Between East & West: Former President of Bosnia

Tagged Under : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hello,

Sometime ago, I read (parts of) the book “Islam Between East & West” by the late former Bosnian President, Alija Izetbegovic (1984, American Trust Publications, ISBN: 0-89259-057-2). I must admit it wasn’t the easiest of reads as it appears to be a real in-depth journey into his mind and the reconciliation between his identity, philosophies, nationality and faith. So, I’m glad he summarised the work in his autobiographical notes: “Inescapable Questions” (2003, The Islamic Foundation, ISBN: 0-86037-362-2) so that I may represent the summary here for your convenience (pp 26-29):

“My aim with that book was to consider the place of Islam in the present-day world of ideas and facts. It appeared to me that it lay somewhere between Eastern and Western thinking, just as the geographical position of the Muslim world occupies the space on the globe between East and West. I tried to show that some general ideas and some values are common to all humanity. To summarise briefly, these are the contents of the book: there are only three world views and more there cannot be - the religious, the materialist and the Islamic.

Everything is created in pairs (Qur’an). Man is a dual being: body and soul. The body is merely the ‘carrier’ of the soul. That carrier has evolved, which means it has a history, but the soul has not; it was inspired by the touch of God.

The first aspect of mankind is the subject of science, the second of religion, art and ethics. This is why there are two accounts and two truths about mankind.

In the Western world, they are symbolised by Darwin and Michelangelo. Darwin has nothing to about Michelangelo’s man, and vice versa. Their truths are different, but not mutually exclusive. Over time they manifest themselves as the opposition of civilisation and culture. Science and technology belong within the domain of civilisation, religion and art to culture. The first is the expression of human needs (how do I live), the second of human aspirations (why do I live). This is the contradiction between utopia and drama.

Utopia does not recognise the individual, drama, morality. Study and meditation are two different spiritual activities, with opposing foci: the first is outwardly oriented - towards nature, the second inwardly - towards the spirit and the Self.

Every scientific method leads towards a negation of God and man, whilst all art announces religion. If there is no God, there is no Mankind either. And without mankind humanism, human dignity and human rights are empty phrases.

Civilisation knows nothing of the notion of duty, and every culture is an affirmation of the victim. Civilisations aim is an ‘earthly empire’ with utopian equality, and religion’s is the ‘kingdom of heaven’. This is Campanella’s ‘Civitas Solis‘ as against the ‘Civitas Dei‘ of St. Augustine. Their is no moral order without God. Morality is merely ‘another physical condition’ of religion. While civilisation is evolution; history, religion and art have no true development.

Every religion was pure in its origins (ur-monotheism). It becomes corrupted in the course of its history, as is the case with art and morality; hence the opposition between Jesus and the Church. Every true law is dual, and medicine is never purely science.

Caveman’s drawings or the aboriginal masks from Polynesia are in essence works of art no less stirring than modern creations. The whole of life is marked by this primary dualism, and its ’signs’ may be found in every phenomenon linked with the name of man. Here too is the difference in spirit between Old and New Testament, between Moses and Jesus. One was leader of the people, the other a preacher of morality. And there, too, lie their two different justices and aims: the Promised Land and the Kingdom of Heaven.

These opposites are reconciled in mankind and in Islam. Islam is a synthesis, the ‘third way’ between these two poles that denote all that is human.

I must admit that I was afraid of experts and their reading of the book ‘line by line’. I felt confident that a reader who followed the vision outlined in rough, or even hinted at, in the book would find something more in it than the pedantic, analytical mind. I was aware that my attempt at stating my vision remained understated, merely conjectural, and in places incoherent. I gave a number of familiar concepts a metaphorical rather than conventional meaning: Judaism, Christianity, Islam and so on are metaphors, with general rather than specific meaning. For example, Islam is a major metaphor for the ‘third way’, for every form of life, with a formula that fulfils the human person. In fact, the book was no more than testimony to a vision of the world.

