Free Thought is Key to Progress

``Thought`` per se is always free; problems arise when voiced if they are not in accordance with the prevalent views.
``Belief`` can only be belief if arrived at after careful thought; and for ``careful`` thought, it is necessary to be allowed to think whatever seems logical to one.
``Blind Faith`` is just that...blind...but it is this blind faith that is eulogized by most ulema. I ``Believe`` and i think that is much more precious than accepting anything and everything i have been told to believe when it didnt make sense to me. God has given us a brain for a purpose, but unfortunately most have put it away and thrown away the key...;)

#63, ballukhan:
Thanks.

``I have regard for Sufi saints but I find it hard to follow religious logic.``

Sorry, I believe that religious experiences do not show any logical relationship with the ordinary experiences- that is what transcendence is about.
I do not think with words when I experinece these emotions- in fact the words cannot capture them and that is why they are so dificult to communicate- the person has to experinece these emotions in person in order to appreciate the religion I am talking about. With the sufi way you do not need to memorize ayats or ponder over any words because the experience itself is sufficient to make you ``understand``(intuit) the true import of religion.
With the experience you become in true ``peace`` with everyone on this universe. It is thousand times better than the peace that you experience after an orgasm.

#58, Ballukhan:
Thanks for the response. I found out from your other postings that you are Sufi. So you do not follow the traditional Islamic thoughts of Shia and Sunni. I have regard for Sufi saints but I find it hard to follow religious logic. This remark is not restricted to Sufiism. The religious proponents of all persuasion have this problem. They all need to take a leaf from scientific logic and utilize its power if they are going to establish an interface with modern world.

I wish you had responded straightforwardly to my statements in #52.

I was very pleased to read this piece because it focuses on a wider question of critical thinking, which is essential to the practice of science including the science of society.

By holding unexamined ideas, conceptions and perspectives we lack the critical ability to compare and contrast them. In all our exchanges with others, whether personal and intimate or political or economic we are relying on our view of the world. A world view. If that world view is limited we will have limited and dangerously uniformed views. If that world view is open, critical and constructive, we will be able to make a contribution to our own lives and the lives of others.
Thanks for the article.
ussa

I was very pleased to read this piece because it focuses on a wider question of critical thinking, which is essential to the practice of science including the science of society.

By holding unexamined ideas, conceptions and perspectives we lack the critical ability to compare and contrast them. In all our exchanges with others, whether personal and intimate or political or economic we are relying on our view of the world. A world view. If that world view is limited we will have limited and dangerously uninformed views. If that world view is open, critical and constructive, we will be able to make a contribution to our own lives and to the lives of others.
Thanks for the article.
ussa

PART II: CONFESSIONS

CHAPTER 5

MY INITIATION IN SUFISM


``He breathes not the fragrance of divine mysteries whose head is warmed by his heart.`` -Wali.

My interest in Sufism made me very friendly with the dervishes. I learned to love the sweetness of their nature and the innate perfume of their manner of using music as the food of the soul.

I began at first to imitate their habits and methods, and spent a few hours in silence every day. Once in a dream I saw a great gathering of prophets, saints, and sages, all clad in their Sufi garments, rejoicing in the Suma or music of the dervishes. I was absorbed into their blissful state of ecstasy, and when I was aroused I still felt the exultation my vision had brought to me. After this I heard continually, waking or sleeping, an unknown voice which cried to me, ``Allah ho-Akbar!`` -God is great!

I also had visions of a most haunting and spiritual face, radiant with light, during my concentration in the silence, which heightened my interest in mysticism still more, especially as I could not divine its meaning. I feared to ask for its significance lest others might laugh at my fancy and ridicule it. At last, when I could no longer control my impatience, I described my golden vision to a friend who was also a lover of the mystical, and begged him for an interpretation.

He answered that the dream was a symbol of my initiation into the Sufi Order of Chishtia Khandan, and the words I heard were the crying of Haq or truth, while the vision was the image of my spiritual guide and protector. He also advised me to undergo the initiation of Sufism, although I had always considered myself undeserving of initiation in that Brotherhood of Purity. But I had a little courage, hoping I might at least be used as a waste-paper basket is employed for torn scraps of wisdom, which would quite suffice me. I visited several Murshids with this purpose, but they made no response, although I had the privilege of studying their various views and methods of teaching.

Thus I learned to know four true kinds of masters and four false ones. Among the true I saw first the one who would never answer the appeal of a seeker until he was fully prepared. The second kind would not initiate anyone until a long and trying period of probation had been undergone by the disciple. The third, in order to keep away undesirable adherents, would make himself appear so utterly disagreeable that everyone would run away at the sight of him. And the fourth would so disguise himself to escape the praise and publicity of the world that none would believe for a moment that he was truly a Murshid.

Among the false teachers I first met the hypocrite, who increases the number of his adherents by telling most wonderful stories and showing them tricks of phenomena. The second apostate was pious, disguising his infirmities and failings under the cloak of morality and always busy with worship and prayer. The third was the money-taking master, who eagerly seized upon every opportunity of emptying the pockets of his pupils. The fourth was he who was greedy for the adoration, worship and servility of his followers.

This experience of different Murshids prepared me for the ideal master, and after six months of continual searching I chanced to visit an old and revered acquaintance, Maulana Khairulmubin, to whom I confided my desire to embrace Sufism.

While reflecting on the matter he suddenly received a telepathic message that his friend, a great Murshid, was about to come to him. He at once arranged a seat of honor, placing cushions upon it, and walked towards the gate in order to bid him welcome.

After a period of suspense the Pir-o-Murshid entered, bringing with him a very great sense of light. As all those present greeted him, bowing down in their humility, it seemed to me all at once that I had seen him before, but where I could not recall. At last, after gazing at him earnestly, I remembered that his was the face, which so persistently haunted me during my silence. The proof of this was manifested as soon as his eyes fell on me. He turned to his host, saying, ``O Maulana, tell me who this young man may be? He appeals intensely to my spirit.``

Maulana Khairulmubin answered, ``Your holiness, this young man is a genius in music, and he desires greatly to submit himself to your inspiring guidance.``

Then the Master smiled and granted the request, initiating me into Sufism there and then.

``The day is short, the work abundant, the laborers inactive, the reward great, and the master of the house urges on.`` -Hebrew saying.

Muhammad Abu Hassim Madani belonged to a distinguished family of Medina, and was a direct descendant of the Holy Prophet. My joy in him was so great that it found its expression in poetry and music. I had at last found my pearl among men, my guide, my treasure, and beacon of hope. I composed a song and sang it to him, and this I feel certain has brought me all my success and will aid me in my future life.

And this was my song:

Thou art my salvation and freedom is mine,
I am not; I melt as a pearl in sweet wine!
My heart, soul, and self, yea, all these are thine;
O Lord I have no more to offer!

I drink of the nectar of truth the divine,
As Moses thy word, as Yusuf they shine
who walk in thy ways; and Christ is thy sign:
Thou raisest to life everlasting!

Thou art as Muhammad to them that repine,
My spirit is purged as the gold from a mine!
I only know that my heart beats with thine,
And joys in boundless freedom!

My Murshid greatly appreciated this outburst of love on my part and exclaimed in deep emotion, ``Be thou blessed with divine light and illuminate the beloved ones of Allah!``

From this time a spiritual attachment between myself and my Murshid was firmly established. As it grew more and more it opened up in me the ways of light through my attachment to that inner radiance, which can never be gained through discussion or argument, reading, writing, nor mystical exercises.

