A Comprehensive Dua

There are many Duas that can be categorized as comprehensive like

رَبَّنَاۤ ءَاتِنَا فِی ٱلدُّنۡیَا حَسَنَةࣰ وَفِی ٱلۡـَٔاخِرَةِ حَسَنَةࣰ وَقِنَا عَذَابَ ٱلنَّارِ [1]

“Our Lord, give us good in this world and good in the Hereafter, and save us from the punishment of Fire.”

وَقُل رَّبِّ أَدۡخِلۡنِی مُدۡخَلَ صِدۡقࣲ وَأَخۡرِجۡنِی مُخۡرَجَ صِدۡقࣲ وَٱجۡعَل لِّی مِن لَّدُنكَ سُلۡطَـٰنࣰا نَّصِیرࣰا [2]

And say, “O my Lord, make me enter a rightful entrance and make me exit a rightful exit, and grant me from Your Own a power, favored (by You).”

رَبِّ أَوۡزِعۡنِیۤ أَنۡ أَشۡكُرَ نِعۡمَتَكَ ٱلَّتِیۤ أَنۡعَمۡتَ عَلَیَّ وَعَلَىٰ وَ ٰ⁠لِدَیَّ وَأَنۡ أَعۡمَلَ صَـٰلِحࣰا تَرۡضَىٰهُ وَأَصۡلِحۡ لِی فِی ذُرِّیَّتِیۤۖ إِنِّی تُبۡتُ إِلَیۡكَ وَإِنِّی مِنَ ٱلۡمُسۡلِمِینَ [3]

“My Lord, grant me that I offer gratitude for the favour You have bestowed upon me and upon my parents, and that I do righteous deeds that You like. And set righteousness, for my sake, in my progeny. Of course, I repent to you, and truly I am one of those who submit to You.”

رَبِّ إِنِّی لِمَاۤ أَنزَلۡتَ إِلَیَّ مِنۡ خَیۡرࣲ فَقِیرࣱ [4]

“My Lord, I am in need of whatever good you send down to me.”

 Despite them all being my favorites, I like this one Dua the most, which is comprehensive as well as brief. This Dua has two parts; first one is the strongest remedy against any addiction, which one finds very difficult to overcome, and the second one caters to the unburdening of debt, no matter how large amount is due.

This Dua is related in Sunan Tirmizi from Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). [5] The gist of the narration is that a Mukatib slave (who has to pay an amount to his master to win his freedom) came to Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and said, ‘I am unable to pay the agreed money to my master, please assist me’. Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) responded, ‘Should I not tell you a Dua that the Prophet ﷺ told me? If you have a debt as big as a mountain, Allah will pay it for you.’ The Dua is as follows:

اللَّهمَّ اكْفِني بحلالِكَ عَن حَرَامِكَ، وَاغْنِني بِفَضلِكَ عَمَّن سِوَاكَ

O my Lord, suffice me with your permissible from your impermissible (i.e fulfill my needs from that which is permissible so that I don’t have to resort to the impermissible) and make me with your blessings, independent from all those other than you (i.e. my needs be only fulfilled by you)

---

[1] Surah Al-Baqarah: 201

[2] Surah Al-Isrāʾ: 80

[3]Surah Al-Aḥqāf: 15

[4] Surah Al-Qaṣaṣ: 24

[5] وَعن عليٍّ، أَنَّ مُكَاتَبًا جاءهُ، فَقَالَ إِني عجزتُ عَن كِتَابَتِي. فَأَعِنِّي. قالَ: أَلا أُعَلِّمُكَ كَلِماتٍ عَلَّمَنيهنَّ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ لَو كانَ عَلَيْكَ مِثْلُ جبلٍ دَيْنًا أَدَّاهُ اللَّهُ عنْكَ؟ قُلْ

اللَّهمَّ اكْفِني بحلالِكَ عَن حَرَامِكَ، وَاغْنِني بِفَضلِكَ عَمَّن سِوَاكَ

رواهُ الترمذيُّ وقال: حديثٌ حسنٌ

93. The Morning Light

1. By the morning light
2. and by the night when it darkens and becomes still
3. (Indeed) Your Lord has neither forsaken you nor is He displeased (with you)
4. and the Hereafter is (a lot) better for you than the present (worldly life)
5. and soon your Lord will bestow you (with so may blessings) that you will be satisfied
6. Did He not find you an orphan and give you shelter?
7. and did He not find you oblivious of the Guidance (of Islam) and guided you (to Islam)?
8. and did He not find you destitute and make you affluent?
9. So you (in gratitude for the above blessings) must not be harsh with the orphan
10. and you must not rebuke the beggar
11. and you must recount the blessings of your Lord.

Atheism in the Muslim Youth

There is a lot of concern in the Muslim communities about the rampant spread of atheism among the Muslim youth. I’d like to share my thoughts about this dilemma.

There are two major reasons for this, I guess. One is that the youth doesn’t know anything about Islam other than fairy tales extant in the common parlance. And with those cotton candy sticks they are thrown in the arena of the internet, to fight the beasts and trolls of atheism and ungodliness. And this fight they are bound to lose. Hence the pervasive atheism.

Second reason is that the youth doesn’t find any role model to follow in their near and dears. Every kid likes to emulate the most admired and successful person around, but the youth doesn’t find many religious people around them that are admired or successful. Also due primarily to daily struggle of existence, parents and elders don’t find time to educate and mentor their youth. The situation is aggravated more with the elders being as oblivious of Islam as the youth.

So when a kid, uninitiated in the field of polemics and unaware of the Islamic creed, encounters some attack on Islam, his already dwindling faith in Islam is shaken. Most young people don’t dare ask such queries but if he’s brave enough, he may ask the Imam of his mosque or his elders but they, not knowing the answer, would invariably snub him, which would result in him keeping these irreconcilable difficulties with his faith to himself. Which would pile up and sooner or later would convert into a rebellion with his faith making him an atheist.

The solution to this situation also needs two major steps. One is that if we want our youth to not fall in the cesspool of atheism, we need to prepare them for the impending onslaught of the internet which they are going to be exposed to, whenever they are online. That can only be achieved by letting them understand the Qur’an either by an authentic Aalim or from an authentic Tafsir. This is a must.

Secondly present the youth with religious role models, if it’s yourself it would be easier for the youth to follow and emulate. But if that’s not possible, find religious role models in your community and admire them and follow them, the youth will definitely follow.

Also do not snub any query regarding faith and Islam, if the kid asks a question, be patient and try to answer it and if unable to answer, tell him we’ll go together and ask such and such Aalim about this. This way you are gaining the confidence of the kid to come to you for subsequent inquiries, and you are giving him a role model to follow (in your form or in the form of the Aalim).

Groupthink – Pitfalls of In-Group Consensus

When a group tries to arrive at a decision, it is deemed by default necessary to have a consensus among the group members. This requirement of consensus, most of the time becomes an instrument to undermine the dissenting minority opinion without due deliberation, which most often than not turns out to be disastrous.

So the culture we need to develop around us is that nobody feels intimidated to voice his/her concerns or to challenge a certain design ideology. Progress and development is a collaborative and not an authoritative enterprise.

Here is an excerpt from a book titled “The Wisdom of Psychopaths – What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success” by Kevin Dutton, which points to such pitfalls of group thinking.

In 1952, the sociologist William H. Whyte coined the term “groupthink” to conceptualize the mechanism by which tightly knit groups, cut off from outside influence, rapidly converge on normatively “correct” positions, becoming, as they do so, institutionally impervious to criticism: indifferent to out-group opposition, averse to in-group dissent, and ever more confident of their own unimpeachable rectitude.

The psychologist Irving Janis, who conducted much of the empirical work on the phenomenon, describes the process as “a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.” It’s not exactly conducive to good decision making.

As a case in point, take the space shuttle Challenger fiasco. Under considerable political pressure to get things under way (Congress, at the time, was seeking a large slice of revenue in furtherance of the space program, and a series of problems had already delayed the launch), scientists and engineers at NASA appeared systemically immune to concerns raised by a coworker, just twenty-four hours before liftoff, over the O-rings in the booster rockets. Though a string of conference calls had specifically been convened to discuss the problem in detail, the decision, incomprehensible in hindsight, was made to press on. The goal, after all, was to get the show on the road.

In the event, it proved disastrous. Inquests revealed, as the villains of the piece, not just the O-rings, but another, more viral, more insidiously carcinogenic culprit: a musty, asphyxiating psychology. The Rogers Commission, a dedicated task force set up by then President Ronald Reagan to investigate the accident, confirmed the nagging, unspoken fears of social psychologists the world over: that NASA’s organizational culture and decision-making processes had played a significant role in the lead-up to the tragedy. Pressure to conform, discounted warnings, sense of invulnerability. It was all there, plain as day.[2]

[2] The complete inventory of groupthink symptoms runs as follows: feelings of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking; discounting of warnings that might challenge assumptions; unquestioned belief in the group’s morality, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions; stereotyped views of enemy leaders; pressure to conform against members of the group who disagree; shutting down of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus; illusion of unanimity; “mindguards”—self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting opinions (Janis, 1972).

