God, You created the night, I made the lamp
You created the earth, I made earthen pot out of it
It is me who created the mirror out of stone
It is me who made elixir out of poison
Today Pakistan celebrates Allama Iqbal’s birth anniversary with the usual lip-service. The key messages of Iqbal seem to have been lost in the maze of officialdom. This is further exacerbated by the hijacking of Islam and politics by vested interests, not to mention the recent events that have shook us all. Iqbal opposed exploitation, Mullahism, emphasised the principle of movement in Islamic thought; and highlighted “Ijtehad†(re-interpretation) of Islamic teachings through a modern parliamentary framework. Alas, all of that is nearly forgotten.
For instance he was clear about the layers of exploitation:
The world does not like tricks and
Of science and wit nor, their contests
This age does not like ancient thoughts,
From core of hearts their show detests.O wise economist, the books you write
Are quite devoid of useful aim:
They have twisted lines with orders strange
No warmth for labour, though they claim.The idol houses of the West,
Their schools and churches wide
The ravage caused for, greed of wealth
Their wily wit attempts to hide
The questions that Iqbal raises in his poetry are universal and deal with the larger issues of Man’s relationship with God and the Universe. This is why his poetry does not address any particular group, but the entire Muslim Ummah. He has inspired Muslims with the realization of life and urged them for self-reform and self-actualization by searching for their khudi or self.
After centuries of stagnation, Iqbal was a voice for reformation within Islam. Shah Walliullah had tried to open the debate but Iqbal represented the twentieth century consciousness of modern Muslims. Iqbal is therefore known across the Muslim world, widely read and quoted. Pity that in the homeland that he dreamt of talking of ijtehad threatens many a fatwa mongers. In Zarb-e-Kalim, he sings:
Your prayer cannot change the Order of the Universe,
But it is possible that praying will alter your being;
If there is a revolution in your inner Self
It will not be strange, then, if the whole world changes too
In the famous series of lectures – The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam – Iqbal held:
“….but since things have changed and the world of Islam is to-day confronted and affected by new forces set free by the extraordinary development of human thought in all its directions, I see no reason why this attitude (finality of legal schools) should be maintained any longer. Did the founders of our schools ever claim finality for their reasoning and interpretations? Never. …The teaching of the Qur’an that life is a process of progressive creation necessitates that each generation, guided but unhampered by the work of its predecessor, should be permitted to solve its own problems.â€
Maulana Rumi and Iqbal communicated a shared message: de’dan day’gar amuz, shan’idan day’gar amuz (learn to see and think in a new way). As Suroosh Irfani writes eloquently, this
“message sums up an outlook of life as a forward assimilative movement, even as one remains rooted in an Islamic heritage. Indeed, the message arose in a historical context when old certainties were crumbling and the new were struggling to be born: Rumi lived at a time when the Muslim world was traumatised by Mongol invasions, while Iqbal’s was a time of awakening of the colonised masses that eventually led to the independence of India and Pakistan.â€
What Pakistan appears today is not the dream that Iqbal articulated for a separate homeland for Muslims of India. The extremists waving their flags on government buildings and propagating a version of Islam that Iqbal resisted, while the peaceful activists are behind bars. I digress: The vision of the Quaid for a modern, democratic Pakistan where rule of law was to prevail has also been undermined. Somehow, I have been thinking of Habib Jalib – wish he was alive today – here are a few verses by him from a poem entitled Youm-i-Iqbal:
Log uthte hain jab tere ghareebon ko jagane
Sab shehar ke zardar pahunch jaate hain thane
Kehte hain yeh daulat hamein bakhshi hai khuda ne
Farsudah bahane wahi afsaane purane
Ai shair-e mashriq! Yehi jhute yehi bad zaat
Peete hain laoo banda-e mazdoor ka din raat
When we arise to wake the poor, the have nots
A beeline to the police station they make, these wealthy sots
They say that God this wealth to them allots
Oh these trite excuses, oh these dusty plots
Night and day the working men’s blood they suck, o poet of the East
These congenital liars, with the vileness of a beast
(Translated by fowpe sharma and Urdu transliteration by Hasan Abdullah)
It is time to reclaim Iqbal and save him from the clutches of forces that have been attempting to maintain the status quo; and promote obscurantism. His vision starts from the self and then reaches for the society and the Universe.
References:
1. A Reader’s Words
2. Allama Iqbal dot com
3. Farzana Hassan
4. Revolutionary Democracy
5. Title Photo by Abro
Related ATP Post: Owning Mohammad Iqbal
Salamalikum,
Rafay: Imam Shafi meant Greek logic really and not literally the Greek language when he said ‘Aristoteles’, as you pointed out. Yes, Mutaliziah fitnah was a direct result of injecting Greek logic in the matters of Islam.
Samad: Tell us one thing: Are the laws of Islam today hostage to the sunnah (actions) of Rasoolullah (saw)? Authentic Quranic tafaseer are explained this way: An ayah is first explained from another ayah from Quran, then ahadeeth, then ijmaa’ of shahbah, salaf, etc.? Now, tell us where are the “interpretations” of the authors authentic tafaseer.
Raza Sahib: I specifically asked you how you ended up translating “ijtehad” as RE-interpretation! You failed to answer this. I’m not asking when the door of ijtehad was closed and who closed it, and what Iqbal had to say for it. If ijtehad doesn’t mean RE-interpretation, would you care to update your post and make that clear in future comments?
