Free Thought is Key to Progress

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

****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.

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

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

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).

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

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.

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!

Bitter woman!

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.

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.

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.