I visited him at the expense of all my affairs whenever I felt his call, receiving rays of his ecstasy with bent head, and listening to all he said without doubt or fear. Thus the firm faith and confidence I brought to bear upon my meditations prepared me to absorb the Light of the World Unseen.

I studied the Qur`an, Hadith, and the literature of the Persian mystics. I cultivated my inner senses, and underwent periods of clairvoyance, clairaudience, intuition, inspiration, impressions, dream, and visions. I also made experiments in communicating with the living and the dead. I delved into the occult and psychic sides of mysticism, as well as realizing the benefits of piety, morality, and Bhakti or devotion. The more I progressed in their pursuit, the more unlearned I seemed, as there was always more and more to understand and acquire. Of all that I comprehended and experienced I valued most that divine wisdom which alone is the essence of all that is best and attainable, and which leads us on from the finite world unto infinitudes of bliss.

After receiving instruction in the five different grades of Sufism, the physical, intellectual, mental, moral, and spiritual, I went through a course of training in the four schools: the Chishtia, Naqshibandi, Qadiri, and Sohrawardi. I still recall this period, under the guidance of so great and merciful a Murshid, as the most beautiful time of my life. In him I saw every rare quality, while his unassuming nature and his fine modesty could hardly be equaled even among the highest mystics of the world. He combined within himself the intense spell of ecstasy and constant flow of inspiration with the very soul of spiritual independence. Although I had found most wonderful attributes among the mystics I had met, some in greater and some in lesser degrees, I had never until then beheld the balance of all that was good and desirable in one man.

His death was as saintly as his mortal life had been. Six months before his end he predicted its coming and wound up all his worldly affairs in order to be freed for his future journey. ``Death is a link which unites friend with Friend unto the Beyond``, is a saying of Muhammad.

He apologized not only to his relatives, friends, and mureeds, but even to his servants, lest there might be anything that he had done to their displeasure and hurt. Before the soul departed from his body he bade farewell to all his people with loving words. And then, sitting upright and unwavering, he continued Zikr; and lost in his contemplation of Allah, he, by his own accord, freed his soul from the imprisonment of this mortal frame forever.

I can never forget the words he spoke while he placed his hands upon my head in blessing, ``Fare forth into the world, my child, and harmonize the East and the West with the harmony of thy music. Spread the wisdom of Sufism abroad, for to this end art thou gifted by Allah, the most merciful and compassionate.``

For some ignorants of sufism
INTUITION


Intuition is a part of knowledge that is beyond man’s personality, and above his knowledge of things and names. It comes at times when man becomes passive and exposes himself to that knowledge, consciously or unconsciously.

There are some who are more intuitive, and there are others who are less so; and if we study the nature of their character, we shall know the nature of their intuition. Those who are confused, who are constantly hurried, who are changeable in their nature, who are afraid of death, of disease, of their own actions, of their enemies, of their surroundings; those who have constant doubt, wondering whether they can trust this person or that, whether a friend may or may not prove worthy, and so on it is all these who have less possibility of intuition. Those who can trust without troubling themselves, those who have few doubts, are usually cleared in their perception. Those who trust in the inner guidance, who understand the secret of the instinct that works through animals and all creatures, those who are pious, those who wish to walk in the light, who always prefer the right way of thinking and speaking and acting it is these who often experience intuition.

Intuition is the first step, inspiration is the second, and revelation is the third. When revelation begins, it has arisen from intuition; for intuition is the fist stage.

What is its way of manifestation? How is intuition expressed? Intuition is of two kinds: it may come without intention, without being invited, or it may come when one asks oneself a question. In the first kind a person may be sitting down, and the thought comes to him that a danger is awaiting him; in what way it may occur he does not know, he just feel it. Next day he finds that something was going to happen to him. Then he sometimes thinks that happiness is coming from a friend, that someone from whom he has been parted for a long time is coming to see him. Sometimes he thinks an enemy is going to turn into a friend; and yet he had not been thinking of the subject. The thought comes to him suddenly. It proves true, it proves right. Without inquiry a thought comes to us which tells us of a coming event. People sometimes take this to be a spirit-communication; sometimes they take it to be thought-transference from someone else. Both ideas are possible, but intuition is a greater and higher thing than spirit-communication or thought-reading, because it is pure; it is our won property; it belongs to us. In this we do not depend upon a spirit, or upon another person sending a thought to us. In this we are perfectly independent; we receive the knowledge from within, which is far superior, greater, and higher.

The second kind of intuition is that of which it is said in the Bible, ‘Knock, and it shall be opened unto you.’ Knocking at the door is asking within one’s own self, ‘What will become of this particular business, or aim, or object that I am thinking of?’ As soon as one knocks at the gate of God, which is one’s heart, from there the answer comes, and

it is a truer answer than any other person can give. There is no one who can know as much about our life, affairs, objects, motives as we do ourselves. And therefore nobody can advise us better than ourselves.

Mankind cannot understand this secret, and consequently begins by depending on the advice of others. This would be advantageous if one had the good fortune to find a better adviser. But sometimes the person from whom advice is asked is foolish, sometimes he is an enemy, sometimes he himself is in confusion and cannot advise. Therefore people keep themselves from their real and true adviser: the guiding faculty within.

Intuition begins in the form of impressions. As soon as we see a person we have an impression of him. His face, his features, his expression, his atmosphere have in a way made an impression on us of his goodness, his righteousness, his wisdom or foolishness, his being useful or not, his being displeased with us or not, his being our friend or enemy. Whatever his condition may be, we receive it without knowing from any other source that these are his feelings. According to our own openness of spirit we get our impressions. We may receive a kind of impression as to whether we will be successful in our business or not. All these impressions convey to a man that his intuition is beginning. That is the first step.

After having intuition about individuals in their relation to ourselves, the next step is the intuition which occurs when another person is telling us of his projects. We have an impression as to whether they will be successful or not. We cannot give a reason for it; or even if we do we become aware that as we utter the reason it is not the real reason. For as soon as we begin to think it out, we at once descend from the higher, the spiritual source of information. To try and prove the basic truth of its spiritual source by means of reason, is to use earthly means to establish that which belongs to heaven. A proper reason for an intuition cannot be given.

The source from which this knowledge comes is not reason. People who are very good at reasoning can go on fighting all their lives, and yet nothing may come of it. Ultimately their reasoning turns into a play on words and terms; and as a word can be made to mean anything, they have always an easy way of escape from being caught by the person with whom they argue. It is just like wrestling; or just as in a court of law two barristers will each present their case as being the truth even though they may in fact know that it is not true. They fight with their reason and logic.

First of all, it is necessary to realize that when we see that our impressions are right and our doubts cannot destroy them, and we have been right in ten impressions and wrong in only one, then we know that the wrong one was not what we thought it was. When this realization has evolved, then we are able to know things intuitively. The difference between imagination and intuition is sometimes puzzling to define. Both come in the same way. When a certain imagination began to construct itself, we cannot say. The imagination came suddenly; but so also does intuition. That is why it is so difficult to discriminate between them. The truth is that if imagination comes with light, then it is certainly intuition. Every imagination is intuition until it has been corrupted by reason; and when the intuition is corrupted by reason it becomes imagination. But every imagination and every thought which is illumined by the intelligence is always an intuition; and therefore to an illuminated person any thought or imagination is intuition.

To him there is never a thought or imagination which is not an intuition.

