Arguing In Circles & The Juice From Three

We have a knack for arguing in circles. A case in point is Ahaadeeth. Inspired by the teachings of the Prophet (pbuh) the early Muslims became the founders and promoters of sciences in the world (without dividing knowledge into ‘religious’ and ‘secular’).  Motivated by the same teachings – in whichever form they got it – the earlier generations gave maximum expression to their latent potentialities and became leaders. They imbibed the whole spirit without getting lost into bits and pieces. We have the same teachings handed down to us. But disregarding the collective spirit we have turned many of the blessings into curse. We need to clearly realize what we are and what we were supposed to be.

We do not mind asking the same questions over and over again. The discussions on Rak‘aat in Taraaweeh is not an isolated case. It is the norm. We have psychological barriers and these barriers we have to remove as much as possible. These barriers aren’t allowing us to move out of the vicious cycle of arguments. Arguing in circles we drain our energies and resources. Our state and mind-set is very well described in the following couplet:

yeh kolhoo ke bailou(n) se kuchh kum nahee(n) hai(n)

chalei(n) ‘umr bhar aur wahee(n) kay wahee(n) hai(n)

Sometimes we are deliberately distracted from the main course. We should refuse to allow it to happen to ourselves. We have to break the vicious cycle of debating and discussing the same issues – over and over again. We have to move ahead – literally. Now the most important question is how to move ahead. To come out of the present predicament we need the wealth of ideas. We need the juice and the gist. We need zaad-e-raah (provision). With all gratitude to all those who have tried to capture the spirit of the pristine Message we can arguably identify three persons who could particularly guide us, the Indian Muslims, initially.  There is something to learn from these three persons. We have to articulate those things and MOVE ON.

We have taken something from Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. We have popularized ‘modern’ education. Numberless projects are being launched. Now it is the time to go back to the VISION given by him: The students coming out of our Colleges and Universities should have Qur’an in the right hand, most modern scientific and technological advancements in the left hand and the crown of Laa Ilaah on the forehead. So that the Muslims regain the same glorious status of founders and promoters of science and technology as they did during the ascendance of their civilization. There is a need now to promote rational and scientific thinking and incorporate it in the syllabi. We will not be able to move in the direction of the above VISION otherwise.

The second is Muhammad Iqbal. What to take from him? His emphasis on individual – which is very much in harmony with the goal of education. This is what khud-aagaahi (khudi) is. Our educational institutions should groom self-concentrated individuals who go in the depth of their personalities and come out to give us new standards of thought and action. This is how the poverty of ideas will be removed and we will move ahead. Also, as individuals we have fewer prejudices. With the association to a particular school of thought we suddenly become responsible for a huge amount of (unwanted) burden. Why should I be responsible for the ideas of anyone else? Besides the above, the wisdom behind the finality of Prophethood (khatm an-nubuwwah) and Ijtihaad which Iqbal beautifully describes as “the principle of movement in the structure of Islam” are extremely valuable zaad-e-raah from him. Why we haven’t grasped the wisdom behind khatm an-nubuwwah is beyond comprehension.

‘Allama Hameeduddin Farahi (1863-1930 CE) seeks coherence (nazm) in verses, Soorahs and the entire Qur’an. He argues that the “whole has a value which the parts do not”. Apparently a Church and a Masjid are built with the same materials. If we look at them in parts then they aren’t different from each other at all. When, however, the two are complete – and become whole – then they aren’t the same anymore. Considering the parts, Qur’an hasn’t used any letters which weren’t there in Arabic language. It hasn’t used any unknown Arabic words either. What is divine in Qur’an, then? It is the order in which the letters and then the words and later verses as well as Soorahs have been put together. The search for the organization and coherence in Qur’an should be taken outside the classroom. We have to see and create the whole coherent picture outside the school, too.

Disregarding the coherence when we quote one verse we ignore the previous and the next verses, the previous and the next group of verses, the previous and the next Soorahs and the spirit of Qur’an as a whole – and the environment. This is why when we move to one topic we do not remember or consider the previous ones. With the three luminaries along with us we can hit our wagon to the stars. The three of them can do wonders for us if we give them (or ourselves) a chance. Their legacy is of everyone. The last one is not well known – unfortunately. His approach to Qur’an will change the outlook of people. At the moment there is only some “academic” interest in his works. (Sometimes “academic” sounds “most irrelevant” to me.) Let us reflect on these submissions for a while.