Does Allah make people go astray?

When Allah says ‘We lead them astray’ or ‘We made them go astray’, what does that actually mean? Is it that Allah compels people to go astray?

فَمَا لَكُمۡ فِی ٱلۡمُنَـٰفِقِینَ فِئَتَیۡنِ وَٱللَّهُ أَرۡكَسَهُم بِمَا كَسَبُوۤا۟ۚ أَتُرِیدُونَ أَن تَهۡدُوا۟ مَنۡ أَضَلَّ ٱللَّهُۖ وَمَن یُضۡلِلِ ٱللَّهُ فَلَن تَجِدَ لَهُۥ سَبِیلࣰا

So, what is the matter with you that you have become two groups about the hypocrites, while Allah has reverted them because of what they did. Do you want to guide the one whom Allah has let go astray? The one whom Allah lets go astray, you shall never find a way for him.

[Surah An-Nisāʾ: 88]

وَٱلَّذِینَ كَذَّبُوا۟ بِـَٔایَـٰتِنَا صُمࣱّ وَبُكۡمࣱ فِی ٱلظُّلُمَـٰتِۗ مَن یَشَإِ ٱللَّهُ یُضۡلِلۡهُ وَمَن یَشَأۡ یَجۡعَلۡهُ عَلَىٰ صِرَ ٰ⁠طࣲ مُّسۡتَقِیمࣲ

Those who gave the lie to Our signs are deaf and dumb, in layers of darkness. He lets whomsoever He wills go astray, and brings whomsoever He wills on the straight path.

[Surah Al-Anʿām: 39]

مَن یَهۡدِ ٱللَّهُ فَهُوَ ٱلۡمُهۡتَدِیۖ وَمَن یُضۡلِلۡ فَأُو۟لَـٰۤىِٕكَ هُمُ ٱلۡخَـٰسِرُونَ
The one whom Allah gives guidance is the one on the right path. As for those whom Allah lets go astray, those are the losers.

[Surah Al-Aʿrāf: 178]

وَلَا یَنفَعُكُمۡ نُصۡحِیۤ إِنۡ أَرَدتُّ أَنۡ أَنصَحَ لَكُمۡ إِن كَانَ ٱللَّهُ یُرِیدُ أَن یُغۡوِیَكُمۡۚ هُوَ رَبُّكُمۡ وَإِلَیۡهِ تُرۡجَعُونَ

My good counsel will not profit you, even though I wish you the best, if Allah wills to let you go astray. He is your Lord, and to Him you shall be made to return.”

[Surah Hūd: 34]

وَیَقُولُ ٱلَّذِینَ كَفَرُوا۟ لَوۡلَاۤ أُنزِلَ عَلَیۡهِ ءَایَةࣱ مِّن رَّبِّهِۦۚ قُلۡ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ یُضِلُّ مَن یَشَاۤءُ وَیَهۡدِیۤ إِلَیۡهِ مَنۡ أَنَابَ
The disbelievers say, “Why is it that no sign (of their choice) has been sent down to him from his Lord?” Say, “Allah lets go astray whom He wills and gives guidance to those who turn to Him,

[Surah Ar-Raʿd: 27]

بَلِ ٱتَّبَعَ ٱلَّذِینَ ظَلَمُوۤا۟ أَهۡوَاۤءَهُم بِغَیۡرِ عِلۡمࣲۖ فَمَن یَهۡدِی مَنۡ أَضَلَّ ٱللَّهُۖ وَمَا لَهُم مِّن نَّـٰصِرِینَ

But the wrongdoers have followed their desires without knowledge. So who can guide the one whom Allah leaves astray? For such people there are no helpers.

[Surah Ar-Rūm: 29]

أَلَیۡسَ ٱللَّهُ بِكَافٍ عَبۡدَهُۥۖ وَیُخَوِّفُونَكَ بِٱلَّذِینَ مِن دُونِهِۦۚ وَمَن یُضۡلِلِ ٱللَّهُ فَمَا لَهُۥ مِنۡ هَادࣲ . وَمَن یَهۡدِ ٱللَّهُ فَمَا لَهُۥ مِن مُّضِلٍّۗ أَلَیۡسَ ٱللَّهُ بِعَزِیزࣲ ذِی ٱنتِقَامࣲ
Is Allah not sufficient for (the protection of) His slave? They are frightening you of those (false gods whom they worship) other than Him. Whomsoever Allah would let go astray, for him there is no one to guide. And whomsoever Allah gives guidance, for him there is no one to misguide. Is it not that Allah is Mighty, Powerful to avenge?

[Surah Az-Zumar: 36-37]

Like in the above Ayaat the words اضل الله and يضلله effectively mean that ‘He made/makes them go astray’. Which seems somewhat inconsistent with Allah’s mercy and forgiveness. Though the translator has translated these words as ‘let them go astray’, it is more of an interpretation than a translation, so the word ‘let’ should have been in parentheses.

So when Allah says ‘We lead them astray’ or ‘We made them go astray’, what it means is that for Humans to act, both their will and Allah’s will is required, so when they want to go astray they cannot go astray without Allah’s will and likewise for being guided.

وَلَوۡ شَاۤءَ ٱللَّهُ مَاۤ أَشۡرَكُوا۟ۗ وَمَا جَعَلۡنَـٰكَ عَلَیۡهِمۡ حَفِیظࣰاۖ وَمَاۤ أَنتَ عَلَیۡهِم بِوَكِیلࣲ

If Allah willed, they would not have associated. We have not appointed you as a guard over them, nor are you a taskmaster for them.

[Surah Al-Anʿām: 107]

قُلۡ فَلِلَّهِ ٱلۡحُجَّةُ ٱلۡبَـٰلِغَةُۖ فَلَوۡ شَاۤءَ لَهَدَىٰكُمۡ أَجۡمَعِینَ
Say, “Then, Allah’s is the conclusive proof. So, had He willed, He would have brought all of you on the right path”.

[Surah Al-Anʿām: 149]

وَلَوۡ شَاۤءَ رَبُّكَ لَـَٔامَنَ مَن فِی ٱلۡأَرۡضِ كُلُّهُمۡ جَمِیعًاۚ أَفَأَنتَ تُكۡرِهُ ٱلنَّاسَ حَتَّىٰ یَكُونُوا۟ مُؤۡمِنِینَ

Had your Lord willed, all those on earth would have believed altogether. Would you, then, compel people, so that they become believers?

[Surah Yūnus: 99]

وَمَا كَانَ لِنَفۡسٍ أَن تُؤۡمِنَ إِلَّا بِإِذۡنِ ٱللَّهِۚ وَیَجۡعَلُ ٱلرِّجۡسَ عَلَى ٱلَّذِینَ لَا یَعۡقِلُونَ

It is not (possible) for any one that he believes except with the will of Allah. And He makes filth settle on those who do not understand.

[Surah Yūnus: 100]

{ وَلَوۡ شَاۤءَ ٱللَّهُ لَجَعَلَكُمۡ أُمَّةࣰ وَ ٰ⁠حِدَةࣰ وَلَـٰكِن یُضِلُّ مَن یَشَاۤءُ وَیَهۡدِی مَن یَشَاۤءُۚ وَلَتُسۡـَٔلُنَّ عَمَّا كُنتُمۡ تَعۡمَلُونَ }

If Allah so willed, He would have made all of you a single community, but He lets whom He wills go astray and takes whom He wills to the right path; and surely you will be questioned about.

[Surah An-Naḥl: 93]

وَلَوۡ شِئۡنَا لَـَٔاتَیۡنَا كُلَّ نَفۡسٍ هُدَىٰهَا وَلَـٰكِنۡ حَقَّ ٱلۡقَوۡلُ مِنِّی لَأَمۡلَأَنَّ جَهَنَّمَ مِنَ ٱلۡجِنَّةِ وَٱلنَّاسِ أَجۡمَعِینَ
And if We had so willed, We would have led everybody to his right path (by force), but the word from Me had come to pass: “I will certainly fill the Jahannam with jinn and human beings together.”

[Surah As-Sajdah: 13]

So in effect when they go astray or be guided, it is also by Allah’s will. So Humans cannot will anything if Allah does not will it. Allah’s will called ‘مشيئة’ is a necessary condition.

