Muhammad Iqbal

Professor Allama Dr. Muhammad Iqbal

Iqbal stands alone in the post classical period of Islamic philosophy as a reviver of the
discipline within the Muslim world. He is the only Islamic philosopher to make a serious
attempt at grabbling with the problems of modern western philosophy within an Islamic
context. His thought has been extremely influential throughout the Islamic world today.

Iqbal introduces his notion of Khudi, or self. Arising from a desire to awaken the
Muslim Ummah and drawing upon inspiration from western existentialists like
Nietzsche, and Muslim spiritual teachers he empowers the Muslim individual. Beyond
its superficial, and important, role as a motivator for Muslims Khudi embodies a deep
philosophical concept prevalent throughout his philosophical writings.

Iqbals breadth and depth of knowledge is truly remarkable. Being educated both in the
east and the west gave him a unique perspective to tackle the problems of modern times.
Below we sample some of his work, and some work related to him. Iqbal wrote in
English, Urdu and Farsi. Many links below are compliments of the Iqbal Academy.

Works:

In English:

• The Development of Metaphysics in Persia (1908)

• The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (1930): The
landmark work in Islamic philosophy by Iqbal. [alternate site]

In Urdu:

• Bang-i Dara (1924) - Call of the Marching Bell [alternate site] [alt. site2] [English
translation]
 • Bal-i Jibril (1935) - Wings of Gabriel [alternate site] [English translation]
• Zarb-i Kalim (1936) - The Rod of Moses [alternate site] [English translation]

In Persian (Farsi): [All of the below are English translations]

• Asrar-i Khudi (1915) - The Secrets of the Self

• Rumuz-i Bekhudi (1918) - The Mysteries of Selflessness
• Payam-i Mashriq (1923) - Message from the East
• Zabur-i Ajam (1927) - Persian Psalms
• Javidnama (1932) - To his son
• Pas Chih Bayad Kard (1936) - What should then be done: O people of the East?
• Armaghan-i Hijaz (1938) - Gift from Hijaz

Allama Iqbal’s Approach towards the issue

of Rationality:

Posted by khuram on August 27, 2006

Iqbal, basically was not a Rational Philosopher. He was a Scholastic (Mutakkalim —

Mahir-e-Ilm-ul-Kalam). Scholasticism basically is such an attempt whereby Scholastic
scholars try to interpret their religion in such a way as to show that religious doctrines are
in perfect harmony with the established rational philosophies.

As I pointed out in another post on the topic of “Scientific Revolution and Muslim
World” that roots of early Muslim philosophers could be found in Mutazillah faith.
Mutazilities were the first ever Scholastics (Mutakalims) in Islam. Thus Yaqub Alkindi,
Al-Farabi and Ibn-e-Sina etc. were also basically Scholastic scholars. All of them had
tried to resolve the apparent differences between the doctrines of Islam and the work of
such rational Philosophers as Aristotle and Plato.

All of these Muslim scholars however committed a common mistake. They mistakenly
took the work of Platinus, a first century B.C mystic type philosopher as an original work
of Aristotle. Both Plato and Aristotle were pro-rational philosophers but Platinus was
inspired by mysticism of Pythagoras. In this way elements of Greek mysticism entered in
the work of above-mentioned Muslim scholars. Platinus was not pro-rational in the strict
sense but under the influence of Plato, he did assign due importance to rationality in his
otherwise pure mystic type doctrines. This point basically deceived Muslim philosophers
and they considered those doctrines as the original work of Aristotle, who was a complete
Rationalist Philosopher. So the work of Muslim Philosophers was aimed at bringing
harmony between the religious doctrines of Islam with such Greek rational doctrines,
which had been contaminated by the elements of mysticism. Muslim Philosophers had
tried to get understanding of religious doctrines based on strong rational footings. Their
intention was admirable and it might had got ultimate success also just if they had
successfully segregated the mystic elements from the rational elements of Greek thought.

Just like early Muslim philosophers had tried to bring harmony between Islamic religious
doctrines and rational doctrines of Aristotle and Plato, Allama Iqbal also had tried to
bring ‘harmony’ between Islamic doctrines and the doctrines of Western philosophers,
who were popular in his time. Thus Iqbal had tried to bring harmony between Islamic
doctrines and the works of such Western philosophers as Rousseau, Fichte, Neitzsche,
Bergson, Loyed Margon, Alexander Ward etc. etc. In addition, Iqbal also incorporated
various elements of Muslim Sufism in his work. Iqbal also had taken the negative
meanings of the emergence of Quantum Physics in his time. He had viewed it as a defeat
to classical physics. He also equalized this ‘defeat’ of classical physics as a ‘victory’ of
religion.

Iqbal, in his work, had adopted many anti-rational elements out of the work of Rousseau,
Neitzsche and Bergson. Rousseau, in his work, had preferred ‘passions’ (jazbat) to
‘rationality’ (aqal). The same thing reflected in the work of Iqbal where he gave
preference to ‘Ishq’ (obviously a kind of passion) over ‘rationality’.