But it is difficult to keep these from being corrupted by reason, because as soon as they are produced we doubt whether they are right or not right. We doubt it until we have killed all the truth of our intuition. Our doubts are always the enemies of our intuition; and therefore practice is required in everyday life to keep intuition from being corrupted and finally destroyed by our doubts. We ought to build a fence round intuitions as if they were delicate plants, and protect them from being destroyed by reason and doubts. By doing so, in time we grow to be sure of our intuitions, and then we never fail to get things right. And when the intuitions become right then the dreams become right. We see what is really going to happen in every thought which comes to us; the truth of life. Then our life becomes a miracle; there is no need to look for wonders in the outside world. Our own has become full of wonders. To the illuminated one every night’s dream becomes a book that tells the past, the present, and the future, both of himself and of all those whom he cares for or wishes to know about.

The next step is inspiration. Inspiration is not only the coming of a single thought, a single idea, but of a flow of ideas. One may express them in poetry, in music, in philosophy, in speech, in writing, in thinking. The inspirations come as many ideas. Inspiration is developed intuition. The expression of inspiration is according to one’s particular ability. If a person speaks a beautiful language, he can express his ideas in that language. All prophets and messengers have received the same message, but they have uttered it in different language. Why? Because surely it is one idea, one knowledge from heaven , but it is expressed according to the language the receiver is accustomed to, seeing that he has no other with which to express it.

The angels are not as great as man, because though they are gifted with the higher knowledge and are in the higher spheres, they have no power of expression. Man gets his knowledge from the higher source, but expresses it through the means provided by the lower spheres.

The Qur`an tells that God said to the angels, ‘I am going to create man, who will be the chief of creation.’ They asked, ‘Are we not a satisfactory army of servants who are always busy in Thy praise and admire Thy beauty and glorify Thy name? Why intendest Thou to create one who will do evil and shed blood, as he will do?’ The answer was, ‘Are you capable of appreciating all that I have made? Can you tell me what are the names of these things that I have made?’ God asks man; man tells Him all the names of things, the things that are sweet or bitter, then names of all manner of things; he knows and enjoys all these things in nature. That is why God says, ‘We have created him that he may be the chief of all creation, and enjoy all that We have created.’ Therefore those who think that the heavenly knowledge is sufficient are mystical; but the joy of the heavenly knowledge and the full understanding of it come from being able to express it in this world’s medium of expression. Therefore man can have knowledge both from within and from the external world. When the two come together, there is a perfect expression.

The last and most delicate degree of intuition is revelation. This comes to prophets and perfected beings. This is a full light thrown upon the human personality, full light from within. To their eyes, ears, sense of taste or touch, all things disclose their secret. Those who have received this knowledge even partly, have by receiving it come to understand the properties of this plant or that, to know that this bitter medicine is good for this purpose,, this sweet one for that, this drug or that vegetable for another. The knowledge of the property of the names and forms of the world is understood by them to the extent that revelation has helped them. When they look into the mind, they know all about the mind. When they study the earth, they come to know it. Whatever they try to know, they succeed in knowing; such is revelation. Those who look in the higher spheres are prophets, those who look on the earth are scientists, musicians, soldiers, and so on. It is from the direction in which he has studied that a man receives the revelation. In the higher spheres all things become clear to those who direct their attention to these spheres.

A man even sees his future in the teacup, with limited light; similarly he sees it in cards, in the crystal, in the coals of the fire, in smoke. All these things have the future written in them; it is the same light that shines upon them and begins to reveal itself in them. It is not only books, but all things in nature which begin to reveal the secrets of nature to him.

Sa’di says, ‘When the eyes open and begin to see with the divine light and divine sight, even the leaves of the trees become as the pages of the sacred Book.’
http://wahiduddin.net/mv2/VII/VII_10.htm

REg Inquirer::
Intuitionism:
The theory that truth or certain truths are known by intuition rather than reason. 2. The theory that external objects of perception are immediately known to be real by intuition. 3. The theory that ethical principles are known to be valid and universal through intuition.

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ne/brouwer.htm

Something on Intuitionistic Logic: Have you ever thought whether the law of excluded middle could be ``not exactly evident`` to all??The obvious difference is that many tautologies of classical logics can no longer be proven within intuitionistic logic. Examples include not only the Law of Excluded Middle P∨¬P, but also Peirce`s Law ((P→Q)→P)→P.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic

PAper on Chinese intuitionism: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/ew27130.htm
Intuituion... The Empty Cup

``Zen does not confuse spirituality with thinking about god while one is peeling potatoes. In Zen, spirituality is simply to peel the potatoes...`` -- Alan Watts

I would recommend books and articles by Alan Watts.

I would also recommend Seyyed Hossein Nasr a Perennialist who makes a great deal of the medieval distinction between intellectus and ratio (reason). The former, they say, implies a holistic mode of understanding that embraces intuition and contemplation. The latter is more partial, reductive and narrowly cerebral, yet it has proved culturally victorious.

The list is endless, I can provide you more in case you want to write a thesis.

Actually the Qur`an paak was written down as it was revealed by Aaqa alayhisalatu wa salam by a number of scribes amongst the Sahaba and the order we have it in now was already completed in the Prophet alayhisalatuwasalam`s lifetime and used to be read and also memorised in his own lifetime. Such a Qur`an was kept in the house of Hadrat Zayd ibn Harith radhi Allahu anhu. At this time it was in loose form. Hazrat Usman collected it in book form and the order he used was the same as Hazrat Zayd`s.

So it was NOT compiled 150 yrs after! Where did you get that from?!

#54, ZaharaJ:
-Do you believe in intuition ?
NO
- Have you ever experienced one ?
NO
- Was it positive or negative ?
Not applicable

EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON ``how you are cut out.``

The most celebrated ``intuition`` is that which Gautam Buddha had at Sarnath. I am not sure if that was totally intuitive.

What is the definition of intuition?

Webster:Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, page 635: Meaning 1c:
``the power or faculty of attaining to direct knowledge or cognition without evident rational thought and inference``

My submission is that the ``power`` part is in the mind of the beholder, and the emphasis should be placed on ``evident`` in the definition. The intuiter may not be aware of his/her chain of thought but there is a logic nevertheless. BECAUSE IF THERE WAS NO LOGIC NO ONE CAN UNDERSTAND THE INTUITER WITHOUT EMPLOYING INTUITION.

RELIGION IS MOST CERTAINLY NOT INTUITIVE. QURAN WAS PENNED FIFTY TO HUNDRED YEARS AFTER THE DEATH OF HAZRAT. So much for the intuition!

[Finally, what assures that destructive action would not result from intuition? Second world war was due to the intuitions of Hitler about the superiority of his race. Intuition can be as frequently wrong as right. It can be as destructive as constructive. What is intuition other than a guess without basis? ]

- Do you believe in intuition ?
- Have you ever experienced one ?
- Was it positive or negative ?

Intuitions have a lot to do with how you are cut out.

#38, hh:
I note your response. Since my urdu is weak, please translate the quatrain per your light and let us see what it means.

Please note #21, freethinker`s input:

Uss qaum mein haiy shokhi-e-andeshah khatarnaak
Jiss qaum kay afraad hon har band sey aazad
Go fikr-e-khudadaad sey roshan haiy zamaana
Aazadi-e-afkar haiy Iblees ki eejaad

(Poignant thought is hazardous for that nation
Whose people are free from all restraints
Though the world is illumined by the God-given thought
Freedom of thought is indeed the work of Satan
(Baal-e-Jibril, p. 168 in Kulliyat-e-Iqbal)

Above quote clearly indicates that Iqbal was scared of ``Azaadi-e-afkar.`` His was the way that Pakistan has been following so far and predictably and inexorably led to the mess it is in. Iqbal was probably a sectarian sunni and an impediment to rational development of the Pakistani Nation. The ``freethinker`` has now proclaimed his position about relevance of Iqbal and I agree with him.

