[Reader-list] Two Iqbals & One Faiz and AnalHa

[yasir ~]

sorry havent had a chance to reply. keeping up with the list is
impossible at the moment due to my own engagements and the daunting
list volume... and the repititious predictable arguments with
occasional gems here and there ...

I agree that things apparently black and white become so many shades of grey.

so, sufism or (other form of religion) may be deeply personal, but
there are also some distinct (and living) traditions, practices and
trends including heretical, heterodox, orthodox and
absorption/rejection of the ideas in specific ways depending on the
(religious) frames of reference (such as particular sunni/shia
subsects). so yes there are different types, schools (tariqa),
traditions, amalgamations, and practices - which sometimes borrow from
christian, jewish, sadhu, hindu ideas and practices. they may also be
geographically distinct.

with iqbal as one goes through his distnct 5 stages gaining the
wisdoms of Adam/transcendence, Angels/freedom, Soul/action,
Love/expansion and Civilization/creation, the last is the
understanding of society and history as creation, after having  gone
through the rest. Khurram Shafique claims iqbal follows this pattern
in an enigmatic way throughout his works, poems, prose works and down
to the structure and order of couplets in his poems !

analhaq isa certain historical moment - it really is the expression of
'fana' - disappeance into a larger entity - the metaphysics of this
(god, man etc) and the eschatology (stages/states and
identifications/relations) is different for different sufis living in
different times - with all the above also applying. for faiz the
historical moment of offering ones head is a small step, a
particularly rebellious step against the oppressors (intolerant of
realities other than of their own power) - who would rather have this
version of reality (in the head and person) obliterated. In such a
scenario how can the ethos fail to be religious.

Maududi does have a sufistic background/environment but he came to
dislike it as wasted effort quite early. his reading of history is not
orthodox such as on the early caliphate (khilafat aur malookiat - but
i would not be able to say anything more specific than this.

frequently the beloved is god. this scheme with much elaboration,
symbolism and nuances
is there in early sufis as well as ghazal of khomeini, ghalib or faiz.
while this may be a problem (if taken literally) for atheists who are
fundamentalist insisting on a strong form of materialism (metaphysics
in which matter is the primary material), this may not be a problem
for dualists (mind and matter), monists of the other king
(mind/spirit/god as primary) and agnostics (who has seen the other
side - we might get a surprise). this doesnt exhaust the possibilities
or the arguments.

While my guess would be: faiz leaning towards agnosticism, his basic
definition of truth is something like, following the trail of the
beloved. on the other hand (from intizar hussain) faiz would be what
is a cultural muslim for whom the debate about god's existence is
meaningless.

this is a fairly common attitude for non-religious types in every trade.

Kshemendra, i find your urges and observations fascinating. this is
heterodoxy and probably what is most interesting in itself - but of
least interest to bigots, alas. you been hanging out in the wrong
places sometimes without a choice.

best


On 9/12/07, Kshmendra Kaul <kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Rahul and Yasir and all other interested ones
>
> "These matters that with myself I too much discuss
>   Too much explain"
> From Ash Wednesday by T S Eliot