Hassan Nisar's comments on Allama Iqbal

1. Iqbal and his type of people have made the life of Muslims difficult.
2. His poetry is illogical..(Larha De Mamoley ko Shahbaz se is a crap. Mamola is different thing Shahbaz is meant for different thing)

3. Poetry has no place in Islam.
4. Iqbal is a local,regional poet.
5. I feel irritated on the thought that Iqbal was a "Shair-e-Mashriq".
6. Nation-State theory have rejected the Iqbal's illogical concept of "Ek hon Muslim Haram ki Pasbani k lie"
7. There are much bigger brains in East then Iqbal e.g those in China.
8. You have to learn Persian to read Iqbal's poetry, so it's useless.

http://www.voice.pk/videos/hassan-ni...uhammad-iqbal/

Anybody who thinks all these assumptions of Nisar are right? Please Comment.

IQBAL was an idealist his contribution in reforming Muslim thought is immense but his contribution towards Islam and Pakistan is exaggerated or in other words he doesn't deserve the place he has been given in our curriculum

We should look at who is raising fingers at whom!. Who is Hassan Nisar? If he is a scholar and poet bigger than Iqbal and recognized in his services by a number greater as compared, then he is o.k, otherwise he is speaking rubbish!. Actually some of our people are in habit of criticizing our beloved and well deserved leaders, just for the sake of being looked at as seculars.
If iqbal doesnot deserve place in our literature, then do they themselves do?. His single most contribution i.e providing with the idea of muslim state in Allahbad, is sufficient to remember him as our hero.
These critics want Gandhi and Nehru in our literature and text books; indeed the followers of Abul-Kalam Azad, they are!

Well, some of the points mentioned holds true logical grounds. Indeed, Iqbal's vision of Pan Islamism in the contemporary world doesn't hold grounds. I mean where is this notion, when two Muslim neighbor countries are at each other's throats all the time. So I always have doubts over this concept.

Secondly yes, Iqbal can't be only attributed to be the only intellectual and greatest mind in the Eastern poetry. There has been other great names too. Even if we look at Ghalib, many people believes that Ghalib had more ingenuity and wittiness.


But after all that I believe Iqbal has a place in literature and poetry. And he deserves to be respected in that right. Similarly the way Hassan Nisar Sahab ridicules people is not a so intellectual and gentlemanly because if you prove yourself to be such intellectual and a man of wisdom you always have to show some respect to those with whom you disagree.

But at times I believes, even though I admire Nisar Sahab, he becomes too harsh, critical and personal in his analysis of people with whom he doesn't agree. I mean after-all, there are better ways to negate and refute someone, much more sanely and calmly. He gets too bitter!

__________________
“Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right doing, there is a field. I will meet you there.” Rumi

There are certain things in Islam which apparently are seen not holding logical grounds, so what will you do? You will start refuting Islam?
Islamic teachings as a whole present a set of idealistic conditions which you can only strive to achieve but can't achieve wholly solely...
Do you think if we divide ourselves among Punjabi,Sindhi,Barelvi,Deobandi then even one city let alone a province can survive?
Every ideology holds in it some "idealistic" notions, it does n't means we should start abusing that ideology?
Do you think What Iqbal presented is something against Shariah?
As this man Nisar is saying only Quran and Seerah...Without commentaries and explanations made by scholars, were we capable of understanding our religion?

[/QUOTE]Secondly yes, Iqbal can't be only attributed to be the only intellectual and greatest mind in the Eastern poetry. There has been other great names too. Even if we look at Ghalib, many people believes that Ghalib had more ingenuity and wittiness. [/QUOTE]

Who said that Iqbal is only one and we should reject all?
Ghalib,Haali,Meer etc all are equally praised in history as well as there inclusion text books is a proof.
But don't you think Iqbal's poetry is unique? Don't you think the way he explained the condition of Muslims, their dilemmas, predicaments and solutions, any other parallel example is present in Muslim History?
Tell me any poet who speaks about civilizations their disparity and clashes among them, so immensely?
But after all that I believe Iqbal has a place in literature and poetry. And he deserves to be respected in that right. Similarly the way Hassan Nisar Sahab ridicules people is not a so intellectual and gentlemanly because if you prove yourself to be such intellectual and a man of wisdom you always have to show some respect to those with whom you disagree.

You can distinguish Iqbal's poetry from 1000's other poetical works very easily, no matter how much difficult language you use or see you can't find a parallel except Ghalib. So, Iqbal has not only a place but a unique place.
[/QUOTE] But at times I believes, even though I admire Nisar Sahab, he becomes too harsh, critical and personal in his analysis of people with whom he doesn't agree. I mean after-all, there are better ways to negate and refute someone, much more sanely and calmly. He gets too bitter![/QUOTE]

Yes, If Nisar is so much capable then he must bring a parallel concept to Iqbal, rather then just abusing the Muslim nation, he must give us solutions, like which Iqbal had given...He can't even explain clearly what Iqbal's vision was.

