From, Islam & Ahmadism, by Allama Iqbal.
Frithjof Schuon writes:
Dialectic convinces us with ideas,So that we may understand things abstractly;Poetry has feeling, works with imagesAnd seeks thereby to soften the austerity of thought —So that we may see the truth with our heart.
How can i be so ungrateful to Allah and be hopeless of my in-competencies? I've to tell myself again and again. I've to be singularly focused on my growth like a selfless seed. I've everything at my service due to Grace of God. Yet this yaas, despair and irrational doubts...
Read part I and part II.
“Under [occidentosis] we are like strangers to ourselves, in our food and dress, our homes, our manners, our publications, and, most dangerous, our culture. We try to educate ourselves in the European style and strive to solve every problem as the Europeans would.”
Read full article here.
In USA, if you curse God or Prophet Jesus, nobody would even care, they won't even look at you and pass by. But if you curse someone's color, race or even nose, you'll get sued for 100k dollars or even worse.* This is because they've lost that sense of Sacred. It is against this aggression towards the rights of God that blasphemy laws exist.
Last para example is taken from an audio clip on Salman Rushdie Affair by Dr Seyyed Hossein Nasr.http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/af/_audio/A065e_SH.Nasr_Sh.Tantawi_19.mp3
The morning dew is a source of freshness and is a proof of God too (at least for a saint). Unfortunately, those who worship modern science and technology whole day, do not realize that from its standpoint everything is nothing but matter, with no vertical dimension and causality to it. Divine Imprint is the source of all meaningful beauty.
This mechanistic and materialistic view of nature, that modern science possesses, is also the cause of so much destruction of environment. Because from its view, there's no sacred element to material world, hence it's there to be captured according to free market forces. They realized it later that destruction of nature creates imbalance (too obvious to us though). We must salute from heart all native cultures that are disgusted by the idol of indefinite economic progress. Yet, many muslims who're envious of worldly power and resources have fallen to the same trap seculars did.
|Blowing brains and spirits out|
Co-authored with Noor.
"Ibn-e-Sina talks of a hanging man, who is hung in the middle of space. His feet don't touch anything; his legs don't touch anything. He doesn't know where he is. [Thus] he can doubt the existence of earth, he can doubt the existence of air - there is nothing he cannot doubt! The one [and only] thing he cannot doubt is himself that is doubting everything.""'I think therefore God is.' Not that 'I think therefore I am'." - Seyyed Hossein Nasr, In the Beginning was Consciousness, The Dudleian Lecture delivered at Harvard Divinity School.
Dr Hina Azam reviewing Dr Qasim Zaman's insightful work, The Ulama in Contemporary Islam: Custodians of Change, observes the political thought and advocacy of Pakistani vs Indian Deobandis, or more generally, Pakistani religious elite ("pro-Pakistan Iqbal" and Jamat-e-Islami) vs Indian religious leaders ("Maulana Azad and Wahid-ud-din"):
One cannot help but notice that the religious establishment, perhaps unwittingly, frequently ends up justifying existing state policies.
I believe that this is not very accurate picture of Pakistani religious elites and establishment. In Pakistan, since its inception, we've seen a very strong contest b/w religious elite which advocates state-level implementation of their interpretation of Shariah* vs modernist/secular leadership (although in minority, but very resourceful and powerful).
In India, we don't see religious leaders advocating that. Their framework is "pluralistic secular" political solutions, which obviously is optimal solution for protecting Muslims there.
