate. This marked the
beginning of the decline of the age of reason in
Islamic societies; belief and tradition arched
over the institutions of Islamic state.
Industrial Revolution in Europe towards the
second half of the 17th century gradually
reduced the power of the church. With
that, rational argument that had been almost
banished from the Islamic world, found a fertile
ground to flourish in European societies with
new and fascinating dimensions. Martin Luther’s
reformative agenda had opened great vistas that
strengthened the position of the age of reason.
Alas, neither an industrial revolution of sorts
nor a thinker of Martin Luther’s vision was
thrown up by the Muslim society for many
centuries to come. The fund of science and
knowledge, which Muslims so painstakingly
brought into limelight, illuminated the houses
of others while Muslims relapsed into darkness.
With each passing century, the gap between the
two grew wider. No wonder, therefore, that 21st
century, a high watermark of socio-
economic development in Western societies, is
seen as potent threat to cynical disregard of
creative faculty of the best of God’s creation (ashrafu’l-makhluqat).
Man’s absolute surrender to the Supreme came in
clash with his innovative and creative
potential. Alama Iqbal subtly alluded to this
fundamental contradiction:
Main khatakta hun dil-e yazdan main kante ki
tarah
Tu faqat Allah hoo Allah hoo Allah hoo
It means that introspective minds within the
Islamic fold did recognize the role of human
intellect and reason in the process of social
evolution. But their circumspection is a
baffling question that has been dogging the
Muslim community.
However, the proposition has another vital
dimension. Quite understandably, in a society
steeped in unending controversy over predestined
and freewill (jabr wa qadr), acceptance of
western view that leaves the future of mankind
to the interplay of forces of intellect, is
almost outlandish. In their view it is
tantamount to questioning the omnipotence of the
Supreme Being: it undermines the entire
structure on which Islamic concept of
relationship between Man and his Creator rests.
For western existentialists reason remains a
prescription for ascent to higher levels of
temporal life. For them, each passing century
proved the veracity of logic being the mother of
all sciences. Great scientific discoveries that
followed Industrial Revolution of A.D. 1688 in
England established the fact that science and
technology were the arbiters of the destiny of
mankind. While veering to this inference,
western societies left the divine and divinity
either to benign negligence or to the dreaming
Easterners.
But to the Muslims, ultimate power rests with
Allah and the ultimate arbiter of destinies is
Allah. Therefore in Islamic culture, the source
of a victory and an achievement is Allah.
Absolute surrender to Allah is one of the basic
tenets of Islamic teaching. He is the arbiter
(jabber wa qahhar). This then is one of the
basic hindrances in Islam’s interaction with the
western world and its ideological tributaries.
But the struggle is not necessarily between
technology savvy west and tradition dominated
Islam. Apart from this dilemma, a major part of
the struggle lies within the broad Islamic fold
itself. It is the revival of the long drawn
struggle between the istadlaliyun and
muttakallimun of 12th century in its new avatar
of “pure” and “counterfeit” Islam. Taliban and
Al-Qaeda is also the product of same thinking.
They are spokesperson of orthodox Islam. Thus
entire Islamic polity has become a victim of
dissensions, strife and differences.
Ordinarily, no external player is either
interested in or qualified to settle this
domestic dispute of the ummah. Awakening has to
come from within. It is important to realize
that overt or covert role of an external entity
is only for its self-aggrandizement. It is for
the Muslim leadership of contemporary times to
lead the community out of the labyrinth of
conflicting convictions and debilitating
contradictions. The question of settling score
with the West will recede once internal conflict
is set at rest, and a cosmopolitan system of
‘Islam at work with other civilizations is
produced. It should be possible to evolve a
viable formula of reconciling to the imperatives
of contemporary scientific age without eroding
pristine principles of faith. It is also equally
important to come out of the cocoon of a
fossilized mindset, and give new direction,
vitality and animation to the process of
socialization.
|
|
|
|
shall have to do more than
mere words to bring back dignity honor to our land.
peace should not be a means to continue the present
impasse, it must be worked out in with the political
aspirations of Kashmiri People. The sooner this is
realized, the better for all of us."