Man is a Creative Activity

"When attracted by the forces around him, man has the power to shape and direct them; when thwarted by them, he has the capacity to build a much vaster world in the depths of his own inner being, wherein he discovers sources of infinite joy and inspiration.  Hard his lot and frail his being, like a rose-leaf, yet no form of reality is so powerful, so inspiring, and so beautiful as the spirit of man!  Thus in his inmost being man, as conceived by the Quran, is a creative activity, an ascending spirit who, in his onward march, rises from one state of being to another."

Allama Iqbal (from The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam)

Making Wholes

The secrets of the sun are yours, but you

Content yourself with motes trapped in its beams.

Turn to what truly lives, reject what seems -

Which matters more, the body or the soul?

Be whole: desire and journey to the Whole.

~ Farid ud-Din Attar (Manteq at-Tair)

How may we come to create healthy societies in this world?  In what way may different nations cultivate a genuine unity with one another, despite being identified by different religions?  In what ways may a method of education facilitate societies and nations of achieving a genuine integrity, a vital wholeness, and a real collective self?  What do we, the people of a society, need to learn?

In Political Thought in Islam, Allama Iqbal describes how a genuine unity of a nation is not based on geographic boundaries, language or social tradition, but "in the unity of the religious and political ideal; or, in the psychological fact of like-mindedness..."  It is, as Iqbal describes, a unity based upon "the spiritual force of a common ideal" that can bind a people together.  Iqbal emphasizes that Islam itself teaches that nationality is not the pinnacle of political development.  He emphasizes that "the general principles of the law of Islam rest on human nature, not on the peculiarities of a particular people."

Given these teachings from Iqbal, there is every reason to believe that the people of a single nation can come together around shared, common essentials of their one faith, instead of bickering about whose sect or denomination is the only true way.  Given all this, there is every reason to believe that different nations, identified with different religions, can also come together around shared essentials, common to other (perhaps all) religions.  I personally believe that Iqbal was not only showing a nation, but also the totality of humanity itself, how to evolve into a genuine pluralism wherein all people are part of a new social process.

Very significant is the intriguing book by Mary Parker Follett, The New State, published in 1918.  In this early classic of American political theory, Follett outlines several concepts and theories which Iqbal so articulately expressed in his own writings.  On the topic, for instance, of what Iqbal refers to as "the psychological fact of like-mindedness," Follett writes of a "genuine, integrated togetherness," implying a similar like-mindedness.

In The New State is a consistent distinction between the group and the crowd ("group" and "crowd" are her terms).  Follett refers to the latter in various ways, including "the helter-skelter strivings of an endless number of social atoms" which, she states, "can never give us a fair and ordered world."  It is, instead, the group which she argues is based upon a genuine consensus of all persons and an "integrated togetherness" not unlike Iqbal's "psychological fact of like-mindedness" being the key to a nation's self-identity.

This passage from Follett's book, referring to the "helter-skelter strivings" immediately brings to mind Iqbal's admonition (near the end of Islam as a Moral and Political Ideal) where he argues against the chaos of the crowd, and for the order of the coherent group.  He writes:

"Islam is one and indivisible; it brooks no distinctions in it.  There are no Wahabies, Sh'ias, Mirzais or Sunnies in Islam.  Fight not for the interpretations of the truth, when the truth itself is in danger.  It is foolish to complain of stumbling when you walk in the darkness of night.  Let all come forward and contribute their respective shares in the great toll of the nation.  Let the idols of class distinctions and sectarianism be smashed for ever; let the Mussalmans of the country be once more united into a great vital whole."

Very much resonant of this "great vital whole" is the lack of separation between church and state about which Iqbal writes (in Political Thought in Islam).  There is, he says, no "high-priest of Islam."  Continuing, he writes:

"The Prophet himself is not regarded as absolutely infallible by many Muhamaddan theologians (e.g., Abu Ishaq, Tabari).  In fact, the idea of personal authority is quite contrary to the spirit of Islam.  The Prophet of Arabia succeeded in commanding the absolute submission of an entire people; yet no man has depreciated his own authority more than he."

Iqbal's emphasis is apparent that it is the "will of the whole Muslim community," oriented along the lines of a genuine consensus, that is central to a social organism developing as a collective self.  In the last paragraph, he points to the example, par excellence, of how consensus is modeled.  Throughout The New State, about consensus including all and excluding none, Follett is in agreement with Iqbal. 