I enjoyed identifying new parallels, theses and antithesis, coincidence and symmetries, but this was not the subject that interested me most deeply. There was one issue that always preoccupied me more than any other: the issue of famous losers. I regarded it then, and regard it to this day, as the deepest religious problem. It can be posited in a number of different ways: whence the tragic and pathos in the Darwinian-Euclidian world? What are the great losers like, and why do we admire them so if this life is the only one we have? Were Antigone, Socrates and Jesus really losers? And if so, why are they so great in our eyes?

What is the origin of our admiration for the fallen heroes that has accompanied us ever since the pre-historical Iliad and The Epic of Gilgamesh? Do not even films such as cheap Westerns exploit our innate sympathy for the victim (that is, for losers) and resistance to the calculated, to self-interest? Sympathy for the victim is not something we can find in the intellect, but only in the soul, by which I mean, essentially, that is not ‘of this world’. And I say sympathy, not understanding, for this is not, and cannot be, understanding.

No amount of reasoning, cogitation and sagacity can explain or justify a single case of a life sacrificed for justice and truth. Something that is very close and comprehensible to every human soul eludes examination by all our science and philosophy. Between the act approved and the approbation there is no mediation of reflection, no apportionment of reasons pro et con. It may even be said that there is no time lapse. It is the instant reaction of the soul to good and justice, to something that is identical to the soul itself. In the world that atheists regard as the one and only, the tragic and tragedy are impossible. In such a world there are only incidents and misfortunes.

In this mindset, tragedy manifests itself to us as a religious parable. In tragedy, villains fall on their feet and great and sincere souls suffer. And because there is no ‘intellectual’ operation to proclaim these eternal losers as mad and demented, the entire story, and in particular its tragic end, appears to us as merely the first act of a greater drama - one that only God could think up. For suffering and death - which are the end of everything to the intellect - are here merely an interval between two acts in a continuing drama. Our admiration and sympathy for the fallen hero are completely meaningless from the intellectual point of view, but for that reason - whether we are aware of it or not - it is deeply religious. For only in such experiences do death and failure or loss have an entirely different meaning.

I dedicated many pages of Islam Between East and West to this question, seeking to resolve it in a variety of ways, but I was never wholly satisfied with the answer. It continues to preoccupy me to this day.”

What of Character…?

Tagged Under : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hi,

From R W Emerson:

..This inequality of the reputation to the works or the anecdotes, is not accounted for by saying that the reverberation is longer than the thunder-clap; but somewhat resided in these men which begot an expectation that outran all their performance. The largest part of their power was latent. This is that which we call Character, — a reserved force which acts directly by presence, and without means. It is conceived of as a certain undemonstrable force, a Familiar or Genius, by whose impulses the man is guided, but whose counsels he cannot impart; which is company for him, so that such men are often solitary, or if they chance to be social, do not need society, but can entertain themselves very well alone. The purest literary talent appears at one time great, at another time small, but character is of a stellar and undiminishable greatness. What others effect by talent or by eloquence, this man accomplishes by some magnetism. “Half his strength he put not forth.” His victories are by demonstration of superiority, and not by crossing of bayonets. He conquers, because his arrival alters the face of affairs….

..Man, ordinarily a pendant to events, only half attached, and that awkwardly, to the world he lives in, in these examples appears to share the life of things, and to be an expression of the same laws which control the tides and the sun, numbers and quantities.

