Remembering Allama Iqbal

What is the definition of ummah? I thought it meant same thing as Mullah.

#64 by kaalchakra

[No Jihadi writer or thinker can fail to pay the man proper tribute.]

Kaal, I would not go so far as saying that this writer promotes the Jihadi line of thinking as currently understood by the non-Muslim world (the Muslim world is less clear-cut in its understanding of the term) – perhaps she is a simply misguided soul brought up on a staple diet of that green brew in its mildest form – which only puts the slightest of green tints on all that it sees!

Perhaps a classical case of “saawan ka andhaa” – for whom the world freezes permanently in its glorious green color – all other colors that constitute stark reality can go to the trash can!

I suppose one can be kind to this writer and say that it is one thing to attempt to cover stuff up by being wishy-washy as distinct from a clear acknowledgment of an inherent desire to pick up guns for the “cause”. (Yes, the latter has been done here on chowk, too – and by far higher profile individuals than no-namers of this writer’s variety!)

You see, as in every walk of life – it is a lot easier to promote the most outrageous of thoughts – as long as SOMEBODY ELSE has to pay the price. (I wonder if such writers have to worry about trivial, mundane tasks – like paying own bills.)

That went for Jinnah and that went for Iqbal!

Politicians who practice such fine craft are called demagogues. I do not know what the term for writers is. Perhaps there ought to be one.

For now, I am tempted to call them “chowk writers” but that would be unfair to a FEW writers.

#65 by Inquirer

[What is the definition of ummah? I thought it meant same thing as Mullah.]

It is perhaps more akin to “moolah”!

``Na Baat Kahoon main ab ki
Na baast kahoon main tab ki
Agar Na hotay Guru Gobind Singh
Tau Sunat hoti Sab ki``

Iqbal

#63 jang

100% agree with you. Like Sarvarkar, Iqbal`s later outputs combine religious exceptionalism and fanaticism with vague universal statements. The overall result is to suggest that islamofascism has something to do with universal human rights or some such crazy belief.

As I suggested in message #3 the violent conversion of Iqbal`s grandfather to islam is deeply relevant here. This type of cultural violence either results in excessive identification with the oppressor (Stockholm Syndrome) or in rejection. I think it is clear the direction Iqbal took.

I found this post..........about Iqbal and Tagore on APNA

``.......Dr. Iqbal protested in a letter to him that he wrote his poetry in Farsi and Urdu because his mother tongue was not fully developed. Tegore Ji replied to Dr. Iqbal, ``Mine was not either but helped it to develop``............

Re: # 69by pmishra2 on April 13, 2006 8:23am PT

If any neutral person struggling to understand the ongoing conflict b/w
Islam and rest of the world, one needs to only visit this board.

The guy may be a good poet, he used words referring to tall
ideals for people practicing one religion, and then proposed that these
converted people should form a separate country.

A person living in muticultural, secular Canada (probably a Canadian citizen!)
is full of praise and uses lofty words glorifying the guy. Hello! One is awaiting
the birth of Iqbal in Ontorio
one can expect the birth of independence struggle for beautiful, humanistic,
Puki-Canadistan.

Re: # 58
When we talk about mindsets and philosophies, we cannot ignore the fact that many of these poets and thinkers had their own influences. A lot of them wrote and said, what they thought was right based on their own observations and views. Hopefully, the future generations will pick from Iqbal`s poetry what is applicable to them and ignore what they do not subscribe to. I wrote something on what I did not like in his poetry. The more I thought about it, the more I felt that it was unfair to compare his verses from early 1900s to the current issues of Ummah. So, I killed that passage. I must say that your conclusion lacks proper evidence. Sometimes, you need to appreciate a poetical expression as it is. You do not have to interpret things literally.

I found an interesting passage on Iqbal`s thought process -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allama_Iqbal
[Iqbal`s Thought

Amongst Western thinkers, Iqbal was deeply impressed by Friedrich Nietzsche. Some people have criticised him for endorsing Nietzsche`s concept of the Übermensch (superman), which is reflected in Iqbal`s own concept of ``the perfect man``. However, Iqbal asserted that his concept of the perfect man is influenced by Jami and Rumi. Bergson`s ideas regarding time also influenced Iqbal. He wrote Payam-i-Mashriq (The Message of the East) as a reply to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe`s West-östlicher Diwan. Amongst Eastern thinkers, Iqbal was influenced by Rumi, whom he called his spiritual guide. Iqbal also admired Mirza Ghalib`s poetic style.