Iqbal makes it very clear in other writings (e.g., The Muslim Community - A Sociological Study) that the individuals in a society make up something larger that is a distinct social organism which possesses its own totality and evolving consciousness (far beyond zeitgeist).  He shares that the main object of religion is "to build up a coherent social whole for the gradual elevation of life."  The italicization is my emphasis, as I find this definition of religion to be inspired and achievable, if only people could sit still with Iqbal for some time.

The principle of consensus is a key to this process whereby a social whole evolves into being.  Follett makes a point of stating that it is indeed a "process" (her specific term) whereby a genuine pluralistic society is evolved into being, not unlike how a chemical process transforms substances through their combination into something new.  Consensus, then, is not to be understood as a passive, simplistic, and mechanical adding-together of disparate parts, but rather as an active process whereby something new is born and grown.  Social pluralism may then be, with consensus bringing all opinions together around shared principles, gradually birthed (one might say realized) into existence.

Follett and Iqbal share another line of understanding.  Very evident is Iqbal's emphasis on the reality of a social wholism toward which religion can be growing people.  This connects with Iqbal's belief that democracy is "the most important aspect of Islam regarded as a political ideal."  It's clear that Iqbal believed that democracy could be born out of mankind's coming-together, in consensus, with the spirit of religous unity at its core.  In the same manner, Follett writes:

"Democracy is an infinitely including spirit.  We have an instinct for democracy because we have an instinct for wholeness; we get wholeness only through reciprocal relations, through infinitely expanding reciprocal relations.  Democracy is really neither extending nor including merely, but creating wholes."

With further allusions to the "process," and resonating with Iqbal's emphasis on consensus, Follett writes:

"To have democracy we must live it day by day.  Democracy is the actual commingling of men in order that each shall have continuous access to the needs and the wants of others.  Democracy is not a form of government; the democratic soul is born within the group and then it develops its own forms."

She writes that democracy is "done through group organization.  We are sometimes told that democracy is an attitude and must grow up in the hearts of men.  But this is not enough.  Democracy is a method, a scientific technique of evolving the will of the people."

Both Iqbal and Follett are pointing in the same direction, through different cultural lenses.  While Follett's emphasis is very much about political theory, Iqbal speaks to me as political theorist, social craftsman, and insightful cultural healer.

So where does all this lead us with regard to a method of eduation which could support and enhance a social consciousness described by Iqbal and Follett?  Iqbal shares some important points with which we may examine this question.  Turning to Iqbal as our guide, let us question our answers in light of how we now typically think of our systems of education.  It is often by asking the right questions that we can cut through the miasma of conditioned responses.

• What kind of people and society are we to create with our systems of education?  This is strikingly distinct from simply questioning what ought to be taught (i.e., for worldly success).  Central to this is: How is will, not intellect, grown and evolved (see below)?
• Are we creating education with the understanding that it contributes to an "orderly transmission" (as Iqbal puts it) of a collective, social mind, from generation to generation, with the emphasis upon the whole, collective social organism (instead of just the individual's elevation and success)?
• How is an educational method to facilitate society's members of reaching the "highest stage of man's ethical progress" which Iqbal describes as when man "becomes absolutely free from fear and grief" (Islam as a Moral and Political Ideal)?
• How is an educational method configured to build upon man's "essential nature" which Iqbal describes as consisting of "will, not intellect or understanding?"  This is a major piece of Iqbal's teachings.
• How might an educational method support the inherent nature of man which includes, according to Iqbal, the fact that man is, ethically, "naturally good and peaceful," and metaphysically, a "unit of force, an energy, a will, a germ on infinite power, the gradual unfoldment of which must be the object of all human activity (keeping in mind the inevitable outcomes of adopting an ethically and metaphysically ill-suited method)?

Iqbal states that "Knowledge for the sake of knowledge is a maxim of fools."  He makes clear his stance on this by expressing that education is to create a Muslim character, avoiding "the false assumption that the idea of education is the training of human intellect rather than human will." 