However, what is very interesting [it's so interesting, i'm quoting whole summary of this argument] is the following argument of Dr Qasim, summarized by Dr Hina:
"Another provocative theme of the book is Zaman’s insight into what happened when the Western notion of “religion” met a traditional Muslim society’s much older understanding of its deen (usually translated as “religion”) in the asymmetrical context of colonial domination. We know that after the time of Hume, Hegel, and Darwin, European thinkers generally conceived of religion as developing, on the metaphor of biological evolution, alongside the progress of human societies from primitiveness to civilization, from simplicity to complexity, from irrationality to rationality, to ﬁnd its end in either (Protestant)Christianity or in science. In the liberal view, religion is that which is best left to private life, separated from the public, civic sphere. In contrast, the centuries-old tradition of Islamic thought did not draw any ﬁrm lines between the sacred and the secular; it conceived the divine command as overseeing both the private and the public domains. What Zaman tells us is how the British carried their ideology of religious evolutionism into India with them, and how out of the marriage of European liberalism and South Asian tradition was born the concept, new for the indigenous Muslims, of their deen as a “religion.” Indeed, says Zaman, the ambivalences created by the tension between religion as private and religion as comprehensive, as well as the doubt created by the idea of “religion” as that which is less than “useful,” continue to express them-selves in self-contradictory approaches to religious education and relations with the state to this day.
Building on a standing religious studies thesis that Islamic “fundamentalist”movements are in fact thoroughly modern in their technical and political strategies, Zaman adds that, ﬁrst, the modernity of contemporary Islamic movements is reﬂected in their very notion of Islam as a subtype of “religion” and that, second, not only the modernists and the Islamists but also the ulama have inherited this new discourse of “religion.” This is seen in their belief in codiﬁcation and implementation of Islamic law at the statewide level and in the role of the ulama as “specialists” in religion. These efforts are possible, Zaman insists, only due to the reiﬁcation of Islam that resulted from Muslim absorption of the European idea of “religion” as a ﬁxed content (rather than, say, aprocess of moral transformation or a relationship of spiritual surrender)." [got to know full explanation of this author]
Dr Asad Zaman gives an account - a rare account - of a major factor of rise of power of West. Western people were so barbarian that they'd engage in continual warfare with each other, on sectarian, tribal or such issues. They developed a lot of mastery over the technology of warfare. The Orient was living in a much relative peace. Due to certain experiences, they realized that world was aloof there 'progress' in killing humans, and were leading much peaceful life (perhaps because they lacked the technology, who knows?). Hence, the agitation and impulse of intra-warfare was calmed down to focus on rest of the world. For various reasons, they're able to come over many countries; and that gave birth to endless plunder of resources, which helped the west become richer and richer.
Today this task is carried out in much more subtle ways by America. See Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John perkins, where he explains how a group of secretive 'economists' (on US govt's payroll actually) would convince surrogate govts to sell off their national natural resources to America; they would convince them to take loan from IMF and World Bank, which would never go out of American economy though. They are the first line of attack of enslaving countries. If they fail, CIA sends in 'jackals' to remove patriotic leaders (like Mossadeq, and perhaps our Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto too). And if CIA fails, as they did in Iraq, the country worth enough is invaded. Perkins was such economic hitman. After 9/11 his conscience finally decided to unleash his secrets that he had been withholding beforehand. The agent of imperial America has spoken to us.
We need to reflect on the proposed meaning of the terms that are susceptible to abuse in this dark age. There's no limit to the abuse of the term extremism, etc. The most rational, sound, compassionate and/or traditional/orthodox would be called religious extremist if they say something inconvenient about modern superstitions. At a mundane level, son of America and Islam, Shaykh Hamza Yusuf notes that in reality "extremism is as American as apple pie." He points to the fact that it's not the problem in the context of it's actual usage: violence is. I suppose he implicitly would agree to my adding important adjectives like indiscriminate, unjustifiable, "without right." Synonym of this kind of violence may well be "oppression/a-fitnah", which as per Qur'an is worse/greater than killing.
Similarly, calling such fascist-liberals or false-liberals, or even liberals [based on philosophy of liberalism] would be a disservice and abuse of the term extremism. Because it is about wrong thinking, as such.
Use of word extremism is only appropriate when things are view from the Centre and Origin, which is the Prophecy, or traditional, orthodox understanding of it. Anything that is away from First Principles or Centre or Revelation of Islam, is extreme. The 'radical middle way' from which we can keep check on extremism is very clear and pluralistic at once: the sunnah of final Prophet sent to humanity. What more need to be said on this than the fact that Prophet Muhammad warned against "ghulu" (translation as extremism) in religion.