Bergson was another anti-rationalist. According to him, human rationality particularly

was incapable to understand the true nature of time or ‘duration’. For him, ultimate
reality could be found in the true meaning of his ‘duration’. But this purpose could not be
achieved by using intellect or rationality. Only ‘intuition’, according to him, could find
that ultimate reality. According to Bergson, Rationality can understand ‘time’ only in
terms of ‘minutes’ and ‘seconds’ etc. whereas reality is that each and every moment of
time continuously keeps on creating new and new features to the universe. He calls this
phenomenon as ‘creative evolution’ and considers it as the ultimate reality of universe.
Since rationality sees time just in mechanical terms of minutes and seconds, so it cannot
get the true knowledge of ‘creative evolutionary’ aspect of duration. Only intuition,
according to Bergson, can find out this reality. Bergson has conceived ‘intuition’ as
equivalent to such ‘instincts’, which acquire the quality of ‘self cognition’. So according
to Bergson, only the ‘intuition’ (i.e. self-aware instinct) can find out the ultimate reality
of ‘creative evolutionary’ duration. This reality, which intuition finds in this way cannot
be communicated to others with the help of written or spoken words. So reality can be
found only through personal intuitive experience. Bergson also discusses the role of
‘rationality’, which just serves the purpose of converting that non-communicate-able pure
reality into the shape of less pure but communicate-able form of written or spoken words
of language. In this way, ‘intuition’ produces the knowledge of reality. This original
knowledge is pure but cannot be communicated to others in this pure form. Role of
rationality is secondary. Rationality converts this pure knowledge into impure form that
can be communicated to others in the form of written or spoken words.

What Iqbal has done? He has picked the same concept of Bergson’s ‘intuition’ with the
same meaning and has given preference to this concept of intuition over rationality. He
also says that only intuition gives pure knowledge but this pure knowledge cannot be
communicated. By just following the Bergson’s course, he says that rationality can be
used to convert this pure knowledge into impure form and so knowledge can be
communicated but only in impure form. Just like Bergson, Iqbal also says that pure
knowledge can be acquired only through personal ‘intuitive’ experience. Rationality
cannot produce any knowledge. Rationality only converts pure knowledge into impure
but communicate-able form. See that for the purpose of getting new knowledge, there is
no need of rational inquiry according to Bergson and Iqbal.
Bergson’s views deserve heavy criticism. Despite the traditional criticism, these views
are not acceptable to me because of my own views about how new ideas are generated by
mind. I myself have worked on the issues of how new ideas come to mind. I am having
the opinion that only rationality produces new ideas. At first new ideas (in the form of
compound ideas etc.) are formed inside mind in such way that gives the vague feelings
that something new has been known. This thing has been considered to be ‘intuitive
product’ by Bergson. I consider it the product of rationality. Bergson considers it as pure
knowledge. I consider it as vogue and less transparent knowledge. According to Bergson,
his intuitive and ‘pure’ knowledge could be made into ‘impure’ but ‘communicate-able’
through the application of rationality. In my opinion, that ‘vogue’ and ‘less transparent’
knowledge can be made into solid, more transparent and more explanatory by purposeful
thinking and deep rational inquiry, which are more advanced features of human
rationality. In another post, where I have presented some aspects of my views about
ideas, I have shown that in producing any form of new knowledge, mind only arranges
and re-arranges the already available pieces of information. I, in my work, have defined
‘intellect’ as the ability of mind that it can arrange and re-arrange various sets of
information. So the process of creation of ‘new’ knowledge takes place under the control
of ‘intellect’ or ‘rationality’. At first instance, rationality can produce only vague and less
transparent ideas. Those vague and less transparent ideas can be made into more
transparent and more explanatory through the processes of deep purposeful thinking and
analysis, which are advanced features of same rationality.

What cannot be communicated cannot be regarded as ‘pure’ just because it cannot be

communicated. Actually it could not be communicated just because it was not
sufficiently elaborated or it had not acquired sufficient transparency and explanatory
power so as to be successfully communicated. What cannot be communicated can be
better termed as ‘vogue’ or ‘less transparent’ etc. One who knows something new in
‘vogue’ and ‘less transparent’ form finds oneself unable to successfully communicate it
to others. If that person makes his mind more clear about that vogue or less transparent
idea after thinking and analysis, then he can bring sufficient elaboration in that idea that
now it becomes communicate-able. A more elaborated idea would be better than a vogue
idea. Bergson and Iqbal are having the view that more elaborated idea would be ‘impure’
whereas that vogue idea would be ‘pure’.

Actually this ‘intuition’ has deceived many Sufi-type philosophers. It is another

interesting fact that only Bergson has tried to define the term ‘intuition’. Otherwise, it
always has been regarded as something very mysterious, which at once can convey the
knowledge of reality to Sufi etc. Bergson is actually a Sufi by heart. According to
Bertrend Russell, Bergson has just presented old Sufism using modern terminology of
biology such as ‘instincts’ etc. Iqbal is also a Sufi, though explicitly he has reacted
against Wahdat-ul-Wajood. Actually there are many other things in Iqbalian thought
where he has assumed clear contradictory positions. Iqbal has presented his views in the
form of poetry but his detailed views about philosophical matters are found in his lectures
on ‘Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam’. His poetry is full of exaggerations
and cannot serve the purpose of any systematic philosophy. ‘Reconstruction of Religious
Thought’ is actually an attempt to ‘modernize’ the Islamic Theology. He has taken many
of the views from above mentioned western philosophers as well as even from Wahdat-
ul-Wajoody Sufism and has presented them in the name of new Islamic Theology.