..But to use a more modest illustration, and nearer home, I observe, that in our political elections, where this element, if it appears at all, can only occur in its coarsest form, we sufficiently understand its incomparable rate. The people know that they need in their representative much more than talent, namely, the power to make his talent trusted. They cannot come at their ends by sending to Congress a learned, acute, and fluent speaker, if he be not one, who, before he was appointed by the people to represent them, was appointed by Almighty God to stand for a fact, — invincibly persuaded of that fact in himself, — so that the most confident and the most violent persons learn that here is resistance on which both impudence and terror are wasted, namely, faith in a fact. The men who carry their points do not need to inquire of their constituents what they should say, but are themselves the country which they represent: nowhere are its emotions or opinions so instant and true as in them; nowhere so pure from a selfish infusion. The constituency at home hearkens to their words, watches the color of their cheek, and therein, as in a glass, dresses its own. Our public assemblies are pretty good tests of manly force. Our frank countrymen of the west and south have a taste for character, and like to know whether the New Englander is a substantial man, or whether the hand can pass through him.

The same motive force appears in trade. There are geniuses in trade, as well as in war, or the state, or letters; and the reason why this or that man is fortunate, is not to be told. It lies in the man: that is all anybody can tell you about it. See him, and you will know as easily why he succeeds, as, if you see Napoleon, you would comprehend his fortune. In the new objects we recognize the old game, the habit of fronting the fact, and not dealing with it at second hand, through the perceptions of somebody else. Nature seems to authorize trade, as soon as you see the natural merchant, who appears not so much a private agent, as her factor and Minister of Commerce. His natural probity combines with his insight into the fabric of society, to put him above tricks, and he communicates to all his own faith, that contracts are of no private interpretation. The habit of his mind is a reference to standards of natural equity and public advantage; and he inspires respect, and the wish to deal with him, both for the quiet spirit of honor which attends him, and for the intellectual pastime which the spectacle of so much ability affords. This immensely stretched trade, which makes the capes of the Southern Ocean his wharves, and the Atlantic Sea his familiar port, centres in his brain only; and nobody in the universe can make his place good. In his parlor, I see very well that he has been at hard work this morning, with that knitted brow, and that settled humor, which all his desire to be courteous cannot shake off. I see plainly how many firm acts have been done; how many valiant noes have this day been spoken, when others would have uttered ruinous yeas. I see, with the pride of art, and skill of masterly arithmetic and power of remote combination, the consciousness of being an agent and playfellow of the original laws of the world. He too believes that none can supply him, and that a man must be born to trade, or he cannot learn it.

..This is a natural power, like light and heat, and all nature cooperates with it. The reason why we feel one man’s presence, and do not feel another’s, is as simple as gravity. Truth is the summit of being: justice is the application of it to affairs. All individual natures stand in a scale, according to the purity of this element in them. The will of the pure runs down from them into other natures, as water runs down from a higher into a lower vessel. This natural force is no more to be withstood, than any other natural force. We can drive a stone upward for a moment into the air, but it is yet true that all stones will forever fall; and whatever instances can be quoted of unpunished theft, or of a lie which somebody credited, justice must prevail, and it is the privilege of truth to make itself believed. Character is this moral order seen through the medium of an individual nature. An individual is an encloser. Time and space, liberty and necessity, truth and thought, are left at large no longer. Now, the universe is a close or pound. All things exist in the man tinged with the manners of his soul. With what quality is in him, he infuses all nature that he can reach; nor does he tend to lose himself in vastness, but, at how long a curve soever, all his regards return into his own good at last. He animates all he can, and he sees only what he animates. He encloses the world, as the patriot does his country, as a material basis for his character, and a theatre for action. A healthy soul stands united with the Just and the True, as the magnet arranges itself with the pole, so that he stands to all beholders like a transparent object betwixt them and the sun, and whoso journeys towards the sun, journeys towards that person. He is thus the medium of the highest influence to all who are not on the same level. Thus, men of character are the conscience of the society to which they belong.