It is clear that Iqbal (as well as Follett) is thinking of something quite different than what most of us think today when he outlines how education ought to be configured and toward what aims.  He was deeply concerned about the social organism of which he was a part.  He saw that, without education which supports the creation of a strong and evolvable social entity, things would ultimately fall apart.

In a manner which few others have so successfully done, Iqbal emphasized the core essentials and principles of Islam.  He pointed to how these should be inculcated into each member of the society, being explicit as to how this is what creates and transmits, from generation to generation, the growth of the human will, the development of unique personality, and the unfolding of a Muslim character. 

The growable and evolvable will, of each and every person, excluding none, is the power and binding glue which enable the evolution of a social consciousness in such a manner that man is gradually freed from the chains of fear.  Free from fear, there is no finality to humanity.  

There in the Simorgh's radiant face they saw themselves.

~ Farid ud-Din Attar (Manteq at-Tair)

* * * * * * * * * 

 Many thanks are due to the generous and expert tutelage of Mr. Khurram Ali Shafique in the many high quality study opportunities he offers through the Marghdeen Learning Centre, his The Republic of Rumi blog, in association with Iqbal Academy Pakistan, the International Iqbal Society, and others.  With his guidance, the very important vision and philosophy of Allama Iqbal are reaching many people.  Any misunderstandings of Iqbal's vision and philosophy that I may convey are entirely my own. 

In the Heart of Man

The World, which has no being of its own
Groped for a way to self-fulfilment, and,
Escaping from non-being’s no-man’s land,
It found its being in the heart of man.

~from Message of the East 

* * * * * * * * * 

May the message of Iqbal spread.  May its essence become known and embodied.  

May humanity come to its senses.  

May humanity not give up on itself.  

May humanity succeed in unearthing its splendors.

Inshallah, may this occur...now.

Happy New Year to All!

 

Marghdeen Now

In the Javid Nama, Allama Iqbal shares a journey through 7 stations. He is guided through these 7 by the spirit of Mawlana Rumi. One of the stations includes the planet Mars. Here Iqbal introduces Marghdeen.  Read this excellent abridged version of this Mars journey at:

 

http://therepublicofrumi.com/iqbal/works/javidnama06.htm 

Marghdeen is, we learn, a world that was the outcome of Barkhia, a Martian ancestor, refusing an offer made by Farzmurz to have a world free of any religious restriction. Indeed, this world offered by Farzmurz to Barkhia would be unknown to God. Barkhia resisted this offer, declined it, with the outcome being that God rewarded the descendants of of Barkhia with Marghdeen.

The people of Marghdeen are described as advanced in science and spirituality. What distinguishes them from earthly humans is that their knowledge is solely dedicated toward improving life. Selfless and simple, they are a race of beings who live soulfully. It is explained that, while the hearts of humans are contained in their bodies, the bodies of the Martians are contained in their hearts.

Marghdeen is described as a world in which no one is poor. No one is ruled by any other. A Martian astronomer offers a dramatic clarification, when asked about whether one might have a destiny of, for instance, being a beggar. He shares that there is no shortage of destinies, and that one only needs to ask God. He explains a secret of destiny: Change yourself and your world changes.

The Martian alludes to earthly humans, stating that they have forgotten themselves, and thus also genuine faith. Humans, he explains, conform to what is outside of themselves (including religion), while, however, leaving unsought and unrealized what is genuinely precious within themselves.

What was Iqbal communicating in this story of Marghdeen?

I propose that he points to a formula for how we human beings may choose to live. I also propose that he was not merely being poetic for the sake of sharing beautiful words. 

He was, I believe, giving something to us in this world, here and now, which, if understood, could be a pathway to a newly created world.  I emphasize that I do not view Marghdeen as merely poetic.  I believe Iqbal was pointing to something that is to be actually (for real) manifested in this place we call the world.

Iqbal believed strongly that all people should seek consensus with each other. That seems very achievable when we love one another. Indeed, love seems to be the way.  It is, I believe, the pathway toward creating a Marghdeen here and now.  

I believe that Marghdeen may consist of genuinely choosing to connect with other people through an ethos founded on Love, instead of through bodies. So we depart from connecting with other people as things. Rather, we connect on the basis of love which has the power to generate the offspring of sincere respect for the opinions of all people. The genuine respect for the opinions of all people is a manifestation of love (and not merely, in the absence of love, what is just tolerance).