There is clear difference between the approach of ancient Muslim philosophers and that
of Iqbal. Ancient Muslim Philosophers like Al-Farabi and Ibn-e-Sina also had tried to
present Islamic Theology on strong rational footings. But, for doing it, they openly had
admitted that their works were the attempt to bring harmony between the doctrines of
religion and those of Plato and Aristotle. Allama Iqbal however never has admitted that
he has taken such and such ideas from the works of such and such western or Muslim
Sufi Scholar. Instead, he has presented these ideas and has given supporting proofs by
manipulating the meanings of various teachings of Islamic Sacred books in a way which
was suitable to his context. Original meanings of those teachings do not come up to the
meanings, which Iqbal takes for his purpose. For example, he has taken the same
meaning of ‘time’ as had been taken by Bergson. But Iqbal uselessly has tried to show
that he had taken that meaning of time from the work of ancient Muslim scholars.
FICHTE belonged to post Napoleon-war Germany. He had tried to re-build the morale of
German nation after their defeat in the hands of Napoleon, with the help of his
philosophy of ‘Egoism’. According to him ‘Absolute Ego’, an impersonal entity – i.e.
instead of religion’s God who possesses ‘personality’, was the ‘ultimate reality’. All
humans also possess ‘personal egos’ which have been originated (emanated) from the
same ‘Absolute Ego’. This Absolute Ego, according to Fichte, was in the state of
transition towards stronger positions. (Remember that aim before Fichte was to give
strength to the ego of German nation after their defeat … with the view to restore the
morale of nation.) Fichte also asserted that those individuals who successfully strengthen
their personal egos, not only contribute to the purpose of Universe as a whole, but also
they could ensure the survival of their individual personalities even after death.

What Iqbal has done? In his new Theology, Iqbal has adopted the same concept of Ego
by the name of ‘Khudi’ and Fichte’s ‘Absolute Ego’ has become ‘Ana-e-Mutliq’ for
Iqbal. There is one important difference however. Fichte had conceived Absolute Ego as
the ultimate reality. That ultimate reality was of a non-religious type. Iqbal only has given
this non-religious type ultimate reality a religious touch. He also conceives ‘Ana-e-
Mutlaq’ as the ultimate reality but in addition, he has equalized this ‘ultimate reality’ to
God. Individuals, on the other hand possess personal ‘khudies’, which have been
emanated (originated … In a manner in which light originates from sun) from Ana-e-
Mutlaq. See that in this scheme, individuals have not been ‘created’ by God but
individual khudies (individuals) have been ‘emanated’ from Ana-e-Mutlaq (God). Just
like Fichte’s views, Iqbal’s Ana-e-Mutlaq is also in the state of transition towards
stronger positions. Individuals who try to give strength to their khudies (through ‘ishq’,
‘riazat’ etc. etc. i.e. not through using rationality) contribute to the purpose of Ana-e-
Mutlaq. Again just like Fichte, In Iqbalian system also, individuals who possess strong
khudies can survive death also. It’s meaning is that persons who did not possess strong
khudies shall not be given any life after their death. According to Iqbal, a person who
wants to die forever can do it provided he must not try to give any strength to his khudy.
So there are no such things as paradise and hell in Iqbalian new Theology. Just like
SATAN is hero of Milton (Remember a famous quotation by Milton: “Better to reign in
Hell, than serve in Heaven” – Milton’s work relates to Romantic movement in
literature) , Iblees is the hero of Iqbal. Iqbal also was influenced by Romantic writers/
scholars like Milton etc.

At this point, it seems necessary to give a mention of two main forms of Theology.
Theology is any systematic theory about God and about the relationship of God with the
Universe. In Theology, there always have been two different types of views about God.
First one is the ‘Transcendental View of God’ (Mawarayi) and the second is
‘Imminentalist View of God’ (Suryani). Semitic religions like Judaism, Christianity and
Islam etc. possess the ‘Transcendental View of God’ (Mawarayi Khuda). Its meaning is
that these religions conceive God as a ‘personality’ whose existence is separate from and
is independent of the existence of material universe. God existed in those times also when
there was no existence of material world. The relationship between God and Universe is
that of a Creator and creature.

Second view, which is mainly held by Arian nations, is known as ‘Imminentalist’

(Suryan) view of God. According to this view, God is not viewed as any personality.
There is no separate existence of God and Universe. God actually pervades (Taari-o-Saari
Hona) in the whole Universe. The relationship between God and Universe is not that of
Creator and creature but is that of soul and body. If God is viewed as a ‘soul’ of Universe
then it means that God did not exist before the existence of material world. Actually,
according to Imminatalism, God and Universe neither had any origin and nor would have
any end.

It is clear that Islamic concept of God is that of Transcendental. First of all Fichte’s
‘Absolute Ego’ is an impersonal entity. Iqbal has equalized this impersonal entity with
God. So Iqbalian Theology talks of an ‘Imminantalist’ God and this view has to be
contradictory with the Islamic doctrines.

Secondly, Iqbal was also influenced by an Evolutionary School of Thought, which is

known as “Emergent Evolution”. Alexander Ward and Loyed Margon were the main
proponents of this school of thought. According to Prof. Alexander, (In Europe, name of
one of Iqbal’s teacher was Alexander … I am not confirmed however whether he was
same Prof. Alexander) the whole Universe is in the process of evolution. Non-living
matter first evolved into the form of plant life. Then plant life evolved into animal life.
This life ultimately has been evolved into the shape of human mind. According to him, it
seems wrong to assume that human mind was the last stage in the evolution of universe.
He says that universe is moving towards another stage of evolution. He calls this stage to
be Divinity. He says that relationship of human mind to Divinity is similar to the
relationship of animal life to human mind. According to him, just like human mind has
been evolved from animal life, in the same way, Divinity shall evolve from human mind.
Thus universe is not complete at the moment because it is still in the process of evolution.