..The natural measure of this power is the resistance of circumstances. Impure men consider life as it is reflected in opinions, events, and persons. They cannot see the action, until it is done. Yet its moral element pre-existed in the actor, and its quality as right or wrong, it was easy to predict. Everything in nature is bipolar, or has a positive and negative pole. There is a male and a female, a spirit and a fact, a north and a south. Spirit is the positive, the event is the negative. Will is the north, action the south pole. Character may be ranked as having its natural place in the north. It shares the magnetic currents of the system. The feeble souls are drawn to the south or negative pole. They look at the profit or hurt of the action. They never behold a principle until it is lodged in a person. They do not wish to be lovely, but to be loved. The class of character like to hear of their faults: the other class do not like to hear of faults; they worship events; secure to them a fact, a connexion, a certain chain of circumstances, and they will ask no more. The hero sees that the event is ancillary: it must follow him. A given order of events has no power to secure to him the satisfaction which the imagination attaches to it; the soul of goodness escapes from any set of circumstances, whilst prosperity belongs to a certain mind, and will introduce that power and victory which is its natural fruit, into any order of events. No change of circumstances can repair a defect of character.

..The face which character wears to me is self-sufficingness. I revere the person who is riches; so that I cannot think of him as alone, or poor, or exiled, or unhappy, or a client, but as perpetual patron, benefactor, and beatified man. Character is centrality, the impossibility of being displaced or overset. A man should give us a sense of mass. Society is frivolous, and shreds its day into scraps, its conversation into ceremonies and escapes. But if I go to see an ingenious man, I shall think myself poorly entertained if he give me nimble pieces of benevolence and etiquette; rather he shall stand stoutly in his place, and let me apprehend, if it were only his resistance; know that I have encountered a new and positive quality; — great refreshment for both of us. It is much, that he does not accept the conventional opinions and practices. That nonconformity will remain a goad and remembrancer, and every inquirer will have to dispose of him, in the first place. There is nothing real or useful that is not a seat of war. Our houses ring with laughter and personal and critical gossip, but it helps little. But the uncivil, unavailable man, who is a problem and a threat to society, whom it cannot let pass in silence, but must either worship or hate, — and to whom all parties feel related, both the leaders of opinion, and the obscure and eccentric, — he helps; he puts America and Europe in the wrong, and destroys the skepticism which says, `man is a doll, let us eat and drink, ’tis the best we can do,’ by illuminating the untried and unknown. Acquiescence in the establishment, and appeal to the public, indicate infirm faith, heads which are not clear, and which must see a house built, before they can comprehend the plan of it. The wise man not only leaves out of his thought the many, but leaves out the few. Fountains, fountains, the self-moved, the absorbed, the commander because he is commanded, the assured, the primary,— they are good; for these announce the instant presence of supreme power.

..These are properties of life, and another trait is the notice of incessant growth. Men should be intelligent and earnest. They must also make us feel, that they have a controlling happy future, opening before them, which sheds a splendor on the passing hour. The hero is misconceived and misreported: he cannot therefore wait to unravel any man’s blunders: he is again on his road, adding new powers and honors to his domain, and new claims on your heart, which will bankrupt you, if you have loitered about the old things, and have not kept your relation to him, by adding to your wealth. New actions are the only apologies and explanations of old ones, which the noble can bear to offer or to receive. If your friend has displeased you, you shall not sit down to consider it, for he has already lost all memory of the passage, and has doubled his power to serve you, and, ere you can rise up again, will burden you with blessings.

Character is nature in the highest form. It is of no use to ape it, or to contend with it. Somewhat is possible of resistance, and of persistence, and of creation, to this power, which will foil all emulation.

As I have said, nature keeps these sovereignty’s in her own hands, and however pertly our sermons and disciplines would divide some share of credit, and teach that the laws fashion the citizen, she goes her own gait, and puts the wisest in the wrong. She makes very light of gospels and prophets, as one who has a great many more to produce, and no excess of time to spare on any one. There is a class of men, individuals of which appear at long intervals, so eminently endowed with insight and virtue, that they have been unanimously saluted as divine, and who seem to be an accumulation of that power we consider. Divine persons are character born, or, to borrow a phrase from Napoleon, they are victory organized. They are usually received with ill-will, because they are new, and because they set a bound to the exaggeration that has been made of the personality of the last divine person. Nature never rhymes her children, nor makes two men alike. When we see a great man, we fancy a resemblance to some historical person, and predict the sequel of his character and fortune, a result which he is sure to disappoint. None will ever solve the problem of his character according to our prejudice, but only in his own high unprecedented way. Character wants room; must not be crowded on by persons, nor be judged from glimpses got in the press of affairs or on few occasions. It needs perspective, as a great building. It may not, probably does not, form relations rapidly; and we should not require rash explanation, either on the popular ethics, or on our own, of its action.