In love, one’s personal ego would be eclipsed in the greater being of the collective awareness/consciousness (manifesting as genuine respect for the opinions of all people in one's culture).  Marghdeen can then arise because of a love-rooted acknowledgement and respect for other people.  One truly desires what is best for one's neighbor. 

This awareness of the larger, collective group (culture, nation, all the world) is not merely being aware of the collective self, but actually being a part of it, essentially dousing the personal ego in the waters of the larger, collective self. Adab brings us along this path, acting as a check and balance on one’s personal, willful, self, allowing the natural growth of something much larger to occur.  

Acknowledging our Common Source, and loving This Source (and all people as expressions of It), we can come together with a shared vision of principles upon which all people can agree. It is a like-mindedness of heart, and not merely another contrived way of putting forward a particularized agenda. 

If there's an agenda, it's one of love, adab, and proactively seeking consensus with everyone in one's culture, nation, world.  It is being big enough (by being small enough) to put aside one's personal agendized drive and, instead, holding the Good of All as supreme.

Quenching one’s personal ego by consciously placing it in the larger context, the larger self, of one’s culture, one’s nation, and even all of humanity essentially dethrones the head, and elevates the heart into her rightful, sovereign place. This replicates what is described in the Javid Nama of the bodies of the inhabitants of Marghdeen being inside their hearts.

Our hearts can indeed become like those described in Marghdeen. If they are now different than Marghdeen hearts, perhaps it's only because a very subtle, but powerful, shift (change) has not occurred.

Can we not enable this shift by requesting a new destiny?

The Morn of Resurrection

In Allama Iqbal's poem, "The Conquest of Nature" (from his second book of poetry, "Message of the East"), is the passage below, "The Morn of Resurrection."  In this section, humanity now stands before God at the Day of Judgment.  Earlier, the devil refused to bow to Adam.  Now, at the point at which humanity gives a collective accounting, the devil bows.

After this passage (below), I share my reflections.  I can only, of course, offer reflections according to my personal capacity.  My intention, however, is for this to be helpful.  

Personally, I consider all such reflections on Iqbal's works as (potentially) highly practical, and supportive of humankind's genuine role.  So it is in this spirit, that is, a practical support for realizing collective unity, in this world, now, that this post is offered.  

         

The Morn of Resurrection
Adam in the presence of God

You, whose sun gives the star of life its splendour,
With my heart you lit the candle of the sightless world!
My skills have poured an ocean into a strait,
My pickaxe makes milk flow from the heart of stone.
Venus is my captive, the moon worships me;
My reason, which does great deeds, subdues and controls the universe.
I have gone down into the earth, and been up into the heavens,
Both the atom and the radiant sun are under the spell of my magic.
Although his sorcery deluded me, excuse my fault, forgive my sin:
If his sorcery had not taken me in, the world could not have been subdued.
Without the halter of humility, pride could not be taken prisoner.
To melt this stone statue with my hot sighs, I had to don his zunnar.
Reason catches artful nature in a net and thus Ahriman, born of fire,
Bows down before the creature of dust!

[Translation by Mustansir Mir]

The above passage speaks to me of hope, of the potentiation of the gold of humankind that is made discoverable by the very seduction of the world.  Without the world, and the devil ever tempting, how could the mettle of humankind be tested?  How could lead be transformed into gold?

But it takes patience to live in the world, and yet not be seduced into thinking that all is lost.  Around us everywhere is (seeming) destruction, negativity, and man's inhumanity to man.  It is the easiest thing in the world to give up hope.  

Loss of hope is a gift of the world.  I can only speak for me, but I refuse to extend my hand to accept that gift.  No matter what evidence may be presented in front of these eyes (and there's a lot of it everyday) to try to convince me that hope is only a dream or wishful thinking, I refuse to accept it.

I sense that this poem speaks to the abiding nature of hope, and to the fact that it is ever-present, if only one does not buy the program of the world.  You buy the program of the world at the cost of hope.  Buying of the program of the world is not the same as being in the world.  The latter is possible without the former occurring.  

According to me, it's the easiest thing in the world to accept loss of hope.  You simply passively accept what the world is saying.  You believe what the physical eyes see.  It actually takes strength and sustained striving to maintain hope, to not be intoxicated with all the apparent hopelessness (which I say is utterly specious), and to look - with intention - at the stars.

