What is lacking inside...

Dear MM:

A beautiful analysis! After a very long time, something touched the heart. Probably your analytical elements had emotions than only ``heavy words``. Probably there was poetic touch that brought out the ``spiritual discipline`s concept``...Anyway, it was a truly touching piece. I felt the ``gist`` to be very invigorating:-

``What if you were to combine `the forward thinking of Western intellectualism` with `the spiritual discipline of a religious soul`?

To me, that would be philosophy + power. To me, that represents a person that we have all forgotten, especially the young like myself.``

I felt like posting the following, wise sayings of Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Ata` Illah:-

``Do not travel from created being to created being.

Otherwise you will be like the donkey at the mill-stone:

That from which he travels is that to which he travels.

Rather travel from created beings to the Maker of being:

`And the final end is to your Lord.`

Your turning to Allah is your turning away from creation.

Your turning to creation is your turning away from Allah.

Do not keep the company of anyone

Whose state does not inspire you,

And whose speech does not guide you to Allah.

The heart does not benefit by anything like withdrawal

By which it enters the arena of reflection``

Take Care

Z.J

MM:

Mashallah.

Iqbal wrote almost 80 years ago that the renaissance of muslims would commence from the `west`(a term very appropriate then).It is very heartening to see that this has begun.The water shed year seems to be 1979,the year another dream of the great Iqbal was realised;the creation of modern Iran.

Zahra:#1

Yours being the first post on the board speaks something to me too.I enjoyed the `quotation` by you.

Please check out the Omarphoenix board for a `quotation` by me too and tell me what you think of it.

This would be an interesting one.Please no more `titles`.



wassalaam.

``What if you were to combine `the forward thinking of Western intellectualism` with `the spiritual discipline of a religious soul`?

To me, that would be philosophy + power.``

Now that was well said.

And philosophy + power would mean `Religion`.

The history of religion is coterminous with the history of mankind.What we,the younger generation, should do is to look into the philosophy of our religion.The word `Philosophy` being derived from the Greek words `philos`(love of) and `sophia`(wisdom).Pythagoras was the first to use this term.He was also the one to have noted that men could be divided into three types:

1.those who loved pleasure.

2.those who loved activity.

3.those who loved wisdom.

We should take it upon us to decide which type are we from and then infuse spiritualism into our soul and spirit.Spiritualism being a term with both philosophical and religious associations.Philosophically,the term is sometimes used as a synonym of idealism.Religiously,it refers to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

In my opinion we need a bit of both.

always,

TAM.

Dear MM

Thank you for an excellent article, which conveys not only your thoughts and emotions but equally, mine. Education, both Islamic and worldly is the way forward. I`m happy to see a lot of young Muslims beginning to think on this line, as opposed to the majority of the older people who think that education is opening a book, or getting a degree and then working 9-5.

Muslims, today have lost enterprise and education in my opinion is the `tool` which is finally going to spawn a new generation of Muslim leaders as opposed to followers. I regularly go to one of these Mosque discussions where the lecturers primarily discuss the birth of a Khalifat and the implementation of Sharia laws. I have always argued that before any `binding,` people should first be made `receptive` to the Sharia laws, otherwise a few one of us will abuse it`s power.

What we need now are (amongst many):

1)Free compulsory education until the age of 15

2)Arabic language to be made compulsory from an early age (non Arabic countries).

3)Arabic and English courses to be made free for everyone.

4)Institutions should be created where incentives are provided for studying both Islamic studies and a course of your own choice as a whole package.

5)Complete restructuring of compulsory education so that young students will `understand` and not memorise.

6)Greater incentives for teachers.

7)Media control, i.e. television/ radio to be used effectively as opposed to just the complete works of Mr. Sultan Rahi.

What we need are a whole new generation of engineers of tomorrow, scholars who are experts in Islamic studies and also a field/s of their own choice. Only when these pioneers begin working together, will Islam resurrect itself once again.

I look forward to the days when the governments will comprise of scholars, academics and humanitarians, not businessmen and merchants.

Take care and best wishes.

Omar Phoenix

Dear Farngi_Kush, #2

Hey guess what, 1979 was a great year for one more reason.....

I WAS BORN.