..He is a dull observer whose experience has not taught him the reality and force of magic, as well as of chemistry. The coldest precisian cannot go abroad without encountering inexplicable influences. One man fastens an eye on him, and the graves of the memory render up their dead; the secrets that make him wretched either to keep or to betray, must be yielded; — another, and he cannot speak, and the bones of his body seem to lose their cartilages; the entrance of a friend adds grace, boldness, and eloquence to him; and there are persons, he cannot choose but remember, who gave a transcendent expansion to his thought, and kindled another life in his bosom.

What is so excellent as strict relations of amity, when they spring from this deep root? The sufficient reply to the skeptic, who doubts the power and the furniture of man, is in that possibility of joyful intercourse with persons, which makes the faith and practice of all reasonable men. I know nothing which life has to offer so satisfying as the profound good understanding, which can subsist, after much exchange of good offices, between two virtuous men, each of whom is sure of himself, and sure of his friend. It is a happiness which postpones all other gratifications, and makes politics, and commerce, and churches, cheap. For, when men shall meet as they ought, each a benefactor, a shower of stars, clothed with thoughts, with deeds, with accomplishments, it should be the festival of nature which all things announce. Of such friendship, love in the sexes is the first symbol, as all other things are symbols of love. Those relations to the best men, which, at one time, we reckoned the romances of youth, become, in the progress of the character, the most solid enjoyment.

This great defeat is hitherto our highest fact. But the mind requires a victory to the senses, a force of character which will convert judge, jury, soldier, and king; which will rule animal and mineral virtues, and blend with the courses of sap, of rivers, of winds, of stars, and of moral agents.

If we cannot attain at a bound to these grandeurs, at least, let us do them homage. In society, high advantages are set down to the possessor, as disadvantages. It requires the more wariness in our private estimates. I do not forgive in my friends the failure to know a fine character, and to entertain it with thankful hospitality. When, at last, that which we have always longed for, is arrived, and shines on us with glad rays out of that far celestial land, then to be coarse, then to be critical, and treat such a visitant with the jabber and suspicion of the streets, argues a vulgarity that seems to shut the doors of heaven. This is confusion, this the right insanity, when the soul no longer knows its own, nor where its allegiance, its religion, are due. Is there any religion but this, to know, that, wherever in the wide desert of being, the holy sentiment we cherish has opened into a flower, it blooms for me? if none sees it, I see it; I am aware, if I alone, of the greatness of the fact. Whilst it blooms, I will keep sabbath or holy time, and suspend my gloom, and my folly and jokes. Nature is indulged by the presence of this guest. There are many eyes that can detect and honor the prudent and household virtues; there are many that can discern Genius on his starry track, though the mob is incapable; but when that love which is all-suffering, all-abstaining, all-aspiring, which has vowed to itself, that it will be a wretch and also a fool in this world, sooner than soil its white hands by any compliances, comes into our streets and houses, — only the pure and aspiring can know its face, and the only compliment they can pay it, is to own it.

Ref: www.rwe.org

What Proof Do You Have?

Tagged Under : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hi,

When most people have issues in their lives, they often base the aspects on a series of events: usually what someone said, how they said it, or the way something was done or how it was not done, etc. This leads to a train of thoughts repeating themselves in the head that creates anxiety and disturbances, which the person own themselves. You see, no one else can really dominate your head, its yours and no-one else’s, so why do many end up agonising so much about (a) other people’s issues, (b) what happened in the past, (c) mis-interpretating the actual event to suit our own inner voice?