#41, ballukhan:
****Positivity would flow from intuition- the correct interpretation of Quaran would be revealed through intuitions- the possibility of a destructive action arising out of intuition is not possible. ****
One man`s intuitions are another`s machinations. Positivity is defined as the doing good to the fellow sentient beings. The environmentalists don`t even limit to sentient beings. Without poitivity is the intuitive interpreations of all extremists of all different religions that have led to the religious intolerance and warfare FOR PRESERVATION OF PRIVILEGE BY DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS SECTS.
Finally, what assures that destructive action would not result from intuition? Second world war was due to the intuitions of Hitler about the superiority of his race. Intuition can be as frequently wrong as right. It can be as destructive as constructive. What is intuition other than a guess without basis?

Plats8:

To respond to your ending remark:

One has to give the other person the benefit of doubt since there may be some eccentricity that is only applicable to that person and cannot be understood by an outside observer. I think we all have our share of eccentricities that make us unique beings. Some call them eccentricities, whereas others name them as attributes :)

ZahraJ #49

Naqshbandi uses Sunni-ness as a coat-hanger. The coats just keep changing.
Thought you would have noticed this by now.

What does Iqbal`s Sunni-ness has to do with his poetic leanings ?

Why should you point out someone`s sect and start referencing the aa`gaa peechaa` of that
sect whenever you get an opportunity ? Kyoun?

It appears that a little boy aka mr. goody-good is trying very hard to portray a certain impression. It also appears that mr. goody-good likes to portray ``that`` impression at very specific locations. Unfortunately, mr. goody-good ain`t successful in getting his point across. May be, it`s the missing element in the intent :( May be or may be not!

Where did i mention or disparage any other sects in these posts on Iqbal? He was a Sunni himself as anyone who reads his biographies and poetry will attest. that is just fact. As for his pining for Madina that too is a fact. you can read it yourself in his works.

[btw iqbal alayhirahmah also wrote scathingly of the qadianis if you are interested calling them heretics and kafirs?!]

Indeed this world is full of all kinds. The very fact that someone divides Islam based on its sects, and always highlights the sects and makes one seem like holier than the other, is completely distasteful.

ZahraJ # 43

[Where is my ``Thank You`` ?]

I thank thee: lead me on. (Shakespeare, twelfth Night)

HH

why would any Muslim find that offensive? Besides, it is true--if you read the Armaghan i Hijaz (Farsi) it is full of his pining and desires to go to Madina before the end of his life and mingle with the sacred dust there...

#42:

[become a devout and pious traditional Sunni Muslim who loved nothing more than to die in Madina Sharif.]

As a Sunni Muslim, I find the above very offensive. Somehow you always insult the very basis of Islam!

hh:

[you have answered the question yourself.. i didnt have to move a muscle!! ;-)) ]

Where is my ``Thank You`` ?

[well, this is what the orthodox clergy wanted the muslims to believe, that they made him `repent & ccorrect` however, considering that shikwa was written in 1909 and its jawab in 1913, it becomes clear that if the clergy wanted to persecute him, they had ample time. they did make a big issue out of it. but thats about all. ]

Rumors (for or against)aside, I do not think one can write a potent and poignant Jawab under the fear of persecution. Just my two cents.

reg Inquirer

Two points require clarification to avoid the type of mis-construction that may take place-
1. Free thinking and ``Positivity``- Intuition is not directed by ``Positivity``, because that itself is now in question. The distinction is fine- the ``Positivity`` itself may be pre-defined by what it is from the interpretation of religious books and cultural understanding of this term in a community. To accept such constraints to the intuitions is to negate the intuition itself. Positivity would flow from intuition- the correct interpretation of Quaran would be revealed through intuitions- the possibility of a destructive action arising out of intuition is not possible.
2. Free thinking and God- The correct interpretation of the phrase `` Being like God!!`` is not that humans become God himself or ``being God``, the distinction between humans and God is clearly understood and the word ```like`` has been chomped from the meaning of the phrase by somebody who cannot read properly. It is that being a part of God`s creation humans aspire to be closer to its creator by reflecting his glory.

So much for hitting below the belt- a favourite past time of ribald Islamist!! I fail to understand why these guys have to discuss theology all the time???

Hazrat Allama Iqbal rahmatullah alayhi was a great poet and a great Muslim and though he went through different intellectual phases in his life--by the end of it he had rejected most of the Western ideas he espoused earlier and become a devout and pious traditional Sunni Muslim who loved nothing more than to die in Madina Sharif. Indeed the ulama of Ahle Sunnat consider him to have died as a wali--one of the Friends of Allah--ie Saints.

He wrote near the end of his life:

The glare of Western sciences could not confuse my vision,
For the dust of Medinah and Najaf is the collyrium of my eyes.

[ Khaira na kar saka mujhe jalwa e danish e Farang
Surma hai meri aankh ka khaak e Madina o Najaf]


In his farsi poetry especially he wrote of his longing for Madina....Prof. Anne Marie Schimmel, the late German scholar of Islam and expert on Iqbal in her book Gabriel`s Wing on Iqbal writes about this and also in her other books.

may Allah have mercy on him!

This post was written before #39 but somehow it wasnt submitted properly. Pls read before #39

ZahraJ # 32

you have answered the question yourself.. i didnt have to move a muscle!! ;-))

++
it was evident that the Jawab was the result of fear of persecution by the orthodox clergy
++

well, this is what the orthodox clergy wanted the muslims to believe, that they made him `repent & ccorrect` however, considering that shikwa was written in 1909 and its jawab in 1913, it becomes clear that if the clergy wanted to persecute him, they had ample time. they did make a big issue out of it. but thats about all.

jawab-e-shikwa is essentially the other side`s version, and if you understand its real `mafhoom`, you`ll see that jawab is more consistent with the main thrust of iqbal`s poetry, that is, rennaissance, pride and dignity of muslims and the need to rise and reform, rather than bask in their glorious past. thats exactly what god tells the muslims in jawab.

another way of looking at it is that shikwa was written by iqbal the philosopher / rebel / thinker whereas jawab-e-shikwa was written by iqbal the religious scholar, the reformer, a leader of an oppressed and enslaved nation.

Inquirer # 37

when you translate the first and the fourth line of the verse (without the 2nd and 3rd) and try to extract the meaning of the whole verse from that, its no surprise that you arrive at such conclusions!

++
so I took this opportunity to learn more about what the literal meaning of his quatrain is.
++

you need to learn a bit more...

Those who have not participated in
My Perspectives of Islam by Rashid Talib can gain alot from there even on this issue.

In my posting, #5, I confessed that I did not understand what Aazadi-afkar was. But I have often wondered about Iqbal`s character, so I took this opportunity to learn more about what the literal meaning of his quatrain is. My research has indicate to me the following:
afkar = plural of fikr or creation; equivalent to tasaanif
tasaanif = plural of tasniif which means imagination in contast to reality

So what is the quatrain saying?