Ha Ha ha

Take care of yourself

Omar Phoenix

The concept of God is different for each individual. It has changed tremendously in the last 3000 years. The attributes of God have been chaging according to the needs and evolving secular knowledge. Thanks to the long period of empires building and colonization by the Christian and Muslim people, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God is believed by roughly 60 perent of the world population. After passing through the dark ages of Christianity and Islam, when religion with power was sheer tyranny, and the scientific revolution required a reinterpretation of the old concepts. During this tyrannical period, religion and God were independent variables (X-axis) and every kind of human endeavor (Y-axis) have to comply with the official interpretation of the religion. Now in modern times, the roles have reversed. As we have seen in several of the Chowk articles and interacts, science has become the independent variable and attempts are being made to prove the existence of God through scientific knowledge. Such attempts in itself are marked degradation of the earlier concepts about God. With science sitting comfortably on the X-axis, the image of God on the Y-axis is constantly varied to comply with the X-axis data.

In the newer versions, God is more personal and internalized. He no longer acts as realtor who used to distribute lands of the Middle East. He is now love, compassion and tranquilty and does not demand various tribal rituals of the past. The proponents of such ideas have effectively delinked God from religions.

In the case of Muslims, the situation is paradoxical. While Allah is the ultimate force in the universe (or on earth), the dominant discourse is religion (shari`a and fiqah, etc.). Except for discussions here and there, the Sufis and like, it is mostly Islamic way of this and that without realizing that not everybody is ready to dump his/ her knowlegde and heritage for the sake of total submission and Arabic traditions. It is the limitation of understanding and knowlegde which forbids one from finding inner self and happiness in the prescribed regimen of more than 1000 years ago.

Acquiring knowledge also mean acquiring up-to-date knowledge. There is no justification to consider past information better than the current level of understanding, save revelations by few chosen individuals. If the interpretation of certain revelations do not fit with an intelligent individual`s level of knowledge and understanding, it must be reinterpreted or ignored.

If the author has found happiness and satisfaction in his understanding of God and Islam--it is good. At the same time it is very personal and subjective. Many others may be equally happy and content with their own interpretation of God--with or without religion--through wahdat-ul-wajood or wahdat-ul-shahood.

MM

I could find very little do disagree with.......you have put a lot of my feelings into words,probably more effectively than I ever could.

I envy the fact that you are a muslim by faith,having decided for yourself, I unfortunately am what I am because I was born into it.

``It needs to be re-defined by young people who actually give a damn about the world, not just themselves.``

Very true, but easier said, whose definition to accept and if everyone redefines for themselves can we be benevolent enough to accept them all and be tolerant enough to live and let live or is that really not in the realms of Islam.

One of the facts that has always fasinated me is God`s promise that there could never be any change in the script of the Quran...and surely over the centuries there hasnt been ...any Quran from any corner of the world will be the same...an awesome feat,....but the irony of it is that though the script is identical its ambiguity has created so many interpretations that it really defeats the purpose. I was discussing this with a friend when he pointed out that maybe that really is the beauty of it.If Islam is the complete religion for all ages and all generations to come then it would be unrealistic to assume that hard and fast laws set down in black and white some 1400 years ago would hold true even today and 1000s of years from now.

As far as I know Islam was not just a religion it was a way of life, now it mostly resides in fancy embroidered cloth on a high shelf. Despite what some ppl have said on chowk (that we just critisize islam etc) I think it the opposite we don`t criticize enough, critisize in a way to analyze. People like the author describes as being in the gray zone (myself included) are really Islamophobic,we dont want to talk about it.The reason being mostly we do not know enough and secondly it is taboo. Our hesitency to apply rationality to revelation, lest it should change some old deep rooted belief, really disappoints me.

Eventhough Allah ordained that He had completed religion for mankind in the form of Islam it still has to evolve, evolve with mankind. Till then it will only breed the madrassah trained mullah who is a literalist to the bone or the cynic who really could not deal with the distortion of religion and decided to denounce it all,never really looking for a middle ground of his/her own.

Nushmia

It`s always interesting to note how, when the Muslim or Christian seeks deeper (non-rational) meaning of life, his/her seacrh is expressed in the totally rational question `Is there ``A`` God?`. Equally interesting is how the born-agains end up with ``A`` God that bears an uncanny resemblance to their father, or to the deity drummed into their consciousness when on their mother`s knee.