وَمَا تَشَاۤءُونَ إِلَّاۤ أَن یَشَاۤءَ ٱللَّهُۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِیمًا حَكِیمࣰا

And you will not so wish unless Allah so wills. Indeed Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

[Surah Al-Insān: 30]

وَمَا تَشَاۤءُونَ إِلَّاۤ أَن یَشَاۤءَ ٱللَّهُ رَبُّ ٱلۡعَـٰلَمِینَ

And you cannot intend (to do anything) unless it is so willed by Allah, the Lord of all the worlds.

[Surah At-Takwīr: 29]

A thing to note is that Allah’s will (مشيئة) is different from Allah’s approval (رضا).

إِن تَكۡفُرُوا۟ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَنِیٌّ عَنكُمۡۖ وَلَا یَرۡضَىٰ لِعِبَادِهِ ٱلۡكُفۡرَۖ وَإِن تَشۡكُرُوا۟ یَرۡضَهُ لَكُمۡۗ وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةࣱ وِزۡرَ أُخۡرَىٰۚ ثُمَّ إِلَىٰ رَبِّكُم مَّرۡجِعُكُمۡ فَیُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمۡ تَعۡمَلُونَۚ إِنَّهُۥ عَلِیمُۢ بِذَاتِ ٱلصُّدُورِ

If you disbelieve, then, Allah does not need you at all, however He does not like for His servants to be disbelievers; and if you are grateful, He will like it for you. No one will bear the burden of someone else. Then, to your Lord is your return; so He will tell you about what you used to do. He is aware of whatever lies in the hearts.

[Surah Az-Zumar: 7]

And the polytheists could not differentiate between the two or deliberately mingle up Allah’s will with his pleasure and used this as a scapegoat for their polytheism.

وَقَالَ ٱلَّذِینَ أَشۡرَكُوا۟ لَوۡ شَاۤءَ ٱللَّهُ مَا عَبَدۡنَا مِن دُونِهِ مِن شَیۡءࣲ نَّحۡنُ وَلَاۤ ءَابَاۤؤُنَا وَلَا حَرَّمۡنَا مِن دُونِهِ مِن شَیۡءࣲۚ كَذَ ٰ⁠لِكَ فَعَلَ ٱلَّذِینَ مِن قَبۡلِهِمۡۚ فَهَلۡ عَلَى ٱلرُّسُلِ إِلَّا ٱلۡبَلَـٰغُ ٱلۡمُبِینُ

The polytheists said, “If Allah had so willed, we would have not worshipped anything other than Him – neither we nor our forefathers – nor would we have made anything unlawful without (a command from) Him.” Similar was the reaction of those who were before them. Therefore, the messengers’ obligation is no more than to convey the message clearly.

[Surah An-Naḥl: 35]

وَقَالُوا۟ لَوۡ شَاۤءَ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنُ مَا عَبَدۡنَـٰهُمۗ مَّا لَهُم بِذَ ٰ⁠لِكَ مِنۡ عِلۡمٍۖ إِنۡ هُمۡ إِلَّا یَخۡرُصُونَ

They say, “Had the RaHmān so willed, we would not have worshipped them.” They have no knowledge of that. They do nothing but make conjectures.

[Surah Az-Zukhruf: 20]

Pakistan does not need a ‘Strategy’

Lt Gen (r) Asad Durrani, the former ISI chief, concludes in his memoir, that the way our ‘Uniformed Rulers’ with all the wherewithal of statecraft could not come up with a ‘Grand Design’ for our Nation, the civilian rulers stand no chance of any worthwhile progress.

Here is an excerpt from his memoir ‘Pakistan Adrift’:

“Given the odds Pakistan had to face right from its inception, we may not have done too badly if we have, in fact, managed to muddle through. On this subject, I have often recalled a statement made to me by a Bedouin prince, who was seldom sober, “There is no need for a strategy”. He did not elaborate, and perhaps thinking that he had had one too many, I did not ask him to. But there was no way anyone trained in the military art could take such a brazen decree seriously. As one who had once headed the NDC, an institution that breathes and oozes strategy, for me the Prince’s assertion was blasphemous. A few years later, when I had to reflect on my days in the corridors of power, I wished I had drunk from the same fountain of knowledge. I think what the wise man from the desert was trying to convey to me was that, even if we had a strategy, our actions would still be dictated by the totality of the environment, one’s ability indeed being an important part of it. How did Pakistan fare on that account? All our Bonapartes were different in their disposition and their putsches occurred in different circumstances. If they took similar paths to gain legitimacy and acceptance—such as hiring a legal wizard and assembling a bunch of political opportunists—one could have understood their compulsion, but if they did not have a strategy, in fact, a grand strategy, to live up to the greatness thrust upon them, one could only bow one’s head in deference to the drunken prince. All of them were convinced that they had found the “scarlet thread”, the idea around which a strategic web was woven, and followed it more or less diligently. For Ayub Khan, the focus was on economy; Zia believed in the centrality of religion, even if was only as an expedient tool of politics; and whenever Musharraf talked of strategy—and he did that all the time— he actually meant stratagem. Strategy is indeed all-embracing. Economic development, ideological moorings, and “enlightened moderation”, which was Musharraf’s proclaimed recipe to achieve our Nirvana, might all be essential elements of nation-building, but they are only parts of a strategic whole. Since our uniformed rulers did not have the time, the patience, or the vision to follow a comprehensive course, the gains they made in their selected fields did not endure. (Though Ayub Khan’s achievements were spectacular: the country sustained an economic growth rate of six per cent or more, for three decades—the only country at that time to do so.) If, when exercising total control over all the instruments of state, the military could not come up with a grand design, it would be foolish to expect that while only playing a role from the side-lines, it could do any better than have hit and miss success.”

Summary of Six Thinking Hats

This book is a novel approach to the science of thinking. It optimizes the process of thinking by compartmentalizing different independent subprocesses of thinking and undertaking them one by one. These subprocesses are given the names of different colored hats. This method encourages collaborative and constructive thinking instead of argumentative thinking.

Aristotle systematized inclusion/exclusion logic. From past experience we would put together ‘boxes’, definitions, categories or principles. When we came across something, we judged into which box it fell. Something could be in the box or not in the box. It could not be half in and half out – nor could it be anywhere else. As a result, Western thinking is concerned with ‘what is’, which is determined by analysis, judgement and argument. That is a fine and useful system. But there is another whole aspect of thinking that is concerned with ‘what can be’, which involves constructive thinking, creative thinking and ‘designing a way forward’.

The writer begins the preface with the following claim about this method:

“The Six Thinking Hats method may well be the most important change in human thinking for the past twenty-three hundred years.”

And then he proves the statement by citing examples of ABB, IBM, Statoil etc. that how useful this new method of thinking was for these corporations in reducing their meeting times and “increasing thinking productivity”. He says that “The method has been used by NASA, IBM, DuPont, NTT (Japan), Shell, BP, Statoil (Norway), Marzotto (Italy), and Federal Express, among many others.”

The writer builds his case by saying that the main difficulty in thinking is confusion.

We try to do too much at once. Emotions, information, logic, hope and creativity all crowd in on us. It is like juggling with too many balls.

What I am putting forward in this book is a very simple concept which allows a thinker to do one thing at a time. He or she becomes able to separate emotion from logic, creativity from information, and so on.

I asked ChatGpt* to summerize the Six Thinking Hats for me, the result is a concise summary.

“Six Thinking Hats” is a book written by Edward de Bono that proposes a method for group discussion and individual thinking involving six colored hats. Each hat represents a different type of thinking, and the idea is that by wearing and thinking with a particular hat, individuals can explore a problem or issue from multiple perspectives and make better decisions as a result.

The six hats are as follows:

1. White Hat: This hat represents objective and factual thinking. When wearing the white hat, individuals focus on what is known and what data is available.
2. Red Hat: This hat represents emotional and intuitive thinking. When wearing the red hat, individuals express their feelings and emotions without giving any justification or explanation.
3. Black Hat: This hat represents critical and cautious thinking. When wearing the black hat, individuals look for the drawbacks and negative aspects of an idea.
4. Yellow Hat: This hat represents positive and optimistic thinking. When wearing the yellow hat, individuals look for the benefits and opportunities of an idea.
5. Green Hat: This hat represents creative and innovative thinking. When wearing the green hat, individuals come up with new ideas and think outside the box.
6. Blue Hat: This hat represents the overall process of thinking. When wearing the blue hat, individuals manage the thinking process and ensure that all the other hats are used appropriately.

The idea behind the six thinking hats method is that by encouraging individuals to think from multiple perspectives and to switch between different types of thinking, they can come up with better solutions to problems and make more informed decisions. The method is often used in business and education settings as a way to facilitate group discussions and encourage creative thinking.