Aazadi-e-afkar sey haiy unn ki tabahi TR Freedom of creativity leads to doom
Rakhtay naheen jo fikr-o-tadabbar ka saleeqa
Ho fikr agar khaam, tau aazdi-e-afkar
Insaan ko haiwaan bananay ka tareeqa TR Creative freedom leads to mostrosities

So it seems to me that Iqbal`s statement is urging people to follow the path laid by the masjid`s mullahs. Evidently, this was an effort to keep thinking muslims, who potentially were opposed to the division of India, in line of the Divisionists (MAJ &Co).

With exception of Nazarhayatkhan and Temporal, no one has addressed the fundamental error. Oh, I did but I do not count, a Hindu Indian!

Gill made a fundamental error - if he believes in freethinking as he professes and proclaims by his pseudonym- by adducing Iqbal who himself was against free thinking. A poet who had a parallel conversion, like MAJ, from a nationalist to a secessionist. NHK and Montolives have argued about the seeds of communalism practiced by muslims. I state that you need to read Iqbal`s address of 1937 in Allahabad to see how the theoretical foundations of partitions were laid by Iqbal and his ilk.

#34, Ballukhan:
You may be a Ballu but are no Khan. Your statement: ``In essence it [free thinking] is about CEATIVITY and POSSIBILITIES- It is being like God itself!!!!`` The practicing muslim can never accept free thinking then.
I refer you to my posting no. 5`s content about Tulsidas.
Iagree with your definition of attributes of a freethinker except may be about kissing a dolphin! However, there can be a constructive and a destructive free thinking. We are presuming the constructive free thinking in this discussion. Hence we need to retain the role of wisdom in free thinking. Free or otherwise the role of positivity in any thinking can not be overestimated. Thus intuition MUST be guided by the goals of positivity.

What Free- thinking is all about-
Free thinking is about losing your layers of prejudices and letting yourself be guided by your intuitions- It is about relying upon your intuition to arrive at new hypothesis about reality, it is about creating new possible wonderful worlds on the earth, creating wonderful inventions, creating possible state of affairs where love abounds ( Jesus imagined such a world of love), it is about dreaming about the heaven while still on earth, it is about planning to make life better for all at this moment than at some in-definite time in the line of infinity, it is about creating new types of relations which innumerable types of beings on this earth (like kissing a dolphin)- In essence it is about CEATIVITY and POSSIBILITIES- It is being like God itself!!!!

Chowk`s features are becoming completely idiotic. What the hell is the sense of having interact number option when that feature does not work?

Ghussa aside, my post # 30 was directed to poster#26.

Some floating thoughts...

- Does religion actually creates barriers in the process of mental growth ? I do not know if that can be concluded with a definitive answer for all and sundry. I have met many senior scientists who have shared with me their mantra on preserving both. Majority happened to be in their 60s and a few in their early 50s. I am not sure if that was an age factor that made the said individuals come to terms with the needs of their heart and mind.

- From what I have heard about Iqbal`s Jawabae` Shikwah, it was evident that the Jawab was the result of fear of persecution by the orthodox clergy. It was not that Iqbal was in the mood of playing free-thinking games with Allah Taa`la and got the message from the sky to write the Jawab. In the same context, I believe that Iqbal was a free-thinker in his own way. Freethinking does not mean that you are limited to only certain bent of mind. You can be in one mode at one point and time and then you can be contradictory to your ownself in the next moment. From my understanding, free means free - you lean towards the direction your mind wants you to. No obvious or hidden barriers!

- Interestingly, in his own philosophical mode Iqbal also wrote quite a few absurd things on modernism, women and aftermath. Now, a society which lacks the open-mindedness(in terms of enlightenment) will recite his verses subh`oa shaam without realizing what they are lacking.

Some questions:

- Can one equate philosophy of life to free-thinking?
- Can one question the faith and belief of a free-thinker?
- Are the free-thinkers devoid of any core belief ?
- Where do they draw their strength from ?
- Is being a freethinker an asset or a disadvantage depending on the surroundings you are living and breathing in ?

This is one side of the picture.

Orthodoxy is equivalent to lunacy(?). And, lunatics do not care to grasp and listen to others. They want to enforce and enforce and enforce. There ought to be a marked difference between the enlightened and the lunatic. If the enlightened is going to take the same route that the lunatic craves for then there is no difference between both idiots since they are equal to each other and are playing with ``very sophisticated`` concepts.

(*~*)

hamidm,

``...but if it means freedom from all prejudice, then i am afraid we are all a bunch of slave thinkers - slaves to the limits of our own intellect...``

Good point.

Perhaps a better twist would be ``...we are slaves to the content of our consciousness, which is memory``.

There`s the top-level memory of our own life and then there`s the deeper, racial, genetic memory which influences our thinking in a more silent, unknown manner.

hh:

Mind clicking on post # 1 again ? Will only take some muscle movement and you will be there.

Thanks.

Good points and relevant supporting examples.

#26, Ballukhan:
I agree with you. But you are not noticing the vested interests of Masjid which will fight, assasinate and defame any independent thinker.

ZahraJ
#19

**Kindly read my ending question in one of the previous posts. I will certainly appreciate a candid response, if you have the information on that.**

Mind writing the question again?

I would like to point out that similar problems existed in the history of sciences in Christian world when the Church had a stifling influence over the scientific thought. The Church always wanted to ensure that the Bible percepts are saved and this led to the recantation of Galileo. It was only with the enlightment and separation of church from state (and its policies) that nobody made efforts to save the percepts of Bible, rathar now every body started making their own postulations about everything from God to the phenomenon of falling apple. Now, the myth of the ``Given`` was broken. Nothing was considered as certain, so much so that philosophical elites like Descartes had to fall back to his brand of intuitionism to save the concept of ``God`` and arrive at a ``certainity`` and a ``given`` proposition of cogito-ergo-sum.
The same situation is confronting the mullahs: and they still want to save their (interpretation of ) percepts rathar that the corroborated hypothesis of sciences like the Newton`s and Einstein`s theories. They would have destroyed the science laboratories first, if they had the weapons like the Americans because scientific theorizing does not believe in a ``foundations`` any ``given`` propositions and does not confuse the question of ``truthlikeness`` with the ``revelations`` of some ``divine``.
Without secularism no scientific theorizing can successfully take place in any culture, because religious blinkers on the intellect stops the intellect at some proposition which is the ``given`` truth in some religious book.
Scientific theorizing is almost an art, an act of intuition unfettered by the religious dogmas which is constantly being bombarded by the mullahs through fears of retribution by some metaphysical being.

These are my personal views and I do not intend to rake up the Popper-Feyerabend-Kuhn controversy again which is well documented in the western intellectual tradition. Instead I would suggest that whenever there is a conflict between the well established scientific theories and the religious propositions then efforts should be made to save these established theories rathar than the religious propositions. Here we require the effort from the modern interpreters of Quran and Hadith to save the established scientifi theories through suitable (alternative) interpretation of the propositions of Quran and Hadith. This is how the west tackled the menace of the Church which had become very powerful like the Taliban once upon a time.

The terms ``free thinkers`` is on European origin from the time of enlightenment with Voltaire being the most well-known proponent. It described people who disregarded sacrosanct, church sanctions and church dictat in favor of rational thinking in the form of writings, discussions and lectures. Liberals, seculars, socialists, communists, athiests, agnostics are some of the products of free thinking. I think, nihilism and existentialism philosophies are also arising from free thinking, though not sure. Free thinker is mutually exclusive term coined by free thinkers. Their opponents have been calling them heretics, murtids, munafiqs, besharam, be haya liberals etc etc. Anybody in those days of Christiandom and in the Muslim world presently labeling people as free thinker mean agreeing to the label or coming out supporting free thiking. Osama or Fazloo won`t call free thinker, ``Free Thinkers``.