Another frequent concomitant of the born-again experience is the `knowledge` that those on the `other side` are subject to the same beliefs, doubts and experiences as oneself, and that their skepticism is nothing but ``egotisitical reasoning`` and nihilistic cynicism. (Also, c/f list of reasons for non-belief in article)

To be sure, the author does use qualifying adjectives (``some``, ``most`` etc.) for `unbelievers`, and there is a lot of substance in her reasoning, but the overriding theme of the piece seems to be that salvation lies in submitting to the God of (a Western) religion.

What about religious traditions that have no (single) God? Is the truly religious experience accessible only to those of the Western Religions (by which I mean Judaism, Christianity and Islam)?

I believe the author is speaking from `authentic` experience. I think her(?) heart is in the right place, is `in touch` with that ineffable reality, call it what you might. But there is a right place for the mind too and, despite the call for wedding `Western intellectualism` with the religious sentiment, the author`s seems to be getting ahead of itself n places.

What is `forward looking Western intellectualism` anyway? And is it at all compatible with the religious spirit? Why this improbable dualism? (And why did F_K not tear it to pieces?) :-)

Philosophy, in its proper sense, IS power, and provided nourishment for the rational AND religious sentiments in all civilizations-- with or without (a) god(s). I`m not too sure that the `forward thinking Western intellectualism` has much to do with philosophy, except in relation to Logic. ``Western`` intellectualism fought the battle against irrational and oppressive dogma, and provides us with wonderful toys today, but don`t expect it to inform the soul anymore. IMHO, we need simple rationality & common sense without atrophying that sense of wonder, and of objective morality. (And please, spare us pathetic existentialist poetry, even if it`s from Iqbal)

Yes, it`s true our is the first age in which God, and even the experience to which the concept points, is non-existent to many, but part of the reason is that the wrong questions are being asked, the wrong premisses are supporting religion. In stead of ``Do you believe in God?``, shouldn`t the `heart of the matter` be ``Do you experience a deeper/greater power/purpose?``

The `ineffable Reality` shouldn`t need our believing (which is of the intellect), just our experiencing. We`d do well to look eastward if seraching for answers. East of Pakistan, that is. And even of India.

regards,

PM

A thought provoking article. It (and the replies) made me think of some stuff i`d forgotten, so I thought I`d add my 2cents.

The quote from Zahra #1: ``Do not keep the company of anyone/Whose state does not inspire you,`` made me think of how the author mentioned being in a grey zone, and hypothetically chosing between Gandhi and Lord Byron. Both have merit, but you pick to be like the person whose life is more inspiring. Like the friends you pick in everyday life, who reflect you. People will pick differently, of course.

Regarding choosing, what I find interesting is the description of the author as ``a Muslim by faith, having decided for herself.`` It`s funny how some people like myself (in the grey zone) take being Muslim as a birthright, almost like being born Spanish. NZK #7 described it as ``not just a religion, but a way of life``. Being `muslim` might actually mean the adoption of a certain perspective or mental attitude which is in a constant state of flux, even during the course of the day! Maybe we are getting trapped by the same thought process as the American Jews, many of whom now see Judaism as a distinct culture or history of their people, rather than, a ``way of life``. In contrast, Islam can foster a certain culture, but it`s not a culture in itself.

NZK #7 also talks about the miracle of the Koran. A friend of mine once tried to address this to me. Part of the miracle is that people of differing backgrounds can each read it and get something out of it appropriate to their individual level of understanding. Assuming a certain level of basic agreement, each personal view is fine, and speaks towards Islam`s flexibility, not ambiguity (if treated properly). So the book speaks to the breadth of humanity. He also felt that though the words/message are constant, the significance can often vary based on the person reading it--there are layers of deeper and deeper meaning, that can change slightly in color depending on the reader`s mood at that moment. The same words, like a prism, can refract light (truth) differently into a spectrum of colors which we can individually examine. The meaning can ``evolve`` for the same person too, as he/she becomes older and more understanding without a real change in the inherent words. (Like a poem, that gets better the more you read it, or a song that now makes sense since `it` has happened to you). The miracle is that the Koran is constantly explaining our psychological state of affairs, explaining the nature of man, predicting how man reacts in certain situations. So, is it really the Koran/islam that is evolving, or the person reading it?? Is it God that`s changing, or our esteem of /relationship to God that changes over time?