Iqbal is one of the foremost modern Muslim philosophers. Major themes in his philosophy include creating an effective response to the intellectual challenge of the West, the revival of intellectual discourse in the Islamic world, and the concept of Khudi or selfness.]


Note: Did you really mean to highlight the gender of ``Aql`` in the second line?

re:this article and Allama Iqbal
Author seems to glorify a poet who probably wrecked the hindu-muslim unity than anyone else and sowed the seed of discord between the 2 communities. He epitomised the Islamic belief that the concept of ummah transcends the concept of nationhood in the minds of muslims. If an average hindu in India today views an IM with suscpicion, it is because he suspects that the IM has more loyalty to the ummah than to the nation itself. The seeds of such doubts were sown by Iqbal himself.
Iqbal was the quintessential pan-islamist, if there was one. Like Jinnah, he got his Law degree from London and was impressed by the vitality of Europe but he also saw crass materialism that he saw would not be suitable for muslims. He was not secular like Jinnah but saw a multireligious society as an ideal that was difficult to achieve in India (he was so wrong!). His pan-islamism, love of his religion took him on a different path, a path that was followed by Jinnah after his death.
Iqbal started his life as a poet with ideals of hindu-muslim unity and yearned for a nation where the 2 communities could live in peace. His poems taraana-e-hindi and naya shivalay were such prayers. Soon he went on a different path, much like jinnah. Why?
Farzana bibi should have dissected that aspect of Iqbal`s psyche that was in constant state of turmoil. He was never sure what he was. One part of him loved India enough to pen the now famous ``tarana-e-hindi`` (``The song of India`` now immortalized in movies and sung by such legends as Rafi, Lata, Asha) while another part rebelled against India and Indians (hindus in particular) so much so that, in a strongly worded poem, he warns the majority community of an impending doom that will destroy India (or Hindustan as he called it) unless hindus changed their ways (he thought hindus were very arrogant).

There must have been this dichotomy in his mind, much like in the mind of Jinnah. Author would have done well to explore that aspect of the author.
Instead, Farzana chose to just eulogise Iqbal.
Allma Iqbal had many failings. He considered Rabindernath Tagore as his literary rival. The seeds of rivalry were sown even before partition. Muslims prided themselves for being physically superior and took pride in taking part in sports (hockey, wrestling being the main sport). When Tagore was awarded the Nobel prize, IMs felt betrayed that the same was not given to Iqbal. This must have rankled in Iqbal`s mind too.
As this article tells us, Iqbal was not your posterboy for secularism.
(Chaghtai (author of a book) tells us on the authority of Sir Abdul Qadir that Iqbal’s friends “persuaded him to follow Tagore for getting the Award, but it was not easy to convince him.” But it is also true, as Chaghtai tells us, that “Tagore’s Award had been hovering on his mind throughout his life, and he, directly or indirectly, could not free himself of this Award Complex.”

But in case of the title of knighthood, the admirers of Iqbal did not face the kind of frustration they had faced in case of the Nobel Prize. Tagore was honored with a knighthood in 1915. After a few years Iqbal, too, was honored with this title. But Ikram Chaghtai has marked a fine distinction between the attitudes of these two poets in respect of this title. Tagore raised his voice against the Amritsar massacre of 1919 and requested the Viceroy to be relieved of the title. The request was turned down, but he stuck to his request and did not use the title with his name after that. On the other hand, Iqbal, after being honored with a knighthood, never thought of returning it.

Chaghtai tells us that Tagore had managed to establish a center for Islamic research in Shanti Niketan, and that Khalifa Abdul Hakim had played a very important role in the establishment of this center. He had kept Iqbal informed about his role in this respect. A newly-converted Hungarian scholar, Abdul Karim Germanus, was appointed as its first chairman and he had the blessings of Iqbal for that.

Iqbal was happy at the establishment of the center and gave his blessings to Germanus on the occasion of his appointment as chairman of the center. But he was not happy at the enthusiastic reception Tagore got in Iran. Chaghtai has, in this connection, reproduced four letters of Iqbal addressed to the Iranian diplomat, Ghulam Abbas Aram. These letters, which have been dug out recently, speak of the suspicion Iqbal had in relation to Tagore’s visit to Iran.)