Under the influence of these views, Iqbal has conceived reality to be in the process of
continuous evolution. According to him, God pervades (taari-o-saari hai) in this
evolutionary reality. Here Iqbal explicitly adopts the imminentalist view of God.
According to him, since reality is ‘evolutionary’, so Transcendental God will have to be
considered indifferent and having no linkage with the affairs of material world. By saying
that God pervades in such an evolutionary reality, Iqbal is saying that God is also in the
process of evolution. To be in the process of evolution means to be still incomplete etc.

So there is variety in Iqbalian thought but neither Iqbal has given this variety any
systematic shape, nor anything can be regarded as pro-rationality in this confused bundle
(Iqbalian thought) of a handsome variety of ideas.

Posted in -Home-, Allama Iqbal's Philosophy, Muslim Philosophy, Philosophy,

Philosophy in Pakistan, Philosophy of Science | 17 Comments »

Some Possible Historical Roots of Iqbalian ‘Ishq’:

Posted by khuram on August 19, 2006

Some Historical Facts About “Ishq”:

In the context of Iqbalian ‘Ishq’, it is important not only to differentiate between ‘Haqiqi’
and ‘Majazi’ Ishq, but also to differentiate between “ishq vs Fear” and “ishq vs
Rationality”. It is clear now that Iqbal, in his work has compared Ishq with Rationality.
The difference beween ‘Haqiqi’ and ‘Majazi’ Ishq is quite famous. So here I only shall
mention some historical facts regarding “Ishq vs Fear” and “Ishq vs Rationality”.

“Ishq vs Fear” has been the issue of religion whereas “ishq vs Rationality” has been the
issue of Philosophy. Haqiqi and Majazi Ishq, on the other hand, have been the issues of
religion and Sufism.

1- Ishq vs Fear:

Since most religions require their followers to offer certain prayers. The issue in various
religions has been that what should be the reason of prayers. Should humans offer prayers
in order to ensure some worldly benefits? Or should they offer prayers with the view to
avoid punishment in after life? Or with the view to acquire good status in paradise, surely
in the after life? In other words, the issue has been that should humans offer prayers
because of worldly gains, or because of fear of God, or because of anything else?

Aryian Vedas are the most ancient religious teachings which are available to us. Contents
of Rig-Vadas show that the ancient Arians had been offering their whatever form of
prayers with the view to ensure worldly benefits for them. For example they used to offer
those prayers so that they might get good crops, or so that they win wars against their
enemies etc.

Soon Arian religion turned into a strict but invisible code of many customs and traditions.
Vedas did not contain any mention about the stratification of society into caste system. At
first, Arians had been just fighting against the native Indians, throughout the time of
Vedas. Eventually, they however had to include the native Indians also in their society.
This was the time when they felt the need of splitting up their society into various castes
so as to ensure the survival of their distinct identity from the native Indians. In the main
classification of four castes, first three i.e. Berhaman, Khashtaries and Vesh were Arians
whereas Shudars were the Native Indians. With the view to introduce such a social
stratification, they brought about many changes in their religious doctrines as well. Now
reason for offering prayers also changed, for them. Previously, they had been offering
prayers with the view to ensure worldly benefits, now on ward, they would offer prayers
with the view to avoid “Janam-Chacker”, which was a new introduction to the religious
outlook of Indian people. Actually, with the view to legitimize such a rigid caste system,
Hindu religious leaders had developed a philosophy of “kerma”. This philosophy asserted
that after death, the soul again would take birth in some other body. Whether the soul
would go to some inferior body or to some superior body, would be determined by the
“karams” (i.e. Aamals …. doings) of the person. A person who did good aamals in his
life, after his death his soul would go to superior body. For example the soul of a good
vesh would again take birth in the body of a Khashtari or even Berhaman. Similarly, the
soul of a bad Berhaman could go in the body of Shudar or even in some other inferior
animal. In this way, this philosophy of “kerma” “successfully” legitimized the rigid caste
system. This philosophy deprived shudars, of their right to complaint against their such a
low status in society because according to this philosophy, their low status was the result
of their own bad kermas (aamal) in their previous life. So the basis of Aamal (or prayers
etc.), in those days, had been the fear of bad transmigration as well as the fear of social
punishments because of strict social customs and traditions.

With the passage of time, Janeism and Buddhism emerged mainly as a reaction to this
caste system and the philosophy of Kerma. Both Janeism and Buddhism rejected caste
system and introduced the idea of Nirvana with the view to end up the evil “janam
chacker”.

Rapid success of Janeism and Buddhism posed severe threat to Hinduism. Hindu
religious leaders again felt the need to introduce new reforms in their religion in order to
counter the threat of Janeism and Buddhism as well as to win the popularity of Hinduism
among the general public.

Emergence of such literature as Ramayein and Maha-Bharata relates to this point in time.
Bhagwat Geeta is the important portion of Maha-Bharata. Philosophy of Bhagwat Geeta
provided for a new basis for why humans should offer their prayers. Philosophy of
Bhagwat Geeta is also not in favour of caste system. Secondly this philosophy asserts that
basis of prayers should be the LOVE OF HUMANS FOR GOD. According to this
philosophy, this love should be unconditional — means the basis of this love should not
be the fear of punishment, or expectation of reward after death. Humans should love God
without any hidden or secondary motive, and Such a love for God should be the reason
for the offer of religious prayers.