SameerJB referred to the ``evolution`` of God. I don`t know if God has become the dependent variable now with Science (a conceptual idol?) as the new yardstick. I think modern muslims have accidentally carried over Judeo-christian-agnostic concepts of God into our religion (through our modern education), and we are having a tough time dissecting what`s what. Which causes some of us to reject ``god``, without realizing that the God of the Koran is cast in a different light than the Torah and Bible. [One quick example of differing concepts is that in common judeo-christian thought/popular culture, Satan and God are thought of as yin-yang (opposing forces) ala Geogre Burns movies. The Koran is very clear in that Satan is a co-equal creation vying with Man, not Allah--so it`s a different playing field. (A non-Muslim pointed this out to me)]. Also, the 99 names of Allah (eg, the Peace, the Helper) do make God personal and internalized without delinking God from religion per se or making it seem like a ``warm fuzzy feeling``.

I agree with SameerJB`s view that ``acquiring knowledge means acquiring up-to-date knowledge.`` Reminds me of a hadith, saying ``Go unto China to find knowledge.`` The knowledge referred to there was of the scientific/technologic sense, which makes you wonder whether the radical Mullahs reciting duahs only can really understand the whole of religion. So, Western education is good, but it helps to filter the good and bad of it.

At any rate, I feel glad for the author. I privately hope something happens for me.

``Become a servant, that thou mayest be free.``

So Iqbal plagiarized from George Orwell`s 1984 just like a certain someone ripped off of the bible and torah :)

In response to Sameer JB’s post(Post # 6):

Your reply was interesting but I could not clearly understand the meaning of your beginning sentence. I will quote the sentence, “The Concept of God is different for different individuals”.

In my view, the concept of God is “very clear” for the believers. Your sentence is very vague and creates ambiguity. In life, many things can be perceived differently i.e Happiness, Life itself, Contentment, Love, Success, Beauty and everything else. But the concept of God “has” no ambiguities. I may have misunderstood you therefore, I will appreciate a clarification.



In poetry, a poet may play with words to create the mystery, but that is their technique. In Sufism, the writings are deep and message-oriented, but are aware of the concept of Master and Servant.

Your other example from Mathematics was addressing logical perspective and lacked the “Tazkara” of a critical component. This critical component is the central element of a human body. It has a very short and simple name, known as “Heart”. When you talk about beliefs and concept of God that has to arise from the heart and make its way to the brain, harmonizing any misconceptions and conflicts. Somehow I felt that you were bringing forth the concept of logic to support your argument of “The concept of God is different…” than letting the heart play any role.

I do not want to sound paranoid but I was disturbed to read the first statement . My disturbance arose because the idea sounded “alien” to me.

Post # 2:

Please accept my apologies for not liking the pseudonym, Farangi_Kush at all. It sounds strong and conveys a negative message, i.e very aggressive, very fanatical and above all extremist. Now because my mind immediately associates these “Au’saaf” with your name and I do not want to be biased because of that, therefore I will opt for only Farangi Saheb. I hope that will be acceptable.

Coming to the point: Thanks for appreciating the “wise sayings”. I could not find the quote that you have asked me to look into. Please tell me the exact location. I do not browse all the available features on Chowk, so if the quote is ‘taking a nap’ in some other “Kona Khurdara” here, I will never know till you point it out to me.

Take Care

MM - Very nicely written - thanks! I think education and experience empower us and together shape our belief system. Aren`t we a product of society, shaped to its fancy depending on which way the wind blew at that time and place?

Definitely, the Quran needs to be read and redefined. Sadly, second-hand experience is taking precedence and thus, it takes forever to re-educate a brain washed mind. Would it be safe to say the Quran also changes with the times?

Agreed, there should be consistency in our actions! Perhaps, some of us are hesitant to state our religious preference for fear of judgmental statements? Oh yes, dealt with the inner sensibilities years ago and battled the outer forces with my Jedi beam... still doing so!

=zensufi.com=

Zahra (#11): It is true that I hold an opinion about God and religion which is not standardized Islamic version. My opinions are greatly influenced by my admiration of the eastern philosophies.

To me religion is an identity and God is personal. At personal level, the concept of God will be different for different people. God is the collective force of nature/ Universe as understood by my mind. At personal level it is not sufficent to merely believe in God, you must know Him exactlly. To me God is more internal than external because myself as well as all form of matter is part of the original unified force which brought the universe into existence.