While nineteenth century materialism closed the mind of man to what is above him, twentieth century psychology opened it to what is below him (René Guénon)
The ‘eclipse of human soul and intellect’ by secular thought has brought disastrous consequences not just at pure intellectual level, but at societal and practical level as well. The change agents have been ‘false prophets of modernism’ (i.e., modern philosophers and theorists). At intellectual level, they’ve lost the traditional, religious view of nature and knowledge, and created false alternatives – the cause of mass misguidance. Not only that, these handful of men have produced this ‘Dark Age’, a material civilization, in which both human actions and intellectual efforts are profane and cut off from Divine guidance. At practical level, though they have discovered in their way great deal of facts about human mind and body, but still paved way to moral degradation, materialism and suffocation of public morality.
Read full article here.
Our society has developed a materialistic mindset. A pursuit of knowledge for personal ilmi consumption that is not related to something "practical", (say the professional degree) is frowned upon as a toxic waste that will rust one's mind, especially if it serves no monetary purposes. Our muslim forefathers, a philosopher and a polymath scholar told us, would sell everything for ilm, and not sell their knowledge for money. (Surely stipends were given to teachers, scholars and their those who reflected on deen.) Their love for knowledge was unearthly - starting with the First Principles of Prophecy which influenced all other fields like a canopy over earth. I too want to drink from that cup. For Iqbal, taking the sip from modern west is a big no-no (perhaps because their 'intellect is atrophied'), for the method in the recipe of Hashmites is unique. As Frithoj Schuon put it: West thinks too much and thinks wrongly; east is sleeping over treasures and doesn't think much.
Imam Al-Ghazzali considered the greatest idol to be the idol of the Self. This was his starting point."
- Hamza Yusuf in a speech: Critical Importance of Imam Ghazzali in our Times.
My tiny brain cannot comprehend the delusions perpetrated by movies. I was perplexed and doubtful - but never sure - of these delusions.
Have the screen play writers ever wondered what they are producing? How would people perceive the writers?
They do mention here and there the odds a hero is up against. But. Take into (some level of) free will of so many people and things surrounding the heroes. That hardly seems to count. Occasionally, one or two things won't go according to the plan and that's it. That's just not enough to even remotely satisfy or honor randomness at work in the world of chaos in which the plots are set.
Do they have anything else but "escapism" as an excuse for fooling themselves and their audience? Probably not. Maybe that's the point that even if the possibility of doing a feat is 1 in a million times - it's doable. However, the process of getting there is brutally by passed in the name of Greece's self-delusional fantasies..
We mistake high definition graphics and few moments of breathtaking actions as a recipe for stretching beyond the limits. Not even a chance. Censorship is required by those with deep introspection into these matters.
|Source. Its no physics' singularity theory i'm talking about :P|
In econometrics, people have gone madder than that. They take two data set and run tests to see correlation between the two - without thinking about any causal relation between the two. They do so because of their adherence to logical positivism which is nominalistic and denies the study of unseen/unobservable. Hence, they look at data and not what lying beneath it, the 'reality', the unseen. (See Methodological Mistakes and Econometric Consequences.)
Perhaps that's why we say: No god but God. Denying everything else first to confirm the Unity of God.
I just had a flash of intuition that above 2 paras imply in some way the latter.
For some time recently, I've been perplexed by self-projections and how i should judge my myself. Should i judge myself from my professional (ie academic) achievements, or the quantitative influence of my work (though I'm yet to produce a single thing)? This all sounded egoistic afterwards, as soon as i tried to reduce the anxiety by little introspection from a spiritual point of view. But. Even this spiritual understanding of my ambitions didn't solve the conundrum. I got the answer from iqbal's persian poem.
(English trans by me from Urdu)
Laazt e sair ast maqsood e safar.
Gar nigah bar aashiyan dari mapar.
Purpose of journey is in its pleasure.
If you aim at your destination/home, don't fly.
Zindagi juz lazzat e parwaz neest
Ashiyan ba fitrat e Oo saaz neest
Life is nothing but taste of flight.
Ashiyana (home) is not nourishing for his nature
Comments/response by Hassan Habib to the previous post: 'Lambs to the Slaughter': Reflections on Geo Network's New Educational Campaign.