In Semitic religions like Judaism and Christianity, the reasons for why humans should
offer prayers have been both (i) to ensure worldly benefits and; (ii) the fear of
punishment or expectation of reward in the after-life. The examples of worldly benefits
include that Jews were promised for the acquisition of ‘promised land’. Hazrat Isa (RA)
had promised for the ‘heavenly kingship’ for his nation.

In Islam, the reason for offer of prayers include (i) spiritual growth, (ii) fear of
punishment and expectation of reward in the after-life, (iii) Love for and obedience to
Prophet of Islam (PBUH). etc. (iv) As a thanks to God.

The concept of ‘love of human for God’, in an elaborated and transparent form, has been
evolved after 1st century of the emergence of Islam. By that time, many ‘Abid-o-Zahid’
Muslims had lost the spiritual basis of their prayers. They used to offer their prayers just
to show before others that how much ‘ibadat-guzar’ they were. The ‘riakary’ of such
‘Abid-o-Zahid’ persons was apparent in their dishonest conducts and attitudes in various
worldly matters. Sufism, in Islam, has been emerged, originally as a reaction to this type
of ‘riakary’ of such type of ‘Abid-o-Zahid’ persons. Early Sufis differentiated between
‘Zahir’ and ‘Batan’. They took the initiative to offer their prayers with such purpose as
the purification of their inner-self (batan), instead of just to make show of their number of
prayers to others. In those days, Hazrat Rabia Basri (RA) happened to be the first Muslim
scholar who introduced the idea of ‘Love of Human for God’, as a basis for the prayers.

This original idea of ‘Love of Human for God’, later on was contaminated by later Sufis
with the Greek notion of ‘Ishq’. Actually later Sufis had adopted various elements of
‘Immanatalist’ doctrines of Indian ‘Vedantas’ and Greek’s ‘Neo-Platonist’ theologies. I
shall discuss about the historical development of ‘Neo-Platonism’ theology later in this
post. Here I shall discuss only the main doctrine of this ‘Neo-Platonism’. This theology,
or philosophy, was developed by the 1st century B.C philosopher Platinus. According to
him, the whole reality or the source of origin of everything is a single unity which he
calls ‘Zat-e-Behet’. This entity, according to him, transcends the universe but everything
of the universe which are (i) First Intellect, (ii) Ruh-e-Kul, (iii) Ruh-e-Alvi of humans,
(iv) Ruh-e-Safli of humans and (v) matter; have been EMANATED from that ‘zat-e-
behet’. ‘Emanation’ means just like light emits from sun in such way that no loss is
suffered by the sun.

According to the details, first of all ‘first intellect’ emanated directly from ‘zat-e-behet’.
Then Ruh-e-Kul emanated from the intellect. Then Ruh-e-Alvi of humans emanated from
that Ruh-e-Kul. Then this Ruh-e-Alvi lost its true status and became inclined to matter
and thus became ‘Ruh-e-Safli’. According to Platinus, human body is composed of
matter. Human soul has been imprisoned in matter in this way. The highest goal before
human is to try to purify his soul (through ‘riazat’, ‘maraqba’ etc. etc.) so that the soul
may get freedom from the imprisonment in matter. After getting freedom from matter,
the ‘purified’ souls then starts backward, or better to say, up-ward movement towards
Ruh-e-Kul, then to intellect and finally again units with the ‘zat-e-behet’.

Platinus says that when human soul is in imprisonment of matter, it feels intense missing
of ‘zat-e-behet’ and the soul acquirs the feeling of ‘Be-Qarari’ for meeting or uniting with
‘zat-e-behet’. This feeling of ‘Be-Qarari’ of human soul for uniting with ‘zat-e-Behet’
has been named as ‘Ishq’ by Platinus.

It is this ‘Ishq’ which compells humans to do such things as ‘maraqbas’, ‘riazat’ etc. etc.
so that the soul may be purified and get freedom from the imprisonment of matter. To get
his soul re-united with the zat-e-behet is the ultimate real goal for any human, according
to this doctrine.

It is important to mention that not only Muslim Sufis, but Muslim rationalist philosophers
such as Al-Farabi and Ibn-e-Sina also had adopted this emanation doctrine with its details
— but after some modifications. Muslim Sufis have derived their concepts of ‘Ishq-
Haqiqi’, ‘Fana-Fi-Allah’, etc. from this doctrine. In addition, various concepts which are
found in works of Muslim scholars such as sufli, alvi, first intellect etc. also have Greek
origins. Just like in this ‘Neo-Platonism’, where ultimate goal for human is to get his soul
re-united with ‘zat-e-behet’, in many forms of Sufism, the ultimate goal before Sufi is
also ‘Fana-fi-Allah. Just like in Neo-Platonism, where maraqbas and riazats are required
for this purpose, in many forms of Sufism also the same maraqbas and riazats are
required for this purpose. In addition, according to Neo-Platonism, since everything has
been emanated from a single source, so all the beauty found in universe is just the
reflection of that singe source. This concept has been taken up by Sufis by the name of
‘Husn-e-Azal’ and they have named the ‘attraction’ for this ‘Husn-e-Azal’ as Ishq.