Mr. Gill:

I wanted to be clearer in my previous posts to point out what was exactly missing in the article; but unfortunately I did not have the luxury of time to jot that down. Your recent post provoked me to set aside certain time to do justice to the thought and intent behind the article. None of my earlier comments were personal, but they were genuine concerns of a perceptive and intelligent being. I had expected more depth from the article and you covered more breadth. You also went into territories that weren`t required to be explored at this time. I had and have issues with the examples and pockets you are trying to link together and their context. I would not have spent a single minute on any gibberish, but this is a fairly seducing subject and requires justice. It did not receive that justice! And, as a hypersensitive individual, I could not resist my outburst :)

Just implementing the core principles of free-thinking!

You have misread my posts to some extent under some preconceived notion.

I am NOT defending Iqbal anywhere!

[zahraj’s devotion to Iqbal and his thought is understandable and valuable.]

Why would you assume that is understandable? I do not agree with his philosophy and his leanings 100%.

[I believe I had read some place in these lectures where Iqbal had asserted that we need the western education but the fear is that our youths may go astray. However I could not put my finger to this quote before writing this response. I want to also clarify that my criticism of Iqbal is not based on any malice; I respect Iqbal as a great thinker that he was. ]

I owed you a clarification on my remark about absent-mindedly submitting this piece. I think my post`s 1st para highlights that. Nowhere did you come across as belittling Iqbal. No arguments on that!

[Iqbal, like every great thinker, has not said the last word on any thing. He is not above criticism if such a criticism is without malice. Human knowledge progresses through criticism and debate. So if I am guilty of criticizing Iqbal, it’s not out of malice. He was the greatest Muslim thinker of his time and the conceptual founder of Pakistan. But in my opinion, his religious philosophy has become outdated.]

I 100% agree with your above assertions except for the use of the word ``malice.`` I doubt any reader mistook your words for that. Please heave a sigh of relief!

[zahraj’s observation that I was probably in haste to submit the essay to Chowk is also incorrect.]

I think my above clarification should make you see things clearly. No offense intended but you are reading my responses upside down. Way too much emphasis on assumptions & preconceived notions! Please walk the talk here otherwise you are contradicting your ownself - freethinking! Your use of the word ``also`` is misplaced in the context you have stated; since you are agreeing to 95% of my critique here.

[I had been thinking of this subject for the last several months but could not figure out where to start the essay and how to end it.]

That`s exactly my point in the earlier post.

Regards.

PS: In my ``not so humble opinion`` the article deserves a re-write or a re-arrangement before any continuation effort is undertaken.

............. i still don`t understand what the heck a free thinker is .....everyone is free to think, but everyone is bounded by his or her prejudices ............. that leaves only two types of thinkers: there are bad thinkers, and good thinkers ............ if free thinking means freedom from the tyranny of god, prophets, jinns and hobgoblins, then i guess sameerj is a free thinker.... but if it means freedom from all prejudice, then i am afraid we are all a bunch of slave thinkers - slaves to the limits of our own intellect .......... in any case that is a lot better than being slaves to limits imposed by crazy men who claimed their mothers were virgins or who talked to winged angels in dark caves .................

.............years ago we used to smoke a lot of strange stuff which induced a lot of ``free thinking`` and we came up with all kinds of magical theories that would give razi, sina and iqbal a run for their money ............. too bad i can`t remember any of it ............

freethinker,

OK, we`ll let Mr.Khayyam rest in peace for now...but let me ask you this:

You`re always writing these articles about the Islamic golden period...about great Islamic mathematicians and astronomers. My question to you is...inspite of all these stalwarts, how come the muslims got stuck with the worst calendar of all civilizations ?????

I mean, its 2003 AD now and that is 1424 AH (anno hegiro) in the Islamic world. Hegiro - for Hijra (year 622 AD when Mohammed fled to Medina).

So, apparently its 1424 years since Muhammed`s flight in 622 AD.

But 1424 + 622 = 2046 ...not 2003 ????? ...and thats because the Islamic year is 11 days short of the actual year (11 DAYS!).

...and thats because the muslims use a pure Lunar calendar...to measure the year which is a pure Solar phenomenon!!

- - - - - - -

I suppose you know all this. But I`ll say it anyways.

Every goddamn civilization seems to have figured out how to compromise the Solar and Lunar calendars. For example in India, we have extra months (adhimasa) every 5 years, etc.

It almost seems like this minor effort was too much for the Arab brain...and they remained content with the Simple and ever-increasingly incorrect Lunar calendar.

How come none of the Islamic greats (say Khayyam) never corrected something as fundamental to civilization and daily life as their Calendar ??????


Thanks.

I acknowledge and appreciate the feedbacks from the readers. zahraj’s devotion to Iqbal and his thought is understandable and valuable. I have been reading Iqbal all my life (since my ‘middle school’ days). I love Iqbal and his poetry but I do take issue with his religious philosophy. I have read his lectures also (Reconstruction of Religoue Thought in Islam) and like to believe that I understand them.

I believe I had read some place in these lectures where Iqbal had asserted that we need the western education but the fear is that our youths may go astray. However I could not put my finger to this quote before writing this response. I want to also clarify that my criticism of Iqbal is not based on any malice; I respect Iqbal as a great thinker that he was.

Here are a couple of other quotes from his poetry:

Hum samjhtay thhay keh laaye gi faraghat ta’aleem
Kiya khabr thhee keh chala aaye ga alhaad bhi saath

(We thought that education would usher in prosperity
Alas, who knew that atheism would also accompany it?)
(Baang-e-Dara, p.209 in Kulliyat-e- Iqbal)

Uss qaum mein haiy shokhi-e-andeshah khatarnaak
Jiss qaum kay afraad hon har band sey aazad
Go fikr-e-khudadaad sey roshan haiy zamaana
Aazadi-e-afkar haiy Iblees ki eejaad

(Poignant thought is hazardous for that nation
Whose people are free from all restraints
Though the world is illumined by the God-given thought
Freedom of thought is indeed the work of Satan
(Baal-e-Jibril, p. 168 in Kulliyat-e-Iqbal)

Iqbal, like every great thinker, has not said the last word on any thing. He is not above criticism if such a criticism is without malice. Human knowledge progresses through criticism and debate. So if I am guilty of criticizing Iqbal, it’s not out of malice. He was the greatest Muslim thinker of his time and the conceptual founder of Pakistan. But in my opinion, his religious philosophy has become outdated.

Regarding saminashah’s comment about ibn Sina. I hadn’t forgotten him, he was mentioned in the essay.

I also admit that the essay has barely touched the essentials of freethought. It is difficult to do justice with the subject in a short essay and it was not my intention also. I preferred to give some historical background to free thought
in the Islamic world in order to make it interesting and relevant to the Muslim readership. However, free thought is not relevant only to the Muslim world; in fact it is for the universal humanity. The scope of my essay was however limited. The intention was to underline its importance to us, the Muslims, who are so backward in the modern world.

I appreciate hh for the translation of Iqbal’s verses that I had quoted in my essay.

I believe ironman’s criticism of Omar Khayyam is unfounded.

zahraj’s observation that I was probably in haste to submit the essay to Chowk is also incorrect. I had been thinking of this subject for the last several months but could not figure out where to start the essay and how to end it. There is no doubt that a better piece could be written.