---

(*) ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer)[1] is a chatbot launched by OpenAI in November 2022. It is built on top of OpenAI’s GPT-3 family of large language models, and is fine-tuned (an approach to transfer learning)[2] with both supervised and reinforcement learning techniques.

Life cycle of a Muslim

To do anything worthwhile you need to plan ahead to execute it in the appropriate timeframe. That is called discipline.

But if their are more than one worthwhile tasks, you need to prioritize the tasks and execute the top priority job. This is called prioritization.

To prioritize, you need to find the real value of the things, this is called valuation. A Muslim gets the value of things from the knowledge of Qur’an and Sunnah. But the people whose hearts are blind or dead, their valuation of things is based upon the appearance of things and their worldly utility.

So a Muslim’s life revolves around these three concepts: Assign Value, Prioritize and Plan/Execute.

{ فَأَمَّا مَن طَغَىٰ (37) وَءَاثَرَ ٱلۡحَیَوٰةَ ٱلدُّنۡیَا (38) فَإِنَّ ٱلۡجَحِیمَ هِیَ ٱلۡمَأۡوَىٰ (39) وَأَمَّا مَنۡ خَافَ مَقَامَ رَبِّهِۦ وَنَهَى ٱلنَّفۡسَ عَنِ ٱلۡهَوَىٰ (40) { فَإِنَّ ٱلۡجَنَّةَ هِیَ ٱلۡمَأۡوَىٰ (41)}

then for the one who had rebelled, and preferred the worldly life (to the Hereafter), the Hell will be the abode, whereas for the one who feared to stand before his Lord, and restrained his self from the (evil) desire, the Paradise will be the abode.

[Surah An-Nâzi`ât: 37-41]

علوم اسلامیہ کی تعارفی کتب

بعض طلباء کے استفسار پر کہ ہر مضمون سے متعلق ایسی کتب جو سہل اور جامع ہوں ان کی نشاندہی کر دی جائے، تو ایسا ایک مجموعہ پیش خدمت ہے۔ کتابوں کی ترتیب آسان سے مشکل کی جانب ہے۔ اس مجموعہ کی ترتیب میں درس نظامی کے طلباء کی رعایت کی گئی ہے، مگر دوسروں کیلئے بھی نفع سے خالی نہیں ہے ۔

السياسة الإسلامية

اسلام اور سیاسی نظریات از مفتی تقی عثمانی

حکیم الامت کے سیاسی افکار از مفتی تقی عثمانی

اسلامی مملکت اور حکومت کے بنیادی اصول از محمد اسد (مترجم مولانا غلام رسول مہر) انگریزی ایڈیشن

بین الاقوامی تعلقات – اسلامی اور بین الاقوامی قانون کا تقابلی مطالعہ از ڈاکٹر وہبہ الزحیلی مترجم مولانا حکیم اللہ (العلاقات الدولیۃ فی الاسلام)

الأحكام السلطانية از علامة ماوردي (450ه‍) (اردو ترجمہ از مولوی سید محمد ابراھیم) (انگریزی ترجمة از ڈاکٹر اسد اللہ)

اسلامی معاشیات

اسلام اور جدید معیشت و تجارت از مفتی تقی عثمانی

اسلام کا نظام تقسیم دولت از مفتی محمد شفیع عثمانی (1976)

یورپ کے تین معاشی نظام از مفتی رفیع عثمانی (2022)

سرمایہ دارانہ اشتراکی نظام کا اسلامی معاشی نظام سے موازنہ از حضرت  علامہ شمس الحق افغانی (1983)

اسلامی معاشیات از مولانا مناظر احسن گیلانی (1956)

تاریخ

تاریخ ملت از مفتی زین العابدین و مفتی انتظام اللہ شہابی

آب کوثر، رود کوثر، موج کوثر از شیخ اکرام (1973)

تاریخ دعوت وعزیمت از مولانا ابو الحسن علی ندوی (1999)

مقدمہ از علامہ ابن خلدون (808ھ) (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا راغب رحمانی، انگریزی ترجمہ از فرانز روزنتھال (2003)، تلخیص مقدمہ از مولانا محمد حنیف ندوی)

الإعلان بالتوبيخ لمن ذم أهل التوريخ از علامہ سخاوی

سیرت

سیرۃ المصطفیٰ از مولانا ادریس کاندھلوی (1974)

اسوہ رسول اکرم از ڈاکٹر عبد الحی عارفی (1986)

زاد المعاد از علامہ ابن القیم (751ھ) (اردو ترجمہ از علامہ رئیس احمد جعفری جلد اول جلد ثانی)

السیرۃ النبویۃ از مولانا ابو الحسن علی ندوی (1999)

السیرۃ النبویہ از ابن ہشام (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا قطب الدین احمد محمودی جلد اول جلد ثانی جلد ثالث)

تصوف

تصوف کیا ہے از مولانا منظور نعمانی (1997) و دیگر

الاربعین از امام غزالی (404ھ 1111) (اردو ترجمہ تبلیغ دین از مولانا عاشق الٰہی میرٹھی)

تزکیہ و احسان از مولانا ابو الحسن علی ندوی (1999)

آثار الاحسان از علامہ ڈاکٹر خالد محمود (2020) (جلد اول جلد دوم)

مقالات احسانی از مولانا مناظر احسن گیلانی (1956)

التکشف عن مہمات التصوف از مولانا اشرف علی تھانوی (1943)

عقائد

اسلامی عقائد از مفتی عبد الواحد

عقائد اسلام از مولانا ادریس کاندھلوی (1974)

عقیدہ طحاویۃ از علامہ طحاوی (اردو شرح از مولانا الیاس گھمن)

الفقہ الاکبر از امام ابو حنیفہ رحمہ اللہ (عربی شرح از ملا علی القاری) (اردو شرح از مولانا الیاس گھمن)

العقيدة الحسنة از شاہ ولی اللہ (اردو ترجمہ عقائد الاسلام از مفتی محمد خلیل خان القادری)

فرقِ اسلامیۃ

تاريخ مذاهب الاسلامية از شیخ ابو زھرہ مصری (1394ھ) (اردو ترجمہ)

الفَرق بين الفِرَق وبيان الفرقة الناجية منهم از عبد القاہر بغدادی (429ھ)

 مقالات الإسلاميين واختلاف المصلين جلد اول جلد ثانی از ابو الحسن الاشعری (330ھ)

الملل والنحل از علامہ شہرستانی (548ھ)

تقابل ادیان

تقابل ادیان از مولانا محمد یوسف خان

اظہار الحق از مولانا رحمت اللہ کیرانوی (اردو ترجمہ بائبل سے قرآن تک از مفتی تقی عثمانی)

الفِصل فی الملل والاھواء والنحل از امام ابن حزم (اردو ترجمہ)

هداية الحياريٰ في اجوبة اليهود والنصارى از ابن قیم (751ھ)

الردود والتعقبات

اختلاف امت اور صراط مستقیم از مولانا یوسف لدھیانوی (2000)

حضرت معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ اور تاریخی حقائق از مفتی تقی عثمانی

اشرف الجواب از مولانا اشرف علی تھانوی (1943)

تسکین الصدور فی تحقیق احوال الموتی فی البرزخ والقبور از مولانا سرفراز خان صفدر (2009)

عبارات اکابر از مولانا سرفراز خان صفدر (2009)

تحفہ اثنا عشریہ از شاہ عبد العزیز (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا خلیل احمد نعمانی مظاہری)

رد الالحاد

الانتباھات المفیدہ عن الاشتباہات الجدیدہ از مولانا اشرف علی تھانوی (1943) (تسہیل و شرح اسلام اور عقلیات از مولانا محمد مصطفیٰ خان بجنوری)

معرکہ ایمان و مادیت از مولانا ابو الحسن علی ندوی (1999)

الدین القیم از مولانا سید مناظر احسن گیلانی (1956)

مذہب اور سائنس از علامہ وحید الدین خان (2021)

مذہب اور جدید چیلنج از علامہ وحید الدین خان (2021)

علاماتِ قیامت

علاماتِ قیامت از مولانا عاشق الٰہی بلند شہری (2002)

التصریح بما تواتر فی نزولِ المسیح از علامہ انور شاہ کشمیری (1933) (اردو ترجمہ از مفتی محمد رفیع عثمانی (2022))

الخلیفۃ المہدی فی الاحادیث الصحیحۃ از مولانا حسین احمد مدنی (1957)

عقیدہ ظہور مہدی احادیث کی روشنی میں از مفتی نظام الدین شامزئی (2004)

دفاع السنة والحديث

فتنہ انکار حدیث از مولانا ایوب دہلوی (1969)

شوق حدیث از مولانا سرفراز خان صفدر (2009)