Hazrat Muhayyudin Ibn-e-Arabi, the main proponent of Islamic Wahdat-ul-Wajood, has

taken many things from Neo-Platonic doctrines. Both ‘Neo-Platonism’ and Ibn-e-Arabi’s
‘Wahdat-ul-Wajood’ are ‘monistic’ doctrines instead of ‘mono-theistic’ doctrines.
Monism asserts the unity between God and universe. In other words, according to
Monism, God and Universe are one and single thing as no other thing can exist except
God. Mono-theism (Islamic Tauheed) on the other hand, asserts that God and universe
are two separate entities. The thing which mono-theism emphasizes is that God is only
one i.e. there are not more than one gods. But fact remains that one God is considered
separate entity than universe. Universe is the creature and the creator is only one God,
according to Mono-theism. Secondly Ibn-e-Arabi has described ‘creation’ of universe in
Neo-Platonic terminology of emanation etc. In addition, he also has adopted another
Greek concept of ‘Logos’, after some modifications.

2- Ishq vs Rationality:

Iqbal, in his work, has compared ‘ishq’ with ‘rationality’. It means that he has taken
whole different meanings of ‘ishq’. It is clear by now that the term ‘ishq’ has Greek
origins. The meaning, which Iqbal takes of this term, also has very interesting history. In
various poetic verses, Iqbal has equalized ‘ishq’ with ‘masti’. Then Iqbal compares this
‘ishq-o-masti’ with ‘rationality’ and then gives preference to ‘ishq-o-masti’ over
‘rationality’. Here, ‘masti’ vs ‘rationality’ also has Greek origins. In ancient Greece, a
god of ‘sharaab, masti and be-khudi’ was imported from the nearby island of Kareet. The
name of that god was ‘Dyonisus’. The worshipers of that god used to heavily drink
‘sharaab’ in order to get ‘masti’ and ‘be-khudi’. They had the belief that during ‘masti-o-
be-Khudi’, their god i.e. Dyonisus entered in their inner selves (halool ker jata hai). A
person named ‘Orphios’ is said to be the main proponent of this Dyonisusism. When this
god enters into the innerself of a ‘mast-o-be-khud’ person, that person is supposed to
acquire ‘irphan’ (i.e. famous ilm-o-irfan’). Note at this point that many Sufis use to call
themselves as ‘Arifs’ (i.e. this term has been derived out of this ‘Orphios’ which becomes
‘oriph’ and so ‘Arif’). So this ‘Dyonisusism’ is also known as ‘Oriphism’. ‘Oriphies’
endeavoured to get ‘irphan’ (irfan) in the state of ‘masti-o-be-khudi’.

Pythagoras was actually a reformer of this ‘Oriphism’. The reform which he brought
about was that he replaced the method of ‘masti-o-be-khudi’ with the method of applying
rational thought and pondering etc. with the view to get ‘irphan’. Although for
Pythagoras also, the meaning of ‘irphan’, just like other followers of ‘Orphism’, was not
‘getting of knowledge’. Actually, even in those times (i.e. about 500 BC), some Greeks
(including Pythagoras) believed that body was the prison of soul. The objective before
human was the same … i.e. to get freedom for soul from the prison of body. These views
later on would serve the founding stone of above mentioned Neo-Platonism. The purpose
of getting liberty from body could be achieved if a person acquired the state of ‘irphan’.
Orphios and other followers of Orphism used to try to get this ‘irphan’ in the state of
‘masti-o-be-khudi’. Pythagoras introduced reforms whereby he replaced the method of
‘mast-o-be-khudi’ with the method of ‘rational thought and pondering’. So this was the
first ever comparison between masti and rationality. Masti was older than rationality. But
this masti had no any such roots over which Allama Iqbal sahib can feel any pride.

Actually, in old times, the process of acquisition of new knowledge was considered to be
the most mysterious one. There was no such idea that rationality could produce new
knowledge. In many ancient nations, it was only ‘Kahins’ etc. who used to tell
mysterious new things to general public. And those Kahins usually did it in the state of
‘masti-o-be-khudi’. The meaning of Kahin is also that a person who tells mysterious
things in the state of masti-o-be-khudi. In the pre-Islamic Arab, whenever any poet used
to say any new poetry, common people would consider that it was actually some JIN in
the inner self of that poet who was telling that poetry to the poet. It was due to the simple
fact that those people did not know that new poetry was just a product of rationality
(obviously inspired by intense feelings) of poet. Due to the ignorance of this fact, ancient
people only could think that new knowledge or poetry could only be produced in the state
of masti and be-khudi when the inner self of person was pre-occupied by some super-
natural entity such as Jin or god etc. Comparison of ‘masti’ with ‘rationality’ has this type
of history … but Iqbal, in his work has taken immediate inspirations out of the work of
Rousseau, who in his work had given preference to passions over rationality. Rousseau
was a supporter of dogmatism. Dogmatists are those who think that since they already
know all the possible things, so they are not in need to apply their rationality with the
view to get knowledge of any new thing. But instead of following the views of Rousseau,
we must think that we are behind other nations just because we really do not know so
many things. We must accept this clear fact that we are in need of acquiring new
knowledge and for this purpose we should apply our rationality. But before applying
rationality, we first should give the rationality its due respect, which unfortunately has
not been given to rationality by our national heroes. Rather, they unduly have de-graded
the rationality by just following the views of some anti-rational type western scholars.
Allama Iqbal : The Poet and Philosopher
(This article was written about 20 years back by my father, Sh. S.D. Khanna. At present he is serving as the
News Editor in Daily Hind Samachar. In the field of journalism, he has the experience of almost 45 years.
An M.A. in Urdu, he has keen interest in Urdu poetry and is himself also a poet in the language.)