The essay did provoke some interesting responses from the readers and may be one of them would like to take it further by writing an article himself (herself).

I’ve noted the comments by others also including sameerj, Azure, and urstruly but I believe they don’t require any specific comments from me. They’ve added and enhanced the scope of the essay by their comments.

Mohammad Gill

``Aazadi-e-afkar sey haiy unn ki tabahi
Rakhtay naheen jo fikr-o-tadabbar ka saleeqa
Ho fikr agar khaam, tau aazdi-e-afkar
Insaan ko haiwaan bananay ka tareeqa

If a person is forbidden from indulging in free thought, how he can acquire the skills and the right attitude for free thinking, which Iqbal seems to stipulate in his above verses. ``


My friend I believe you are missing the point. What Iqbal is trying to say is that free thinking is only good if it is bounded by some boundries. In case of Iqbal it is Islam. One is free to think, however there are boundries set by Islam and thinking beyond those boundries is forbidden. What I am trying to say is that there are certain orders in Quran that should be followed without question. Scientific knowledge, which is based on sensory perception and mental analysis, will not provide answers.

For example Quran says Allah is one. A limit is set by Allah and thinking beyond is forbidden. This is the ``tadabur ka saliqa`` Iqbal talks about. A free thinker is not bounded by any boundry and will question every thing including his mother about who his father was?

Asfand

hh:

[shikwa and jawab-e-shikwa are two different angles of a `dispute` or an `argument`. when you read shikwa, you side with man (against god) but when you read the jawab, you think that, no, man was wrong, god is right. go back to shikwa, again you will think man is right. so its just the power of his pen and his thought that convinces you. and thats what was intended. ]

I am perfectly clear on Iqbal`s stance, where he was coming from and the ins and outs of Shikwa`h & its Jawab. Still thanks for sharing your take.

Kindly read my ending question in one of the previous posts. I will certainly appreciate a candid response, if you have the information on that.

mohamad

coool article.
but in talk of free thinkers how can u forget ibn sina

#16, urstruly: Even though you did not respond to the serious part of my comment (#15), i enjoyed your response to it. I thought my comment was a hard-hitting one and was ready for a repartee, but you took it in good spirit and I value that!

I agree with your evaluation of Gill. Hey, who cares what he thinks we thank him for raising an issue about which you and I like to think about.

Inquirer:

Pl. read your post again, it only confirms what I just wrote.

Mr. Gill never felt a need to backup the ideas he promotes. He might have his reasons, but I think he is not sure himself whether he believes in what he preaches or not. This is a catch 22: if he believes what he promotes, then he is a conformist and if he is a non-conformist then he must promote what he beleives. God! I love this.

How clear like daylight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
urstruly does not want even to acknowledge the existence of free thought. How could he? He never had a free thought!!!!!!!!!
For him copying Europeans is free thought!!!!!!!!
For your enlightenment, urstruly: Free thought is when you are not under the knife of Masjid before you think. Need definition of ``think?``

Gill never comes back to interact but wouldn`t it be fun to see the dual between urstruly and Gill, IF HE BELIEVES IN WHAT HE WRITES.

I don`t understand what the meaning of the phrase ``free thought is``. I think it is quite relative. For example, I think that any opponent of me cannot have free thought because in my opinion his thought is prejudiced, preconceived and shortsighted whereas the thought process of those who agree with me and mine are absolutely capable of producing rational and free thought. I am pretty sure that my opponents hold the same opinion about himself. So what is the free thought?

I think the term ``free thought`` has a very specific meaning. It refers to the thought process of those Europeans who for the very first time challenged the religious dogma. It was during that time when Europeans were in the process of discarding their religion (christianity) as a dominant moral compass and a political force. So they termed their own thinking as ``free thinking`` and their opponnent`s thought process as ``slave-mindedness``. The situation in Muslim world is quite the opposite. It is not the religion (Islam) that has disappointed Muslims (as Christians were disappointed by Christianity) but what has disappointed them is the lack of religion in their daily lives as a moral and political common denominator. Those who promote the idea of ``free thought`` in Muslim World are actually influenced by the interaction with the European culture during 200 years of colonialism. They think that the same paradigm that held true for christians in Europe, will hold true for Muslim world as well. In support of their claims if Suleman Rushdie, Abuzayd, and Taslima Nasreen are the best they can produce, then allow me to be sarcastic and say ``good-luck`` to them.

Bitter woman!

Interesting analysis, Mr Gill. However, your translation of Iqbal`s verse is not correct. Infact its way off. That verse simply means:

Free thought can spell disaster for those whose thought is not developed and mature. And if a person`s ideas are still in their infancy and he doesnt have a firm grip on them, then free thought can easilylead the person astray.

This is understandabe. Intellectuals like Farabi and Sina ventured into free thought after they had reached a certain level of excellence in their fields. They had achieved what was then considered the highest level in their professions. Free thought took them a step further and they ventured into new ideas previously unexplored by man.

SAMEER JB #6
If you understand Iqbal, you would not say that his poetry is `momentary`. his message is as applicable now as it was when he wrote it. and i think a lot of people on this forum DO understand iqbal well. i`m glad that Gill included iqbal`s and omar khayyam`s verses!

ZahraJ

*but unfortunately his own susbtsance is not 100% applicable to him. It`s all in the head and the product of human imagination - philosophy*

I dont understand what you mean by `applicable to him`. does he have to personify his poetry through his actions? his poetry is simply a message for the degenerate muslims of that time. initially it was for the muslims of the sub-continent and later he addressed muslims of the world as one. now whether he himself practiced what he preached is absolutely of no importance. its what he wrote.

shikwa and jawab-e-shikwa are two different angles of a `dispute` or an `argument`. when you read shikwa, you side with man (against god) but when you read the jawab, you think that, no, man was wrong, god is right. go back to shikwa, again you will think man is right. so its just the power of his pen and his thought that convinces you. and thats what was intended.

Mr. Gill:

My initial observations were the result of a quick skim through the article.

On a second glance, there are a few weak pockets.

- Thank God the topic was revised since I was ready to pick that point. Apart from ``Material`` the ``Immaterial`` aspects have to be taken into consideration, in the context of free thinking.

- The ending, no doubt a fact, has no spark or momentum to captivate the attention of the reader.

It`s like asking a kid to find out the answer of 6!. The little kid wrote 6 with a big bang on his neat homework book. There was an initial excitement. As he started dissolving the myth behind 6!, he realized that after jotting down 3, there was a 2 and then a simple 1. Nothing else could be done. For a few minutes, the child`s curiosity incited him a little more and he muttered, ``Yeh Kaisay Ho Saktaa Hae that I`ll get such an easy question to solve? There must be something else to discover. Let`s contemplate.`` After a few minutes, he realized that he could neither go aa`r nor paa`r. So, he realized that`s it! Just 3x2x1 = 6!

The article itself is indeed a result of a free-thinker`s freethinking :) It does not impact the reader the way this ``notion`` should.

Lastly, freethinking, if devoid of innovation, can be quite boring and bland.

The topic is very interesting. And, the writer certainly has the potential to make it a very interesting and interactive effort; but this one requires some re-arrangement/re-write(with due respect to the freethinker`s flow of thoughts). Probably the writer was in the process of laying out the ground for his ideas and by mistake hit the ``submit/post`` button. Aaisa Bhee Hota Hae or I should say Aaisa Hee Hooaa` Hae.