صرف ایک اسلام بجواب دو اسلام از مولانا سرفراز خان صفدر (2009)

حجیت حدیث از مولانا ادریس کاندھلوی (1974)

متونِ حدیث پر جدید ذہن کے اشکالات از پروفیسر اکرم ورک

آپ بیتیاں

آپ بیتی از مولانا عبد الماجد دریابادی (1977)

احاطہ دیوبند میں بیتے ہوئے دن از مولانا سید مناظر احسن گیلانی (1956)

آپ بیتی از مولانا زکریا کاندھلوی (1982) (جلد اول، جلد ثانی)

نقش حیات از مولانا حسین احمد مدنی (1957)

المنقذ من الضلال از امام غزالی (404ھ 1111) (اردو ترجمہ اجالوں کا سفر از علامہ عبد الرسول ارشد)

سوانح

تذکرۃ الرشید از مولانا عاشق الٰہی میرٹھی

سوانح قاسمی (1,2,3) از مولانا مناظر احسن گیلانی (1956)

اشرف السوانح از خواجہ عزیز الحسن مجذوب

تذکرہ شاہ ولی اللہ از مولانا مناظر احسن گیلانی (1956)

نقش دوام، حیات محدث کشمیری از مولانا انظر شاہ مسعودی (2008)

یادِ رفتگاں

یادِ رفتگاں از مولانا سید سلیمان ندوی

پرانے چراغ از مولانا ابو الحسن علی ندوی (1999)

شخصیات و تاثرات از مولانا یوسف لدھیانوی (2009)

نقوشِ رفتگاں از مفتی تقی عثمانی

مجموعہ مکاتیب

بلاغِ مبین یعنی مکاتیب سید المرسلین ﷺ از مولانا حفظ الرحمن سیوہاروی (1962)

مکتوباتِ شیخ الاسلام از مولانا حسین احمد مدنی (1957)

مکتوباتِ امامِ ربانی از مجدد الف ثانی (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا سید زوار حسین شاہ، البینات شرح مکتوبات از شیخ سعید احمد مجددی)

غبارِ خاطر از مولانا ابو الکلام آزاد (1958)

شاہ ولی اللہ دہلوی کے سیاسی مکتوبات جامع سید خلیق نظامی

علوم القرآن

علوم القرآن از مفتی تقی عثمانی

علوم القرآن از علامہ شمس الحق افغانی

آثار التنزیل از علامہ ڈاکٹر خالد محمود جلد اول، جلد ثانی

التبیان فی علوم القرآن از شیخ محمد علی الصابونی (اردو ترجمہ از علامہ محمد صدیق ہزاروی)

مقدمہ فی اصول التفسیر از امام ابن تیمیہ (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا عبد الرزاق ملیح آبادی)

الاتقان فی علوم القرآن از علامہ سیوطی (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا محمد حلیم انصاری جلد 1،  جلد 2)

غريب القرآن

لغات القرآن از علامہ ڈاکٹر خالد محمود (2020)

لغات القرآن از مولانا عبد الکریم پاریکھ (2007)

لغات القرآن از مولانا عبد الرشید نعمانی

مفردات الفاظ القرآن از امام راغب الاصفہانی (اردو ترجمہ مفردات القرآن از مولانا محمد عبداللہ فیروزپوری)

تفاسیر القرآن

معارف القرآن از مفتی شفیع عثمانی

تفسیر عثمانی از علامہ شبیر احمد عثمانی

بیان القرآن از مولانا اشرف علی تھانوی

احکام القرآن از امام ابوبکر جصاص رازی (اردو ترجمہ از مولانا عبد القیوم)

تفسیر القرآن العظیم از امام ابن کثیر

مشکلات القرآن

آیات متعارضہ اور ان کا حل از مولانا محمد انور صاحب گنگوہی

مشکلات القرآن از مولانا انور شاہ کشمیری

دفع ایھام الاضطراب عن آیات القرآن از شیخ محمد الامین شنقیطی

تأويل مشكل القرآن از امام ابن قتیبہ

مسائل الرازي وأجوبتها من غرائب آي التنزيل از محمد بن أبي بكر بن عبد القادر الرازي

مشکلات الحدیث

شرح معانی الآثار از امام طحاوی

شرح مشکل الآثار از امام طحاوی

تأویل مختلف الحدیث از ابن قتیبہ

مختلف الحدیث از امام شافعی

مشکل الحدیث و بيانه از امام ابوبکر بن فورک (406ھ)

اصول الحدیث

نزهة النظر في شرح نخبة الفكر از علامہ ابن حجر عسقلانی (852ھ 1449) (عمدۃ النظر اردو شرح نزهة النظر از مفتی محمد طفیل)

تدریب الراوی فی شرح النواوی از علامہ سیوطی

قواعد فی علوم الحدیث از مولانا ظفر احمد تھانوی

الرفع والتکمیل فی الجرح والتعدیل از مولانا عبد الحی لکھنوی

دراسات في علوم الحديث على منهج الحنفية از عبد المجید الترکمانی

Natural Disasters – Why do they affect the poor more?

It is a common observation that most adversely affected by a natural calamity like floods, earthquakes and fire etc are the less privileged segments of the society. And the influential and rich people stay more or less unscathed during this tumultuous upheaval. This difference can be attributed to the disparity of resources available to each segment of the society and the management of these resources. For example the Rich can fortify their houses against earthquakes while the Poor can barely sustain a mud-brick house; the Rich can easily make their houses away from the water-ways while the Poor needs to be near water. And so it seems that the Poor having being all their lives in a constant cycle of misery are subjected to another punishment because of the same poverty; kind of a double jeopardy.

A flooded residential area on Aug. 30, 2022, in Dera Allah Yar town after heavy monsoon rains in Jaffarabad district, Balochistan. (FIDA HUSSAIN/AFP via Getty Images)

And when the religious elite surmises the reasons for these natural disasters as the people’s wrongdoings, the Poor cannot ignore to notice the glaring selectivity of wrongdoings of one segment of society over the other, which only adds insult to injury. The Rich and the Poor are almost the same as regards to sinning; with the Rich having more time and resources available for indulgence but the punishment meted out to each seems not to be commensurate with their respective crimes.

So what, if any, logical explanation of such dichotomy can be presented? What is the real reason of natural disasters? Is it a punishment of people’s wrongdoings? These questions, just like the fundamental questions cannot be answered with total conviction with our faculties of sense perception and intellect alone; we need some other source of dependable knowledge. And that external source of concrete knowledge is Wahy (the Revelation) in the form of Qur’an and Sunnah.

Coming back to our original question that why do natural disasters affect the poor people more. To answer this, we need to establish few premises which emanate from the common understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah. These premises will be helpful in arriving at some logical conclusion.

1. Natural Disasters have different connotations.
   • It is a test
     • “Surely We will test you with a bit of fear and hunger, and loss in wealth and lives and fruits, and give good tidings to the patient.” (2:155)
   • It is a warning
     • “Why then, did they not supplicate in humility when a calamity from Us came upon them? Instead, their hearts were hardened and Satan adorned for them what they were doing.” (6:43)
     • “We divided them on the earth as separate communities. Some of them were righteous, while some others were otherwise. We tested them with good and bad times, so that they might return” (7:168);
     • “Do they not see that they are tested every year once or twice but then they do not repent nor do they take heed?” (9:126);
     • “Corruption has appeared throughout the land and sea by [reason of] what the hands of people have earned so He may let them taste part of [the consequence of] what they have done that perhaps they will return [to righteousness].” (30:41)
     • And We will certainly make them taste the nearer punishment before the greater punishment, so that they may return. (32:21)
   • It is a punishment
     • “Whatever hardship befalls you is because of what your own hands have committed, while He overlooks many (of your faults)” (42:30);
     • “All this is because Allah is not the one who may change a favor He has conferred on a people unless they change their own condition, and that Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing” (8:53);
     • “When they persisted in doing what they were forbidden from, We said to them, “Become apes debased”” (7:166);
     • “When We give people a taste of mercy, they are happy with it, and if they are touched by an evil because of what their hands sent ahead, they are at once in despair.” (30:36)
     • “So, when they provoked Our anger, We took vengeance on them, and drowned them all together” (43:55)
2. A single disaster can have any combination of connotations.
   • It can be a test and warning as quoted above in (7:168), (9:126)
   • It can be a warning and punishment as in (30:41)
   • It can be all three as told in (8:53)
3. Not every sinner gets punished in this world.
   • “Those who withhold in miserliness what Allah has given them out of His grace should not take it as good for them. Instead, it is bad for them. They shall be forced, on the Doomsday, to put on what they withheld, as iron-collars round their necks. To Allah belongs the inheritance of the heavens and the earth. Allah is All-Aware of what you do” (3:180)
4. Criteria to attach a connotation(s) to a natural disaster.
   • “And beware of a scourge that shall not fall only on the wrongdoers from among you, and know well that Allah is severe at punishment.” (8:25). Which means that any disaster that befalls upon people does not distinguish between the wrong and the right. They would endure it or perish in it together but would be judged accordingly.
   • Narrated Aisha ra: Allah’s Apostle ﷺ said, “An army would invade the Ka’ba and when the invaders reach Al-Baida’, all the ground would sink and swallow the whole army.” I said, “O Allah’s Apostle! How would they sink into the ground while amongst them would be their markets (the people who worked in business and not invaders) and the people not belonging to them?” The Prophet replied, “All of those people would sink but they would be resurrected and judged according to their intentions.”
     (Sahih al-Bukhari – 2118). This means that it was a punishment only for those who had the intention to attack the Ka’ba, but the ones who meant no harm to Ka’ba, also got swallowed but not as a punishment but as a collateral and they would be judged according to their intentions.