Iqbal is probably the most quoted poet in world’s literary and intellectual circles. His
admirers attach some sort of sanctity to his opinions and use his verses as arguments.
Probably his most remarkable achievement was that he gave an abiding place to the
teachings of Islam and patriotism in the hearts of the people. The language he used was
one of rare beauty and charm. With its solid Islamic background, wealth of stirring
phrases and telling epigrams, his verse can be memorized easily and recalled and
reproduced effortlessly. Even moderately educated has a readily useable treasure of
Iqbal’s wisdom on the tip of his tongue.

Allama Iqbal is the spokesman of reality. The limits of his poetry are unbounded and
limitless. He used it as a source of his message, which he wanted to give to the nation.
Iqbal was considerably influenced by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan’s thoughts. He sprang into
prominence about the time of Sir Syed’s death. He studied the ups and downs of the
culture of man very deeply. He dedicated Godly gift of his mind for only one work –
spiritualism and patriotism. It was the only motive of his life. He lived for only this work.
This work was to give message to the nation, which he gave in each and every way. He
provided it with a philosophical and spiritual content and drove it deep into people’s
consciousness.

To Allama Iqbal, we owe not only a poetry that stirs our soul and philosophy that serves
us a clarion call for a dynamic life, but a message to his countrymen to fulfill their
destiny as ordained for them in the Holy Qoran. For his exhortations, Allama Iqbal used
the vehicle of poetry that he weaved with prophetic vision, religious, historical,
psychological, social, cultural and political themes as if in a Kaleidoscope.
There are, indeed, countless facets of Iqbal’s message each replete with limitless truths,
each capable of blazing a resplendent trail. But the quintessence of his message is best
expressed in his own words in his lectures on “The Reconstruction of Religious
Thought in Islam”. Iqbal says, “Humanity needs three things today – Spiritual
interpretation of the universe, Spiritual emancipation of the individual and basic
principles of a universal impart directing the evolution of human society on a spiritual
basis.”

Sir Abdul Qadir said, “There are so many things which are alike between Galib and
Iqbal. If I were a believer in the transmigration of soul, I would have remarked that Mirza
Galib had great love for Persian and Urdu poetry. This love did not let his soul take rest
in paradise and compelled it to transmigrate again in someone’s body to irrigate the
garden of poetry and he was again born in Sialkot – a city of Punjab. He was named
Iqbal.”

The couplets of Iqbal symbolize the true teachings of Holy Qoran. He says, “Know
Thyself. Everything in this world belongs to you. Remove fear and intimidation from
your hearts. Dive into seas. Fight with tides and strike with rocks, because life is not a
bed of roses, but a battle field.”

Iqbal also made some very pertinent comments on the rising generation. “The youth,” he
said, “had been largely captivated by western ideas and was impatient to put them into
practice in their immediate environment, little realizing the incalculable damage that
exotic ideologies had done in the land of their birth. In trying to evolve a nationhood of
the western pattern, the countrymen would be wiping out of the brightest achievements of
Islam. Iqbal led an unrelenting crusade against all forces of disruption from the beginning
to the end. Apparently coming from an overused pen and a tired mind, his last Urdu work
published in his lifetime, lashes out at all the major evils that would banish from the kind
of society he was advocating. What he branded as forces of disintegration including
colonialism, western education, indifference to religion etc. All of these are more or less
closely inter-related political slavery, in Iqbal’s reckoning, is the main spring of all evils;
it brings out the most sinister side of human nature warps and minds of the rulers and the
ruled alike and dehumanizes vast segments of humanity. Western education changes our
habit of thought and scale of valves, intellectual serfdom leads to indiscriminate adoption
of alien wonts and usages. Immitation kills initiative and discourages independent
thought and effort. Much of what he said constitutes the warp and woof of our thinking.
His idealism is a force that goes deep into our mental and moral make up.

Iqbal is not a poet of insurrection but a poet of man’s awakening. With reference to Sir
Abdul Qadir, it can be said, with confidence and without doubt that except elementary
practice, he initiated writing in Urdu before beginning of the 20th century. In 1897-98, he
was seen in poetical symposiums. He attended a meeting in which the renowned literary
personalities participated. There, he recited his poem Himalaya that was published in the
first issue of MAKHZAN, after some days. When Iqbal started composing couplets,
Daag Dehlvi was in high esteems. By the efforts of Maulana Mohammad Hussain Azaad,
the base of new poetry was prepared. The Hexameter (a verse which consists of six
metrical feet) of Hali was becoming popular among the masses. Akbar Allahabadi, in his
special way, was criticizing social and political problems. The speeches and writings of
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan had done well in eradicating the darkness of minds and thoughts.
Several religious movements had breathed their last. The light of the teachings of Raja
Ram Mohan Roy and Shah Wali Allah was quite new. The struggle for independence of
1857 had not vanished from the minds. Fifteen to twenty years had elapsed in coming
into existence of the Congress. A great revolution was created in political and social life
with the efforts of Surinder Nath Bannerji, Dada Bhai Naoroji, Sir Feroz Shah Mehta and
Badr-ud-Din Tyabji. The roaring of Gokhale had shaken the foundations of the palaces of
the government. Such was the background of mind when our world was feeling the
necessity of a new culture. This was the environment when the spokesman of reality
opened his eyes; he as totally of light saw the wall of India – “Himalaya”. At that time, he
by making the Ganges a witness spoke lonely:
Jal Raha Hun Kal Nahin Parti Mujhe
(I am burning and find no peace and tranquility in anyway.)
Sone Walon Ko Jaga De
She’r Ke Aijaaz Se
Khirmane Batin Jalaa De
Shaula-o-Awaaz Se
(O poet! Rouse the people from sleep with the miracle of poetry. Set ablaze the internal
nest by the voice of flame.)