__________________
If I am what I have and if I lose what I have, who then am I?

True.

True. The contradictions are appalling. But it's not reasonable to look for logic in poetry.

I don't think that is true.

True, but so are many other great poets. This is a trivial matter, I'd say.

Just a personal opinion of Hassan Nisar, but understandable.

Very much true. A glaring contradiction.

True. Don't know about China but sub-continent had many poets greater than Iqbal, i.e. Ghalib, Faiz etc.

Better part of Iqbal's poetry is in Persian. Still, that doesn't mean his poetry in Urdu is 'useless'. Hassan Nisar didn't call it useless, by the way.

No, that is not the way to judge criticism. Personal circumstances of a man are irrelevant to criticism.

P.S. The way this video has been compiled can be cited as a good example of yellow journalism.

Well, I've tried to find the original video, but couldn't find. May be, that's something out of context...The reason I've not given any stance against it...

@ Gypsfield Sir, you have shown your stance just but kindly explain in two,three sentences e.g "How Iqbal has made life difficult"? and other statements.

As far as my meagre knowledge of Iqbal poetry is concerned,Yes, Iqbal's concepts are difficult to grasp and it's very difficult to understand the connectedness.And it's even more difficult to practise them...
But the poetry I have understood, I see it not too much difficult...

Iqbal's poetry revolves around following few ideologies.

1. "Self-discovery"..To acknowledge your hidden capabilities, as everyone has been bestowed with different set of capabilities.
He gives example from Muslim history that the great great Muslims had revealed their hidden treasure, it made easy for them to put their effort in the things they were capable of.e.g

Don't you think West is following this concept more? It's not a modern concept?


2. "Tadbeer" against "Karma"....Iqbal rejected the conventional concept of "Karma", that man is destined to do what his "Taqdeer" has decided for him. Instead Iqbal emphasized upon "tadbeer".



Do you think West is practising this concept more? And Muslims are still unable to grab this concept.

3. Self Respect...The concept of "Larha de Mamole ko Shahbaz se"...It's symbolic representation of two types of People...Those who conserve their Self-respect and instead have unveiled their innate capabilities are termed as "Shahbaz" and those who have sold their self-respect to others and are instead overwhelmed by mere "apparent necessities of life like earning bread and butter" are termed as "Mamoley"...

Don't you think Muslims begging to other Nations for every technology,monetary benefits etc is due to the fact that they have lost their self-respect?

4. Ijthad...Instead of Blind "Taqleed" of Islamic ideas, there is a need of "reconstruction" of Islamic thought.


He wants the Islamic thought to be re-vitalized. And he wants even the Quran should be translated in a new way. The present commentaries of Quran are not according to the changing times.
And it's the fact that until the description of Quran remains the same we the Muslims can't move forward. Because Quran is the integral part of a Muslim's individual and society.."Iss se Jaan churhana bhi Mushkil he".

And this reconstruction is even at individual level, for this purpose we have to understand the Quran deeply despite of sticking to old translations we have to understand it verse by verse in a way it is revealing on us anew.

According to him, if we follow the above mentioned pattern, we can bring a better
1. Political System then democracy
2. Economic systems then Capitalism and Communism (being nearer to Islam)
3. Civilization then European civilization..

Yes, these principals of "Self-discovery", Self-Respect, Ijtihad, Tadbeer are making, the life of people following Iqbal, difficult...And will make much difficult...

I am not in state to discuss the "Nation-State" theory and "Iqbal's Pan-Islamism" I've still much to understand in this regard, I think.

Is it justified to compare "Ghalib" with "Iqbal"?
Ghalib was a great poet as well but both had done poetry on different lines...


However,Iqbal was also accused of "Apostasy" just like Ghalib...Ulemae Deoband waged war against his concepts..."Fatwas of Kufr" were delivered on him...

And Now see...All the Muslim Ulemas are seen chanting his poetry...Salafis like Ahmad Deedat, Zakir Naik, Deobands like Maulana Tariq Jameel, Barelvis like Maulana Ilyas and also Maulana Modudi even Shias are seen praising his poetry....After half century they are understanding Iqbal now...
He is a symbol of unity among Muslims...But.....
And now I am seeing a new sequela...

I want those who think Iqbal is just a "Home-Made" illogical poet to write their comments...