So we know now that a natural disaster can have different connotations (1,2) which can be ascertained by the actions of the people enduring it and their actions in the aftermath of the disaster (4). If they perished in the disaster, it was a punishment only for those who were the wrongdoers but for the righteous it was the bridge that united them to their beloved Allah (4). But if they endured that catastrophe and their deeds did not increase in piety rather they carried on with their corrupt practices, it was a warning which they did not heed to or a punishment (4). But if they reverted to a life of piety and righteousness, it means it was a warning and they heeded to it (1). And if some people who were wrongdoers but were not hit by the disaster, it does not mean that they will not be punished (3); it simply means that this disaster was not meant for them.

As for the poor being hit worse than the rich there can be a number of reasons like the ones cited at the beginning or the government did not do it’s duty of safeguarding the poor or some rich diverted the disaster towards the poor. Those who were responsible for such callous acts which caused the suffering of the Poor, will most probably be punished in this world and definitely in the Hereafter (3). But the real reason boils down to the fact that in the Grand Design of things the Poor have been chosen to be poor while the Rich are selected to be rich by the Masheeat (will) of Allah to test the Poor and the Rich alike.

Is it they who allocate the mercy of your Lord? We have allocated among them their livelihood in the worldly life, and have raised some of them over others in ranks, so that some of them may put some others to work. And the mercy of your Lord is much better than what they accumulate. (43:32)

This does not mean that if a person is poor it is because of being unfavored by Allah subhanahu wata’aala or being rich is a sign of favor from Allah subhanahu wata’aala. The standard for being favorite of Allah subhanahu wata’aala is clear and within the reach of poor and rich alike i.e.

 O mankind, We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into races and tribes, so that you may identify one another. Surely the noblest of you, in Allah‘s sight, is the one who is most pious of you. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware. (49:13)

The sufferings of the Poor are but a test, if they endure the suffering with patience they will have a befitting reward in the Hereafter.

Surely We will test you with a bit of fear and hunger, and loss in wealth and lives and fruits, and give good tidings to the patient.  who, when a suffering visits them, say: .We certainly belong to Allah, and to Him we are bound to return. Those are the ones upon whom there are blessings from their Lord, and mercy as well; and those are the ones who are on the right path. (2:155-57)

While the resources provided to the Rich is also a test for him, actually Allah subhanahu wa Ta’aala has apportioned a part of his wealth for the Poor.

and those in whose riches there is a specified right, for the one who asks and the one who is deprived (70:24-25)

If the Rich spends those resources according to the injunctions of the Qur’an and Sunnah, he too will be successful in the Hereafter.

The example of those who spend in the way of Allah is just like a grain that produced seven ears, each ear having a hundred grains, and Allah multiplies (the reward) for whom He wills. Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing (2:261)

And if they do not heed to the orders of Allah, they will have a devastating end.

O you who believe, many of the rabbis and the monks do eat up the wealth of the people by false means and prevent (them) from the way of Allah. As for those who accumulate gold and silver and do not spend it in the way of Allah, give them the ‘good‘ news of a painful punishment. On the day it (the wealth) will be heated up in the fire of Jahannam, then their foreheads and their sides and their backs shall be branded with it: .This is what you had accumulated for yourselves. So, taste what you have been accumulating (9:34-35)

Can Intellect Answer Fundamental Questions

Fundamental questions are the questions that pertain to extra sensory and metaphysical realm like why is there something instead of nothing?, what is the purpose of life, why should one not commit suicide, where were we before we were born and where would we go after death, what do we mean by ‘We’, what is consciousness etc. Philosophers have tried to answer them albeit without any conclusiveness while some have termed the questions as illogical or absurd. So it seems that these are the questions which cannot be answered with total conviction using the known tools of our sense perception and logical inference. To bring certainty and conviction in response to such basic and fundamental questions we need to have some other source of dependable and concrete knowledge.

Since common sense and logic work on some previously known facts which are observable; if you cannot observe something how can you make it a basis for any kind of logical deduction. For example, the inference from the premises “all men are mortal” and “Socrates is a man” to the conclusion “Socrates is mortal” is a valid logical deduction, but it presupposes the two premises to be true; and they can only be true if they are observable. So if either one of the premises is not observable or in other words not true, then the inference cannot be termed logical in any sense of the word. Another example is that you have never seen a phoenix or a unicorn, then if you claim that phoenix can breath fire or a unicorn (winged one) can fly, just because you read it in so and so book, then your claim cannot be called logical rather it is purely based upon the authenticity of such and such book. By authenticity it is meant that the writer of the book has observed these traits of the phoenix or the unicorn.

So asking for a logical answer of such metaphysical questions is beyond the scope of human intellect. and we need some kind of external source of authentic knowledge to extinguish the innate fire of attributing meaning to everything around us. We like to make sense of every natural phenomenon around us and we see a pattern that one thing serves the other, one phenomenon occurs to assist another phenomenon. And somehow it seems that their only raison d’être is to collaborate among each other to make life sustainable for human beings. Sun, earth, water, rains, air, plants, animals, they all are there to help human beings survive, if only one factor in this Grand Design goes missing, like it stops raining or keeps on raining or all the bees vanish or the sun extinguishes or the air goes kaput, the only thing that would be effected severely is the human exitance. Scientists call these conditions which are necessary for life’s existence, the Goldilocks conditions which are lucidly expounded in these theories: Fine-tuned Universe and the Rare Earth Hypothesis.

So when the human intellect can attribute meaning to almost every phenomenon around it, then it is but logical to ask about the meaning and reason of Human existence. But this can not be known by Human Beings as the question of meaning is beyond physical; a cow cannot know its meaning or reason to exist (and they don’t seem a least bit bothered about it) but a human being who is external to the cow has the knowledge about its existence that the cow exists to give us milk and meat.

That external source of definitive knowledge is Wahy (Revelation) which comes directly from the Creator. And last and the final Revelation is the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet sallallahu alahi wasallam. And Qur’an tells us the reason of Human existence as Allah’s worship only:

And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me. (51:56)

Likewise all the other fundamental questions are addressed in the Qur’an and Sunnah in such a manner that is easy to grasp for everyone and anyone.

Suicide

The Myth of Sisyphus

Every question that needs to be answered must first be formulated in a way which identifies the realm with which it pertains. Humans are endowed with two faculties with which to make sense of things around them – sensory perception and logical deduction based upon these perception. So we cannot make a logical inference about something which our senses have not perceived yet.

Just take an example of the philosophical question what Martin Heidegger has called the fundamental question of metaphysics: “why is there something instead of nothing?”. Philosophers have tried to answer it or reject it as meaningless, but no one came up with some answer with total conviction. And this is because this question does not belong to our sensory perception; no one can claim to observe the instance when there was nothing and then something came about just like one observes that there was no pizza and then the pizza came out of the oven. So the person who observed the pizza making process, may be able to answer the question that ‘why there is pizza instead of no pizza?’ but no one can answer the fundamental question of metaphysics, since no one observed something out of nothing.

Same is the case with the notion of ‘keep on living’ and not committing suicide. When someone sees his existence to be of no consequence and devoid of purpose, he must think then, what is the point in living. and more so when somebody is not happy or enjoying his existence, he is bound to gravitate towards ending his life to bring a halt to the ever engulfing misery.

Albert Camus in his book The Myth of Sisyphus finds that the fundamental question to ask is, should one go on living or commit suicide. He says,

THERE is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy.

Albert Camus – The Myth of Sisyphus

For Camus killing yourself is admitting that all of the habits and effort needed for living are not worth the trouble. As long as we accept reasons for life’s meaning we continue, but as soon as we reject these reasons we become alienated—we become strangers from the world. This feeling of separation from the world Camus terms absurdity, a sensation that may lead to suicide. Still, most of us go on because we are attached to the world; we continue to live out of habit.