It is a matter of the mind to know God; It is a matter of the heart to believe in religion and the God of the religion. It is not to say that God of religion and personal God are two different things; It is to say that the understanding at the mind/ brain level is usually logical and rational whereas it is a blind faith or love at the heart level.

If a person has a blind faith in the prayer for rain, he will go to the prayer happily (heart level); If a person knows for sure that it is gonna rain if he prays, he will carry umbrella with him to the prayer (mind level).

This is the point I have repeatedly made in my several posts that since religion is an affair of the heart, a blind faith, then religion and state are seperate things.

I am not familiar with Tazkara. If you like to elaborate it or like to extend this discussion further, I will be glad to interact.

P.S. I am lately reading Deepak Chopra`s recent book, titled ``How To Know God``. He has some intresting discussions.

Sameer JB:

I read the following lines, a few times and disagree with the portrayed picture (heart level). Then, if you are a person who functions on (brain level), you’ll have hard time synthesizing the events taking place at (heart level).

“If a person has a blind faith in the prayer for rain, he will go to the prayer happily (heart level); if a person knows for sure that it is gonna rain if he prays, he will carry umbrella with him to the prayer (mind level).”

I have not read your posts before, therefore cannot comment on the views expressed in them.



Regarding the following statement: -

“To me God is more internal than external because myself as well as all form of matter is part of the original unified force which brought the universe into existence.”

- Are you associated in any way with Physics?

- Define internal and external concepts, in the above statement’s context?

Besides the above questions, I will appreciate if you assist me in understanding a little deeply without being “vague” the “mind level” approach towards the following “heart level” case :-

It was a dry hot summer day. A group planned to get together to offer the prayer for rain. They offered the prayer and then dispersed. (Now, they were never under the assumption that as soon as they finished their prayers, it will rain. Their intent was to ask God whole-heartedly to help them.) To their utter dismay, it did not rain. They decided to reorganize their session and go with more passion and humility. To their despair, it did not rain even after the second time. They went home and did not let it go. As a result, they waited and waited. All in vain!

The third time they decided to have a plan of action. The plan was to stay focused (Khushoo-Khuzo-o) and request, going to the level where the ego disappeared and the remainder was a helpless creature, looking up for assistance. And, this time after they finished praying and were about to head home, there was Grhhhhhhhhhhhhh….. thunder and lightning. And then, in no time, it just rained and rained and kept on raining for hours. They were intelligent individuals, so they just took out the umbrellas from the back of their car and thanked God. Their going to a certain level of depth and focus in their prayers never meant that they were ill-prepared.



I have heard some of Deepak Chopra’s books on audio. Besides him, I have heard quite a few on their perceptions and interpretations on mind, soul, spiritualism and etc. It is fine to listen to their perspectives but there is a lack of authenticity. Somehow, I am not a Deepak Chopra fan. I just have his quotes on few pages of my planner but they were already printed there and I did not have any option.

I suggest something more authentic than Deepak Chopra, try finding a book, “62 discourses of Abdul Qadir Jilani” . Just to forewarn you, it is not an easy read. You’ll have to re-think before you plan on proceeding to the next sentence.

Take Care

Sameer JB (Response Part II):-

By Taz`kara(An Urdu Word, I will stay away from the origin and other philosophies behind it, for now)I meant, ``Mention``.

I feel that people with the ``mind level approach`` are either unaware or are hesitant to accept that the ``heart level component`` does not need to be evoked in any way or shape. It is naturally there. They have to bring up the mention of ``logic and rationality`` to draw a clear cut line defining the boundaries between the heart and mind. Please do try to contemplate, do you have an option to go with one or the other ?

In my second post, I referred to `heart` as the initiator of belief and travelling towards, the human intricate machine - `mind` to create the balance. I did not say that it can survive on its own. Correct me if I am assuming that you are trying to build a world of belief based on `mind alone` ?

Now I feel guilty of bringing up too many questions, but can`t help as you thoughts were the initiating force :-)

A Correction:

The book`s name is `` The Sublime Revelation`` and there are 62 discourses explained. You can checkout the following site also: http://www.islam.co.za/abdalqadirjilani/