That is why, i feel intrigued when IMs (like Farzana bibi) also applaud him. If IMs today are struggling in every aspect in India, Allama Iqbal must be blamed. His poems, while of superb composition and literary merit, did do a lot to alienate the muslims from the hindus, something from which IMs have not yet recovered.
Sridhar

#73 rsridhar

Nice work. While no one is free from prejudice and arrogance, it is really important to expose people who pretend to be otherwise. As you say, this guy is one brilliant dude but follows the familiar pattern of islamo-supremacy and ultimately islamo-fascism.

#68 k-ji

Is that a real quote? Where is it from? Wow, and just the other day I was thinking that without the sikhs (and to some extent marathas) all of North india would have been part of pakistan.

RE:``Major themes in his philosophy include creating an effective response to the intellectual challenge of the West, the revival of intellectual discourse in the Islamic world, and the concept of Khudi or selfness``

...and there is nothing in his poetry as a proper so-called ``response``. West have exclusive copyrights on almost all of the ideas that underlie modernity.

The best thing, i think, Iqbal did is to very articulately and unironically, i must say, define Jihadi dilemma of being losers in this world And at the same time being the chose ones by Allah.

That ``betrayal`` by Allah is very powerfully composed in his poem Shikwa. That could be another way of looking at the underlying causes of Jihadi wrath and (misdirected) anger.

from Shikwa:
KyuN MusalmaNoan main hay Dolat-e-Dunya Naayaab
Teri Qudrat to hay woh jiski Na Hadd-o-Hisaab

Tu Jo Chaahay to Utthay Seena-e-Sehra Se Habaab
Re Ru-e-Dasht Ho Seelee Zad-e-Moj-e-Saraab

Taan-e-Aghyaar Hay, Ruswai Hay, Naadaari Hay
Kya Tere Naam Pe Marnay Ka Ivaz Khuwaari Hay

---

Lyrical beauty is there but that is irrelevant to the content of his work. That would be like one becomes a fan of Nazi Germany after watching visual masterpieces directed by Leni Reifensthal.

re:#63 by jang
Savarkar never wrote poetry so sublime as Iqbal. It is when i read Iqbal and Ghalib (in hindi/english translation) that i wish i had learnt urdu script!
Did not Iqbal say (about Indian civilization) in tarrana-e-hindi:
``Yunan-o-Misr-o-Rome sab mit gaye jahaan sey
ab tak magar hai bakeey, namon-nishaan hamara
Kuch baat hai ki hasti mitthey nahin hararee
Sadiyon raha hai dushman daur-e-zaman hamara``
(The civilizations of Greece, Rome and Egypt are destroyed
But out civilization is still intact
There is something in us that refuses to die
For centuries, the world has been our enemy)
After pennies these beautiful verses, why did he become a pan-islamist?
Truly, mind is a battlefield whose mysteries are unfathomable.
Sridhar

re: Iqbal`s poetry
Can someone please post a link to his poems in English/hindi transliteration?
Sridhar

re:#69 by pmishra2
There is also something about Iqbal`s brother being wrongly implicated in a case. Did he think hindus were somehow conspiring against him and his religion? I think the judge dealing with the case was a hindu (even in British India, Indians rose to that position by early 20th century it seems).
Anyway, there is something that is deeply personal about him that made him go from a nationalist to pan-islamist.
Sridhar

bjkumar

Good points there. On my part, there isn`t much to add, except the following:

Actions are practical expressions of a range of ideas, probably hierarchical in scope and in motive power, distributed within the body of a community. The obscene acts of some Tantriks killing children, for instance, are partly connected to many otherwise beautiful concepts within Hinduism.

Iqbal constructed his jihad at the highest ideological plane, hence his most exalted status in the community of Jihadi philosophers.

In future his status may shift depending upon whether Jihad turns out to be a central tenet of Islam or not.

Thanks for reading. Time to keep my peace :)

Also, Iqbal`s vision of a state for the muslims of northwestern India was not achieved in 1947. It was worked out finally by the next generation in 1971. Geography of today`s pakistan seems closer to what Iqbal had in mind when he gave that famous Allahabad Address.