So, that I may also increase my knowledge in this regard. However, I am amazed with stances...All my previous posts on Iqbal's poetry went in vain then...I will have to find refuge some other philosophy then Iqbal... Freudian Philosophy is better? Or I should follow "Osho"?



Getting refuge in Ghalib's poetry in requesting the comments..

"Pila de Oak se Saqi jo hum se Nafrat he

Piyala Gar nahin deta,Na de, Sharaab to de"

Or I will have to study Iqbal in more detail

"Inkaar ki si Lazzat kahan Iqrar men he
Barhta he shoq Ghalib unki "Nahin" "Nahin" se...

Ghalib,however, had also grievances on the present scenario of our "Billo Rani" youth of Muslims...I remember his one of rebuking quote to a Muslim man having hobby of flying Pigeons and accusing Ghalib on taking "scholarship" from Government.

" Daikho Mian Shkayat hum se nahin, Khud se karo..Qaumen baadshahon se nahin, awam se banti hen, aur ap agar aaj bhi "Kabootar" na urha rhe hotey, to yeh qaum kuch aur hoti, yeh mulk kuch aur hota... and finally in Adieu 'Jao Kabutar urhao"...

__________________
If I am what I have and if I lose what I have, who then am I?

Making myself clear in this regard that..It is just symbolic..
Iqbal usually regarded the "Falcon" as a "Darwaish" parinda...And minor birds as opposite...
In this very case, he is saying the same but in different perspective that if even
a small weak bird like "Mamola" adopting the principle of Self-discovery and self-respect can become capable of fighting the larger birds...

__________________
If I am what I have and if I lose what I have, who then am I?

Iqbal was a poet and just like most other poets, he used symbolism and often ended up in contradictions. So it might not be right to directly blame him in making our lives difficult. However, the fact that the powers to be of this country chose to elevate him to the status of some demigod and a flawless poet of Islam (since we are afflicted with this disease of dragging religion into everything) was what created all the problems. There are too many contradictions in his poetry, he would condemn Western civilization and imperialism but you would find him lavishing the Queen with praise and accepting knighthood, you will find him criticizing democracy in poetry and calling it the most viable system in prose, you will see him saying “juda ho deen siyasat se to ban jati hay changezi” in poetry and calling for Mustafa Kamal’s Secularism in prose, and so on. This might have been natural for a poet, but the moment we decided to elevate his status and take everything from him at face value began all the problems. See what I mean?

Difficulty is one thing, simple plain contradictions another. The former may be excused, the latter is hard to.

There is nothing new here. All these concepts already existed in previous philosophies before Iqbal, although he used them in his poetry is a pretty good way. He actually borrowed a lot from philosophers such as Nietzsche, particularly the concept of ‘khudi’, considering his attachment with Germans. As for the concept of Ijtihad, that again becomes incomprehensible because of the contradictions. He favors Ijtihad in his prose to reconstruct religion and supports democracy and secularism (very brave stance) but in his poetry you would find him criticizing the same things, taking us back to square one.

That is what I meant by problems. Since we have elevated him to a heavenly status, everyone is using him for his own mean ends. A Taliban can use Iqbal for his purpose and a secular person can do the same, because of the contradictions. And because we have politicized the man instead of just appreciating the poet in him, we have created countless problems for ourselves.

Allow me to point out a very important thing. One of the worst things you can do with yourself is to view things in black and white. Either a person is great or nothing, either a thing is good or bad. This is how a child views things. In real life, things and ideas are never in black and white. Iqbal was a human and had his own limitations, just like you and me. Our problem is that we elevate a man to the status of an angel and then are disappointed (and angered) when someone points out their mistakes. This attitude leads to nowhere. You can name any great philosopher from history and I’ll point out his contradictions and mistakes because they were humans who made mistakes. Plato and Aristotle, considered among the originators of philosophy, are full of contradictions and mistakes. And we know about their mistakes because we don’t consider them perfect, because we know they were just humans like us, because they are subject to inquiry and criticism. The moment we start considering someone perfect and refuse to listen anything against them, we are inviting trouble. And this trouble is what our attitude toward Iqbal is causing us today. Objective criticism is something non-existent in this pure land.

No one is asking you to shun Iqbal or anything like that. He was a remarkable poet and you can continue to enjoy his poetry. You can continue to derive inspiration from his concept of khudi and such. But elevating him to perfection is not really a sane thing to do.

Thanks for writing this post. In my opinion, Hassan Nisar's criticism is an over-reaction. Iqbal as a philosopher was spot-on regarding his time and space and he's even relevant today. As a poet, he was really good but we should read his poetry just as any other poetry-pleasure reading of witticisms- not as a guiding light of our life which we often do and where the whole trouble starts.

__________________
He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow (Ecclesiastes 1:18)