Its because its convenient to do so. It’s easier to follow self-furnished notions and assumptions rather than approaching the source of the matter and deal with it thoroughly and clearly. This takes courage, sincerity, respect and courtesy. Wheareas living by assumptions makes us feel secure in our own little world to the extent that we develop a notion, or an assumption, into a living fact, without any actual eveidence for it. This is the base nature of man, and we cannot turn away from it, but rather have to acknowledge it and work on it.

This, in my analysis, is all what NLP (neuro-linguistic programming), CBT (cognitive behavioural therapy), Meditation, Prayer and a whole host of other therapy/coaching/personal development disciplines are concerned with. Dealing with:

  • Creating self-awareness, integrity and openness
  • Acknowledging one’s own limiting beliefs, values and assumptions
  • Expanding the Inner vision and developing an authentic voice
  • Getting to the source of problem on the inside & altering images/sounds/energy vibrations
  • Realigning the central nervous system so that it congruent and whole
  • Moving to better (higher) place of being, relating, seeing, perceiving, judging and living.

The list is not meant to be exhaustive, but representative of what it means to deal with self-made, mind-consuming assumptions.

Furthermore, the same is true of revealed faith and monotheistic religions. Essentially, they point out the wayward practices of those who design their lives on fanciful conjecture, tradition and habits of convenience.  Continuing from the chapter (68) quoted in the previous posting, let’s take a look at some of the latter verses:-

What is the matter with you? How judge ye?

Or have ye a book through which ye learn-

That ye shall have, through it whatever ye choose?

Or have ye Covenants with Us to oath, reaching to the Day of Judgment, (providing) that ye shall have whatever ye shall demand?

Ask thou of them, which of them will stand surety for that!

Or have they some “Partners” (in Godhead)? Then let them produce their “partners”, if they are truthful!

Just as we tend to repeat the false notions of others in our minds, the same is true of our spiritual beliefs and practices: we tend to reject the avenue towards clarity and evidence-based spirituality and rather follow convenient mis-truths because we have a sense of security by being surrounded in their presence: idols, fetishes, priests, godlings, suspicions, omens, materialism, fellowship, intellect, science, art, construction, industry etc.

Do we stop and consider the whole order of the universe and our little place in it? Are the work of our minds, imaginations and hands nothing but lesser reflections of the great order of the universe. If so, why not acknowledge the Creator of the heavens and the earth for this great order and leave all other considerations aside? Convenience should not replace logic, proof, evidence, justice, rationale, and pure spirituality based on these aspects. This was the way of Father Abraham and this is the right way. All other ways are bound to lead to confusion and imbalance.

The first step towards FREEDOM is to question. Question:

  1. Yourself - the mind, body, soul and spirit, who’s controlling them?
  2. Your Existence - from whence and to where, and why are you here?
  3. Your Provision - who ultimately provides this for you?
  4. Your Relations - what do they really mean and do you honour any of them?
  5. Your Code of Conduct - who’s standards do you live by?
  6. Your Laws - Who says what’s allowed and what’s prohibited to you?
  7. Your Tastes - What are the boundaries and structures that define your choice of taste?
  8. Your Inheritance/Legacy - How are you linked before you and with generations after you?

Begin this honest questioning process with yourself and then once done, ask yourself this:

What are my foundations for these, i.e. by which Authority  do I claim such matters? Do I have a Book, a God-head, or any other higher authority that determines such matters for me, or am I just living by ’societal norms’ of which I am clueless as to who, or how, these norms have come into place.

Question, for it is the beginning of your journey and the end of fanciful assumptions.

“Ask, & you shall be answered,
Knock, & you shall be opened to,
Seek, & you shall find”

For Success and Contentment,

Asad Khan