Lahore, the legendary city of united Punjab, blossomed at the turn of the century into a
new centre of knowledge and culture. A galaxy of writers, litterateurs and educationists
appeared on the literary scene. Among them were Mohammad Hussain Azaad, a first
rank writer known for the first authentic history of Urdu poets, Aab-i-Hayat; Tirath Ram
Ferozepuri, a noted translator; Lala Hans Raj, the saintly Principal of the local D.A.V.
College, who dedicated his services to the Arya Samaj and the cause of education; and
Principal Hakim Ali of Islamia College – an embodiment of simple living and high
thinking. There were also Lala Lajpat Rai, the firebrand nationalist and Sir Abdul Qadir,
a legal luminary, philanthropist, humanist, editor and many more. They slowly but
silently brought about renaissance in thought and literature in the province. More or less,
it was the time when Home Rule League was founded. In the struggle of independence of
country, the Congress, in accordance with the demands of the circumstances, was
changing its own strategy. The day had not come yet, when from the platform of the
Congress, an open challenge should have been given to British Imperialism. Gokhale was
about to demand the reduction and annihilation of new colonialism. Our angel Poet,
Iqbal, warns us:
Yeh Khamoshi Kahan Tak
Lazzte Faryaad Paida Kar
Zamin Par Ho Too Aur Teri
Sa’daa Ho Aasmano Mein
(O man! How long will your silence continue? You should reveal your hardships and
create such a situation that your voice should go from earth to sky.)
Again,
Utho Meri Duniya Ke
Garibon Ko Jaga Do
Kakhe Umra’a Ke
Daro Deewar Hila Do
Jis Khet Se Dekhan Ko
Muyassar Nahin Rozi
Us Khet Ke Har
Khosha-e-Gandam Ko Jala Do
(Rise and rouse the poor of my world. Strike and shake the palaces of the rich. A field
that does not give bread to the farmer should be burnt completely.)

One of the great forums of literary and religious gatherings in Lahore was Anjuman-e-
Himayat-Islam, which had the avowed object of promoting the cultural, educational and
social interests of the Muslims. The Anjuman provided a ready platform to Iqbal to recite
some of his famous poems, like Nalaa-e-Yateem (orphan cry), a pathetic verse lamenting
the pitiable condition of the Muslims. “Shikwa” (the complaint) written soon after Italy
had grabbed Tripoli from the Turks, voices the grievances of the Muslims against their
God. Khizr-e-Rah (The Guide), a poem unmasking and dissecting the European
civilization and statesmanship and Talu-e-Islam (The Rise of Islam), in which the poet
glorifies the vision of the rebirth of Islam, of which Mustafa Kamaal Pash’a coup in
Turkey, was in his opinion, the promise to flourish.

His verse invariably succeeded in generating the right atmosphere of emotional upsurge.
“Hindustan Hamara” his short poem of nine stanzas pointedly refers to the citizens of
the sub-continent as Indians and India as their motherland. It chides communalists by
saying that “Religion does not teach bigotry.” (Mazhab nahin sikhata aapas mein bair
rakhna) One critic hails it as the best patriotic poem written by any Indian in modern
times. The last two stanzas of the poem require a special significance:
Yunan-o-Misr-o-Roma Sab Mit Gaye Jahan Se
Ab Tak Magar Hai Baki Naam-o-Nishan Hamara
Kuchh Baat Hai Ke Hasti Mit’ti Nahin Hamari
Sadiyon Raha Hai Dushman Daur-e-Zaman Hamara.
(The civilizations of Greece, Egypt and Rome are dead and gone but the glory of India
shines still. There must be something and some reason why we have not been wiped out
of existence, despite the fact that for centuries the horrible winds have been blowing
against us.)
Iqbal summed up for all times to come his and the nation’s emotions in lines of ineffable
beauty and splendour.

Iqbal, the poet of world celebrity, played an important role in the history of the Indian
Muslims. Though he supported the Liberal movement, he asked the liberal Muslims to be
on guard so that the broad human principle, which Islam stood for, was not thrown in the
background by emphasis on the nation and the race.

Iqbal described the European civilization as inhuman, rapacious, predatory and decadent.
He even quoted such writers as Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Spengler and Karl Marx
holding conflicting views to denounce in different aspects. He passionately attacked the
European civilization in poems which are pearls of Persian and Urdu poetry. He was
essentially a humanist and considered Islam as a religion of broadest humanism.

The Aligarh Movement, started under the leadership of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, played a
significant role in bringing about awakening among the Muslims, especially among its
middle classes. Chirag Ali, Syed Mehdi, Mustafa Khan, Khuda Bakhsh, Hali, Nazir
Ahmed and Mohammad Shibli were the outstanding leaders and exponents of the ideas of
the movement. They exhorted the Muslims to imbibe the western culture to interpret
Qoran in the rational terms and in accordance with the needs of the Muslims in the
present period and to revise their social system on more or less modern and democratic
lines.