This suicide question is entangled with the question of meaning and purpose; what is the purpose of life? And this cannot be solved using the sensory perception and logical deduction alone, we need a higher source of knowledge. And that source is the Divine Revelation in the form of the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.

Was Partition of India necessary – A Muslim’s Perspective

Time and again it has been contended with much vehemence that a united India would have been more beneficial for the Muslims of India. It is not more than an after thought, devoid of historical analysis, based merely upon whimsical interpretation of the post Partition events.

It is my conviction that keeping in view the pre Partition events, the Partition of India and making of Pakistan was the best option available to the Muslims of the Subcontinent. The Hindu Muslim coexistence as equals was impossible in a United India. And this was and is obvious to anyone who have studied the pre Partition history of the Subcontinent. Whenever the Hindus got their say in matters concerning Muslims, they made sure that the Muslims got the worst deal. Allah Ta’aala says in the Holy Qur’an:

كَيْفَ وَإِن يَظْهَرُوا۟ عَلَيْكُمْ لَا يَرْقُبُوا۟ فِيكُمْ إِلًّۭا وَلَا ذِمَّةًۭ ۚ يُرْضُونَكُم بِأَفْوَٰهِهِمْ وَتَأْبَىٰ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ فَـٰسِقُونَ

How (can they have a treaty) while if they overcome you, they will not observe any bond or treaty with you. They want to please you with (words of) their mouths, but their hearts refuse. Most of them are sinners.

Surah At-Tawbah: 8

I’ll jot down significant events that inform and endorse my conviction.

1. Partition of Bengal: The Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say

partition of Bengal, (1905), division of Bengal carried out by the British viceroy in India, Lord Curzon, despite strong Indian nationalist opposition……..

East Bengal, because of isolation and poor communications, had been neglected in favour of west Bengal and Bihar………

The Hindus of west Bengal, who controlled most of Bengal’s commerce and professional and rural life, complained that the Bengali nation would be split in two, making them a minority in a province including the whole of Bihar and Orissa……….

Agitation against the partition included mass meetings, rural unrest, and a swadeshi (native) movement to boycott the import of British goods……….

In 1911, the year that the capital was shifted from Calcutta (now Kolkata) to Delhi, east and west Bengal were reunited……..

The aim was to combine appeasement of Bengali sentiment with administrative convenience. This end was achieved for a time, but the Bengali Muslims, having benefitted from partition, were angry and disappointed.

Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “partition of Bengal”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 4 Feb. 2009, https://www.britannica.com/event/Partition-of-Bengal. Accessed 17 July 2022.

2. Shuddhi and Sanghatan

The 1920s in United Provinces were marked by a growing movement of Hindu reformist, religious and communal organisations. The community and nation making discourse of the Arya Samaj and the Hindu Mahasabha launched the programme of shuddhi and sangathan on a large scale in 1923 in the region………

Sangathan was the answer of the militant Hindu organisations to consolidate the Hindus.

Charu Gupta, Articulating Hindu Masculinity and Femininity: Shuddhi and Sangathan Movements in United Provinces in the 1920s

One of the most salient developments in the 1920s was the launching of the shuddhi movement by the Arya Samaj to bring into the Hindu fold various groups considered outside the pale of what had now come to be defined as ‘Hinduism’, including untouchables and, later, Muslim, Christian and even Sikh communities.

Muslim reactions to the shuddhi campaign in early twentieth century North India
By Yoginder Sikand

The campaign developed with remarkable speed and spread rapidly from Agra to Muthra and Aligarh and neighbouring districts. By May the shuddhi enthusiasts claimed no less than 18,000 converts in Agra and the neighbourhood.31 Another government record stated, “Swami Shraddhanand and his lieutenants threw themselves into the struggle with great zeal to bring back the Muslims in Agra to the fold of Hindu religion…that as many as 300 converts had been obtained form one village alone”.32
More than 30,000 Malkana rajputs were stated to have been converted by the end of 1923 itself and in 1927, it was reported that more than 1,63,000 Malkanas had entered the Hindu fold.33

Charu Gupta, Articulating Hindu Masculinity and Femininity

3. Nehru Report:

The report was not acceptable to Muslims and both the Muslim members of the Committee did not sign it. Syed Ali Imam, due to bad heath could not attend the meetings of the Committee while Shoaib Qureshi refused to sign the repot. In the fourth session of the All Parties Conference convened in December to review the Nehru Report, Jinnah representing the Muslim League presented following four amendments in the report:

There should be no less than one-third Muslim representation in the Central Legislature.
In event of the adult suffrage not being established, Punjab and Bengal should have seats reserved for the Muslims on population basis.
The form of the constitution should be Federal with residuary powers vested in the provinces.
Sind should immediately be made a separate province and the reforms should also be introduced in NWFP and Balochistan at the earliest.

Jinnah’s proposals were rejected when put to vote in All Parties Conference. The Congress managed to get the majority vote in favour of the Report.

Nehru Report (1928)

4. Congress Ministries (1937-39)

     a. Wardha Scheme: Compulsory education for seven years in Hindi and mandatory bowing before picture of Mr Gandhi.

The majority of their [Muslims’] grievances from early 1938 onwards according to government’s own assesment “related to the Education Department and the foremost of them was the Vidya Mandir Scheme” with additional complaints over the neglect of Urdu and compulsory participation in the singing of “Vande Mataram”. 

Muslim Response to the Educational Policy of the Central Provinces and Berar Government (1937 – 1939)

5. Cabinet Mission Plan (1946):

The Plan was:

The Cabinet Mission Plan provided that only three subjects would belong compulsorily to the Central Government. These were Defence, Foreign Affairs and Communications, which I had suggested in my scheme. The Mission however added a new element to the Plan. It divided the country into three zones, A, B and C, as the members of the Mission felt that this would give a greater sense of assurance to the minorities. Section B would include the Punjab, Sind, the N.W.F.P. and British Baluchistan. This would corutitute a Muslim majority area. In Section C, which included Bengal and Assam, the Muslims would have a small majority over the rest.

India Wins Freedom, Orient Longmans, 1959, p 149

The Muslim League accepted the Plan.

He [Jinnah] told the Council that the scheme presented by the Cabinet Mission was the maximum that he could secure. As such, he advised the Muslim League to accept the scheme and the Council voted unanimously in its favour. 

India Wins Freedom, p 150

Congress also accepted the Plan but then Jawaharlal Nehru went back on this decision. Abul Kalam Azad after regretting making Nehru the president of Congress, writes

Now happened one of the unfortunate events which changed the course of history. On 10 July, Jawaharlal held a Press Conference in Bombay in which he made a statement which in normal circumstances might have passed almost unnoticed, but in the existing atmosphere of suspicion and hatred, set in train a most unfortunate series of consequences. Some Press representatives asked him whether with the passing of the Resolution by A.I.C.C., the Congress had accepted the Plan in toto, including the composition of the interim Government. 

Jawaharlal stated in reply that Congress would enter the Constituent Assembly ‘completely unfettered by agreements and free to meet all situations as they arise.’ 
Press representatives further asked if this meant that the Cabinet Mission Plan could be modified. 
Jawaharlal replied emphatically that the congress had agreed only to participate in the constituent Assembly and regarded itself free to change or modify the Cabinet Mission Plan as it thought best.

India Wins Freedom, pp 154-155

The above list is by no means exhaustive but captures the communal ethos of pre Partition India, which was evident even to Winston Churchill. He says in 1931 in his speech about the Hindu Muslim communal divide that

If you took the antagonisms of France and Germany, and the antagonisms of Catholics and Protestants, and compounded them and multiplied them ten-fold, you would not equal the division which separates these two races intermingled by scores of millions in the cities and plains of India.

Winston S Churchill – Never Give In – The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches, Pimlico, 2004, pp 97-99

What actually is Terrorism

The quest for a consistent definition of an idea is invariably marred with the cultural, social and linguistic biases of it’s invokers. And this is what has been happening with the word ‘Terrorism’. When a person of colored skin does it, it is ‘Terrorism’ while if a white guy does the same or worse, it’s an ‘Act of Violence’. The word ‘Terrorism’ is more of a political tool to divide people into ‘us’ and ‘them’ rather than an academically consistent idea.

Dr Jonathan Brown makes an indepth analysis of the problem of defining Terrorism. Here is an excerpt from his marvellous book ‘Slavery and Islam’.

“A common definition of terrorism (there is no agreed upon definition), similar to those used by the US government, is that it is the use or threat of violence by non-state actors against non-combatants for an ideological cause.25 We can test our definition by inverting it: what is ‘an act of violence by non-state actors against non-combatants for an ideological cause’? It’s terrorism. That seems obvious enough, and the abstraction seems accurate. Except, as in the case of tomatoes, when it is not.