Re-opening door of ijtehad doesn’t mean re-interpretation. I think it’s a simple enough concept to understand. Yes, Iqbal called for it. But, so did scholars of Islam starting from ibn Taymiyyah to many today. However, your concept of re-opening ijtehad is re-interpretation based upon ‘modern parliamentary framework’, which is not what Iqbal is saying. What these personalties mean is doing ijtehad within a strict limit of shariah and applying the concept of what is known as Maqasid ash-shariah (the goals of shariah) in fiqh. Ijtehad is based on Quran, Sunnah, ijmaa’ and then qiyaas and not some modern platform.
Also, you are incorrect in making a general statement of using ijtehad in all matters of Islam. Please know that ijtehad IS NOT allowed in matters of clear injections (muhkamaat) because there is no need, of course! This includes the five pillars, hadd punishments in general, etc. Please bring me one authenic source (not the run of the mill, igornat progressives), even Iqbal, where this concept is challeneged. Yes, rules that are affected by culture/time/circumstances can be changed from time and place but that changed has to be based on Quran and Sunnah and done by mujtahids and not on some modern theory and by laypersons like politicians, “intellectuals”, and what have you Would it be appropriate to ask a group of medical doctors, who in their own right are learned people, to design an airplane? Then, how come some learned intellectuals in a parlimentary settings be allowed to derive injunctions from Quran and Sunnah, etc. Does usul (principles [of jurisprudence]) mean nothing to people? Or you think any learned person automatically knows all what’s written in Quran and Sunnah and usul that Quran and Sunnah champion.
If what you say about Iqbal’s interpretation of ijma’ being parlimentary-based, then he is sorely wrong. This concept of ijma’ is of course not new. Imam Sahfi’ in his book al-Umm talks about ijmaa’ and how the permissibility of ijmaa’ can be found in al-Quran. Here is the issue: You are championing changing the rulings in Islam from one time to another based on “core principles of Islam”, right? But, you have demonstrated that in fact you are advocating for changes in the core principle of Islam! How? You are suggesting, based on how you interpret Iqbal, that consensus of modern parlimentary body can be taken as ijmaa’ in shariah/fiqh! However, the core principle is that ijmaa of sahabah, then the rest of salaf is looked at first and finally the sound/authentic scholars to come to a conclusion. In fact, Imam Malik was so strict that he would only accept the ijmaa’ of the learned of ahl al-Madinah in matters of difference of opinions because he believed what learned people of ahl al-Madinah did can be considered to be closest to what Rasoolullah (saw) did. Now, please do compare the ijmaa principle of these imams and what you are talking about. To me, it is clear that a fundamental shift is being advocated in the core principles, like ijmaa’ here, unbounded use of qiyaas and then the worst of all hadith rejectors (no Sunnah!). The fact is to reach to vague, liberal rulings or to outlandishly change rulings in Islam one is forced to change the principles because otherwise it’s not possible, walhamdulillah.
Opening the door of ijtehad means tackling issues like IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) birth, fiqh al-aqaliyaat (minority fiqh, for today we see an unprecedent situation where a large Muslims communities live in non-Muslim lands), and how DNA tests are to be judged in cases of hadd, etc, etc. On the other hands, there are completely illetrate intellectuals who want to do fake ijtehad to re-interpret shariah laws rather than knowing where exactly ijtehad is needed.
Lastly, with all due respect, you are saying much more than just propagating Iqbal’s call for ‘change’. Social justice, self-transformation through Islam are achieved on matters that are settled and have clear injunctions and do not need ijtehad. They only need to be preached and reintroduced! Allahu Alam
they call themselves
Dear Wasim Arif- thanks for the defence (!) but I think it is important that there is disagreement and debate – a thousand flowers must bloom, always.
Ibrahim Bhai,
I really disagree with your diatribe against Raza’s post especially given YOU HAVE NOT READ IT!!!!!
I need not quarrel with you for it will achieve nothing, you can laud Imam Shafi alone and I and others can do likewise for Iqbal and Rumi but you talk of childish behaviour, how can you criticise the points without reading the post. Come on bhai, be fair to Raza and to others.
Feimanallah
Wasim
Ibrahim:
I respect your views and the right to differ and even trash my views here-
The ijtihad that A. Iqbal was asking for implied the re-opening of the doors of ijtihad which our orthodoxy holds that have been closed since the four schools documented their respective interpretations nearly 8 centuries ago.
ijtihad is the central to Iqbal’s vision. He opined that Muslim laws could be modified from time to time under the core principles of Islam, which are universal for all times. And, the modern parliament can facilitate that. This was the essence of his lecture that I quoted in the post.
Ijma: Since Quran, Hadith and Qiyas (legal syllogism) constitute Islamic knowledge, Iqbal recommends Ijma as another valid source in Islam. However, he interprets ijma as the parliamentary process. He held that national development and state-policies are entrusted to the parliament (subject to the presence of a good number of qualified religious scholars).
Private life: this post was not about how Iqbal’s personal life – that may have its role in his intellectual and poetic development and is a separate subject in itself.
All I am saying is that Iqbal’s vision had some fundamental calls for change: transformation of Muslims’ condition across the globe and in particular India, infusing modernity in the way Islamic laws had been settled centuries ago, a strong emphasis on social justice and above all an inner transformation of the muslim ‘self’ that had suffered a long spell of orthodoxy and colonialism.
Ahsan: thanks for pointing out the apparent contradicitions in the text.While the themes of Iqbal’s poetry are universal, his primary audience – poetic works and prose – is the Ummah!