Regards,
Zahra

Some comments Mr. Gill:

(1)

``According to O’Connor and Robertson (3), “Khayyam measured the length of the year as 365.24219858156 days. Two comments on this result. Firstly, it shows an incredible confidence to attempt to give the result to this degree of accuracy.``


Incredible confidence ?!!! ...or gross ignorance?

As a professor you should know better Mr. Gill. It shows khayyam knew nothing of experimental error analysis.


Consider this:

.24218 of a day is 20924.352 seconds
.24219 of a day is 20925.216 seconds
.242191 of a day is 20925.302 seconds

When we move past the 5th decimal, we are talking of millisecond accuracy.

The best clocks in those times were water clocks that were in the 1-second accuracy region. What meaning does a .24219858156 have when you are guaranteed only 5 decimal accuracy ??????

What grade would you give a student at your lab for this kind over-ambitious answer????
(Really I would like to know!)

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

(2)

``Secondly, it is astoundingly accurate. For comparison, the length of the year at the end of the 19th century was 365.242196 days while today it is 365.242190 days``


Since the Arabs learnt mathematics and astronomy from India, why should it come as a great surprise that Omar Khayyam measured the year accurately? After all the Indians knew the the year accurately at least 700 years before khayyam was born (Aryabhatta).

If arguing for free thought is in vogue, may I suggest The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn. If ever there was a book to rival the social theories generated by Darwin`s Origins of the Species, it is this. Although it takes scientific knowledge as its basis, Kuhn`s argument that development only occurs when the paradigm in which thought functions is forced to shift is valid for intellectual progress as well.

Another great work on the intellectual history of the 20th century is a Terrible Beauty by Charles Watson.

Rafay Alam

we should send this article to Maulana Fazlur Rehman and co... wonder what he would make of it...

****they did not believe (rightly or wrongly) in Allah’s attributes because according to their understanding such a belief would inevitably lead to a belief in the existence of multiple ‘infinite beings’ and Allah’s unity would thus be imperiled. ****
Desire to conceptualize God as unique from worshippers - presumably of elevated kind - is a built-in trap for disenchantment with the conception of divinity. Tulsidas has defined divinity in Ramayan in human terms. Gross summary of the idea is: doing good to your fellow sentient beings selflessly is worship.

****Although he believed in the existence of God (he had his own reasons for this belief) he did not believe in the authenticity of any religion. ****
Would be interesting to provide capsule information on this subject.

****Since this religion is true and summons to the truth which leads to knowledge of the Truth, we the Muslim community know definitely that demonstrative study does not lead to (conclusions) conflicting with what Scripture has given us for truth does not oppose truth but accords with it (2). ****
This is a confusing paragraph and requires clearer write-up. This also may encapsulate the close-mindedness that Gill is overtly condemning but deep down might believe in.

****And that inverted Bowl we call The Sky
Where-under crawling coop’t we live and die
Lift not thy hands to..’It’ for help..for it
Rolls impotently on as Thou and I ****
Very interesting since a parallel exists with Einstein who on the basis of General Theory of Relativity wondered if God had any choice in creation of Universe!! More information on Omar Khayyam`s thought should be brought out.

****Aazadi-e-afkar sey haiy unn ki tabahi
Rakhtay naheen jo fikr-o-tadabbar ka saleeqa
Ho fikr agar khaam, tau aazdi-e-afkar
Insaan ko haiwaan bananay ka tareeqa ****
Don`t know what ``Aazadi-e-afkar`` is; but is Iqbal a visionary or a reactionary?

****The Islamic world needs to be rescued from the torturous clutches of the unbearable orthodox clergy, if it ever is to develop materially. It is not possible to seal the human mind for ever; a suitable symbiosis should exist between orthodoxy and independent and rational thought. ****
Only strictly secular education INDEPENDENT of murkiness of Masjid can free Islamic population of the opaque mist that bewilders and blinds them. All other religions have achieved this.

I also see no point in bringing Iqbal through his poetry into this essay. Many people not well versed in Urdu poetry with enough vocabulary won`t understand it. A poet is not obliged to create art of poetry only on the basis of his/ her deep beliefs. They express their thoughts which can be momentary as well as induced.

I think sulphuric acid discovery is credited to Jaber bin Hayan and not Al-Razi. Now to the topic:

Free thinking is like a plant whose seed is non-conformism. One has to question conformism before coming up with free thinking interpretation of philosophical thoughts. However, most muslim free thinkers were/ are not non-conformists because non-conformism means exclusion from the fold of Islam. Islam from early on is very strict and rigid against non-conformists. The sharia is infallable in Islam.

In order to be free thinker, a Muslim has to wipe the slate off completely with wet cloth so that the deeply held dogma does not influence free thinking. Following it through deconstruction or reductionism of the Islamic thoughts keeps the free thinking limited and bound within a high walled boundry. The net result is wasting too much effort hitting head against the walls of this thick boundry.

The free thinking in 7-10th centuries had different meanings because the difference between conformism and free thinking was not as wide as it is today. Since scientific revolution and enlightenment, the distance or difference between conformism and free-thinking has greatly widened due to dynamic free thinking pulling away from static conformism and dogma. The current free thinking among Muslims is mostly still at the level of 7-10th century and even that earlier level is considered heresy and blasphemy and jeoperdizes the lives of free thinkers.

Mohammed:

...thanks for this precise article, and for your persistence...you write
It is sad that intellectual terrorism continues in the Islamic world against those who dare to build a bridge of reconciliation between the Scriptural text and the prevalent socio-economic-scientific conditions in the modern Islamic world.

...so what is new?…how can a religion for eternity be rigid?…so we gather stones and missiles for the free thinkers…hence, again…what is new?

rgds,

t

Yet another brilliant article by Gill sahib.

Tolerance for freethinkers is indeed a necessity in the modern Islamic world without which there would be a constant drop in all sorts of scientific progress. Although it has been said that the Qur`an is very compatible with the modern scientific discoveries, yet there is little space for offtrack methods for further advancement in scientific knowledge. In my opinion, this is THE one difference that exists between the West and the East, and if this difference is not minimized if not eradicated in the near future the Islamic world would have to suffer and lag behind a lot more.

It`s very disturbing to see all freethinkers being labeled as atheists, apostates or even worse, blasphemists. The normal mind would not tolerate anything unorthodox and which might apparently be a threat to religious beliefs; it does not dare to think beyond what has been said and firmly grounded by religion. But only through vigorous and indepth study can one find the true link between religion and science and be able to think freely without any intrusion from religious restraints.

I have a slight objection on the title of this article though. Why is it Free Thought is Key to Material Progress? Does it mean that in your freethinking you are also considering the non-material aspect too? I would not have used the word Material in the title if I had written it. I hope you get my point.

Gill, this is truly a University Avenue article. I have just gone through it but not fully gathered my thoughts. I intend to comment on it in near future.
Congratulations for having penned a very interesting analysis.

An Interesing Topic.
An informative articl.
Some good highlights of Mulism History.

I have immense respect and love for Iqbal for the substance of his verses, but unfortunately his own susbtsance is not 100% applicable to him. It`s all in the head and the product of human imagination - philosophy. With that perspective, taking a few verses by him and projecting those as the basis for the concept of free thinking is not very captivating in my view. Iqbal`s poetry is indicative of the various phases of evolution he went through on his thinking level.

Come to think of it, why did he write the Jawab`ae` Shikwa after stating his Shik`wa?
Was that truly a product of his free thinking or the fear of persecution by the orthodox clergy?