In 2015 Canadian police foiled the plot of several young, white Canadians to open fire in a crowd. When asked if law enforcement considered this an attempted act of terrorism, a police spokesman replied that these were individuals who ‘had some beliefs and were willing to carry out violent acts against citizens’ but that it was not terrorism. ‘It’s not culturally based,’ he explained.26 The next day Canada’s Justice Minister reiterated this point: ‘The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore [it’s] not linked to terrorism.’27 In 2010 an American man seeking to strike a blow against  government  tyranny crashed his plane into an IRS building. When a government spokesperson announced that the attack was not terrorism, experts objected that this did indeed fit the standard definitions of terrorism. A Fox News anchor interjected to interpret the comment for the audience: ‘This does not appear to be terrorism in any way that that word is conventionally understood’ (emphasis mine).28

So why are definitions of terrorism as an abstract concept failing when applied to situations they should fit? Because the test for the ‘correct’ definition of terrorism is not whether it encompasses the essence of some external reality, an abstraction ‘out there’ in the world. Terrorism is a word that we have shaped and deployed. It is a category we have called into existence. The definition of terrorism is correct if, and only if, it corresponds to what we mean by terrorism and how we use the word, as the Canadian Minister of Justice, the US Department of Homeland Security and the Fox anchor showed. Even if we come up with a well-crafted definition for the abstract category of terrorism, it is whether a particular incident strikes our speech community as ‘terrorism,’ not whether it fits under our abstract definition, that ultimately governs how we label it.

‘We’ think of terrorism as a bundle of associated features, and ‘we’ identify something as terrorism when it is analogous to what ‘we’ have dubbed terrorism in the past. Scholarly definitions of terrorism, of which there are more than 109 by one count, are all abstractions.29 They make no mention of the race, background, religion or culture of the actors. But when ‘we’ say terrorist ‘we’ think of non-whites and non-Christians, in short, not real Westerners.30 Abstraction here is supposed to discover or inaugurate a category that transcends particular interests or loyalties. But definition carries with it an evaluation. And, as some scholars of terrorism have cynically observed, when ‘we’ think of terrorism what we really mean is ‘violence of which we do not approve,’31 or certainly violence done by people of whom we do not approve.

The act of assertion embodied in abstraction and definition is a preliminary step in a larger process, one by which we give shape and features to our reality. They form part of what Michel Foucault (d. 1984) and others have described as discourses, or those constellations of words, terms, propositions and maxims that form our thought and intellectual cultures. These discourses make up the reality that we ‘know’ around us. They are the background of our minds.32 This is not a neutral process. Reality is made by powerful and dominant forces and interests. Terrorism as a defined concept makes up terrorism discourse, which is used to condemn and delegitimize events and actors. Terrorist is an eminently political label, used to draw lines, exclude and vilify. Governments and policy makers molded the term for just this purpose.33 Of course, this does not mean that a violent act done by a ‘terrorist’ is fabricated or did not really occur, any less than an animal we call a dog does not exist simply because the category of dog is something that we have made up. But that we have a category called terrorism, with its own loaded meaning and purpose, and that we apply it to certain things and not others, is a reality we have manufactured.”

---

25. See Jonathan R . White, Terrorism and Homeland Security. Alex Schmid (2012) offered this definition: ‘Terrorism refers, on the one hand, to a doctrine about the presumed effectiveness of a special form or tactic of fear generating, coercive political violence and, on the other hand, to a conspiratorial practice of calculated, demonstrative, direct violent action without legal or moral  restraints,  targeting mainly civilians and non-combatants, performed for its propagandistic and psychological effects on various audiences and conflict parties’; see http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/ schmid-terrorism-definition/html.  See  also  http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terror_08.pdf; http:// www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005; http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2003/31880.htm.
26.  ‘Alleged Halifax mass shooting plot “not culturally based” say police,’ CBC News, Feb. 13, 2015, http:// www.cbc.ca/news/canada/novascotia/alleged-halifax-massshooting-plot-not-culturallybased-say-police-1.2957446.
27. Anna  Mehler  Paperny, ‘Halifax plot: So what is “terrorism,” anyway?,’ Global News, Feb. 14, 2015, https://globalnews.ca/ news/1830795/halifax-plot-sowhat-is-terrorism-anyway/.
28. Devin Neiwert, ‘Huh? Since When is Attempting to Blow Up a Federal Building NOT an Act of Domestic Terrorism?’ Crooks and Liars, Feb. 18, 2010, https:// web.archive.org/ web/20190317023152/https:// crook sandliars.com/david-neiwert/huh-when-attempting-blowfederal-bui. More recently, a young, white, conservative Christian man was found to be behind a spate of package bombings in Austin, Texas. The White House spokesperson stated that the attacks has ‘no known links to terrorism’; ‘No known link to terrorism in Texas bombings: White House,’ Reuters, US, March 20,  2018,  https:// www.reuters.com/article/ustexas-blast-whitehouse/noknown-link-to-terrorism-intexas-bombings-white-houseidUSKBN1GW293. 
29.  Simon Mabon, ‘Locating Terrorism Studies,’ 5–17.
30.  Jana Winter and Sharon Weinberger, ‘The FBI’s New U.S. Terrorist Threat: “Black Identity Extremists,” ’ Foreign Policy, Oct. 6, 2017, http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/10/06/the-fbi-has-identified-a-new-domestic-terrorist-threat-and-itsblack-identity-extremists/; Timothy McGrath, ‘Turns out people get angry when you say white Americans are terrorists, too,’ PRI,  July  8,  2015,  https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-08/turns-out-people-get-angry-when-you-saywhite-americans-are-terroriststoo.
31. Alex P. Schmid and Albert J. Longman, Political Terrorism, 3; Schmid, ‘Terrorism – The Definitional Problem,’ 375–420.
32. See Michel Foucault, ‘The Order of Discourse,’ 48–78.
33. See the work of Rémi Brulin, ‘Le discours Américain sur le terrorisme: Constitution, evolution et contextes d’enonciation (1972–1992).’ For an admission that US courts see using the label terrorist as ‘prejudicial’ for acts of violence carried out by White Americans, see Ryan J. Reilly, ‘There’s A Good Reason Feds Don’t Call White Guys Terrorists, Says DOJ Domestic Terror Chief,’ Huffpost, Jan. 11, 2018, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/white-terrorists-domestic-extremists_us_5a550158e4b003133ecceb74?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004.

Suggestions for Majma ul Uloom ul Islamia Curriculum

In a webinar held under the auspices of IRN, I forwarded few suggestions for Majma ul Uloom ul Islamia Curriculum. I elaborated a little upon those suggestions and added some more, so that a comprehensive and presentable document may be developed. Here I present the suggestions.

1. Increase the breadth of knowledge keeping the depth of core subjects; Every branch of Islamic knowledge may be introduced with the introduction of top three books of that genre. For example in the field of Qiraa’aat these books can be introduced.
– Al Shatabiyya
– Al Nashr Fi Qiraa’aat Al Ashr
– Al Tayseer Fi Qiraa’aat Al Sab’

2. Teaching of Aqaid in the backdrop of contemporary attacks on Islam i.e. Scientific, Humanistic, Cultural etc. In this regards Mufti Abdul Wahid’s book Islami Aqaaid would be a good start.

3. Struggle of Ulama before and after creation of Pakistan. Since there is a complete blackout regarding efforts of Ulama in our Social Studies syllabus, there is need to highlight those efforts. In this regard, Ulama’s contribution towards creation of Pakistan and their struggle for Islamization of Pakistan afterwards e.g. Qarardad e Maqasid, Ulama Kay 22 Nikaat, 1953 ka Qadiani Mas’ala, 1973 Declaration of Qadianis as minorities may be highlighted.

4. Olympiads for different Uloom e Islami; On the style of Physics and Maths Olympiads, Olympiads based upon Islamic Knowledge for every Darajah, with voluntary participation should be organized on National/International levels. Heavy prizes may be given and ample publicity be done to attract best minds of the Nation towards Uloom e Deeniyya.

5. Kindling of Spark of Independence i.e. Jazba e Hurriat; Struggle of Ulama during Colonialism throughout the Islamic World e.g. Imam Shamil in Chechnya, Imam As Sanusi and Omar Mukhtar in Libya, Imam Bonjol in Sumatra, Ameer Abdul Qadir in Algeria, Syed Ahmad Shaheed, 1857 War of Independence, Raishmi Rumaal Tehreek etc.

6. Inculcate Love of Reading; Mashaheer Ulama’s favorite books and their effects on making them great. I wrote few blog posts about this.

Favorite books of Great Scholars

مفید کتب