I very much like "The Morn of Resurrection."  To me (and I do not pretend to understand it, but only to appreciate it according to my capacity), it speaks to the triumph of humanity.  It is a triumph, however, that seems (to me) to be entirely dependent upon Adam's earlier seduction out of heaven and into the world. Had the temptation of Adam not been successful, would we have this ending?

Similar (I propose) to King Arthur attaining the throne by pulling the sword out of the stone, so too is the halter of humility hidden in the burning world of materiality.  It says in this poem:

"If his sorcery had not taken me in, the world could not have been subdued."

The Devil, and his burning, was a trap. But only by entering the trap could we be set free from it.  By entering the trap, there was some kind of activation of potentiation of self. With the status of heaven gone, now Splendor or Disaster could be willingly chosen.  

I could see (though no one seems to ever talk about it) that the Devil was a bit worried all along that humanity would discover the subtle gold hidden in the dark places of the world.  Or perhaps not, as he might have a role much deeper than the insipidly simple one which most people seem to attribute to him.  Some might say that the devil could be the worthy opponent without which humankind would be without struggle, and thus the opportunity for Overcoming and Triumph.

But...some say, what to make of all the seeming horrors of the world when what is (seemingly) "good" gets trampled over by what is (seemingly) "bad?"  Why cannot justice occur here and now?  That line of thinking, to me, leads to a dark place absent of hope.   

I have spent many years working in fields directly related to man's inhumanity to man. I don't understand it, though I work in the world of mitigating it, in the context of human-determined justice. I sense (meaning simply that I don't know, but merely intuit) that man's justice may be qualitatively different than divine justice. I don't know what is divine justice, but I doubt that it is what is in my mind when I think of justice (as we know it here in creation, in the world).

It is my opinion that the "normal" modern person (any culture, any religion) has an awareness/consciousness that is excessively focused outwardly.  Inwardly focused awareness/consciousness is rare.

I am of the opinion that the bad stuff in the world is a consequence of long-term abandonment, in collective humanity, of an inner orientation.  This is visible (any culture, any religion) in how, for instance, confused and fearful people hijack religious understanding/realization, and/or nationalistic fervor, and/or both, and give it their own, very worldly (burning) spin.  They then mistreat the beautiful, loving, and tolerant aspects of a religion, making it twisted and hurtful, and thus mistreat their fellow man by denying them beauty, love, and tolerance.  And, of course, the mistreated parts of the religions themselves are cited as justificatory reasons for this insanity.   

Then bad is perpetuated, with the justification being simply what can pointed at in the outer world.  Our greatest enemy, then, runs amuck, unchecked, while all problems are projected outwardly onto others.

For me, I very much consciously try, to the degree that I am able, to divorce myself from societal, national, and worldly conditioning (conditioning is ever-present from birth onward). This takes sustained effort to be aware of such conditioning.  I try to lift myself up out of this so that I do not get swept away in the apparent insanity, while, at the same, remaining receptive to currents of collective consciousness. 

I refuse to give up hope that humanity, as a collective whole, will discover its Splendor.  I refuse to give up believing in what all the great ones tell us repeatedly about how people can transform into true human beings. 

I refuse to accept the scissors of separation that are so openly and daily given to us from the world.  I do not want to cut and cut and cut.  I would rather have a needle so that I can sew things together.

I realize, as I write this, that I am denying on the one hand, and affirming on the other. If I don't say "no," with intention, then I'm too easily fooled into believing that "yes" does not even exist.  For me, I have found this to be true.  I must say "no" to this, while saying "yes" to something else.

All of this is, for me, not merely a pleasant myth with which I can be distracted from the challenges of the world.  At the day of humanity's collective accounting, I want the Morn of Resurrection to be the Reality.    

I like it when messages manifest in music, poetry, etc. that highlight humanity's drive for a better world.

Sometimes they're messages with which I might whole-heartedly agree.  Sometimes, I might like part of it, or even just the intention behind it.

People with intentions to make the world a better place for everyone (not just a select few, group, or portion)...I like that very much.

The Unity of Us All.

I perceive a manifestation of Iqbal's message in this short clip from the movie, "The Great Dictator."

 (Many thanks to Yosy for pointing out this clip to me.)