The freedom of expression we enjoy and the open debate against medievalism that we Pakistanis are carrying out through an open press on Iqbal's ideology 'Father of our nation' a debate.. ''Allama Iqbal would never have accepted the medievalisation of Pakistan in the name of Islam.''
“AMONGST THE COMMUNITY INDIVIDUALS do not SURVIVE alone;
LIKE WAVES THAT EXIST IN oceans But OUT OF oceans the waves are nothing”
Iqbal was a poet of 20 century, but in his poetry there is a wholesome fusion of the physical and metaphysical, a mutually inclusive combination of the material and the moral. He transmigrated literally Ghalib’s soul into his writings. There is spontaneity, variety and diversity in his poetry. And he paid a poignant tribute to Ghalib in his poem ‘Mirza Ghalib’ which appears in this collection. His poems like ‘Himalaya’ (which he wrote in the year 1901), ‘Tarana-e-Hindi’, Naya Shivala’ ‘Shikva’ and ‘Javab-e-Shikva’ are the masterpieces in Urdu poetry. The reason my name is 'Iqbal' is that my father told me that he wanted me to display some of his attributes, I think sub-consciously I have been affected by his poetry and I like his work a lot.
Javed Iqbal his son has applied the pin to the overblown balloon of Pakistan’s ideology by speaking frankly about its dark underside, saying that his father never intended this kind of coercive state with ulema rampant in it with their savage recipes. He has been proved right again and again, but to no effect. In our post-Taliban period, the ulema are on the warpath. In this Dark Ages penumbra, he has chosen to speak frankly once again about his celebrated father and about himself. Ruled by hypocrisy, we don’t like anyone speaking honestly.
Dr Javed Iqbal “Son of Allama Iqbal”?
: living under a great man’s shadow
Khaled Ahmed’s
Urdu Press Review
Does Justice (Retd) Javed Iqbal have the right to be his own person, or should he bow to the “national convenience” of living in a glass case with a sign saying “Son of Allama Iqbal”?
Allama Iqbal’s son Javed Iqbal has always been a bit of a thorn in the side of the ideological state of Pakistan, presumably “imagined” first by his father. Hypocrisy flourishes under ideology, be it of the Soviet or the Ayatollah brand. Javed has applied the pin to the overblown balloon of Pakistan’s ideology by speaking frankly about its dark underside, saying that his father never intended this kind of coercive state with ulema (of the “su” variety) rampant in it with their savage recipes. He has been proved right again and again, but to no effect. In our post-Taliban period, the ulema are on the warpath. In this Dark Ages penumbra, he has chosen to speak frankly once again about his celebrated father and about himself. Ruled by hypocrisy, we don’t like anyone speaking honestly.
Well known literary figure Anwar Sadeed wrote in “Nawa-e-Waqt” (January 10, 2003) a review of “Apna gareban chaak” (Sang-e-Meel) by Justice (Retd) Javed Iqbal extracting some nuggets of personal detail from the life of the national poet Allama Muhammad Iqbal. Allama used to laugh and cry in his solitude and used to raise his hand while reciting a line of poetry. His favourite costume was “dhoti” and “banyan” with a towel on his head while saying namaz. His room was filled with dust with books scattered all around. His bed was always dirty like his “dhoti” and “banyan” which he would never change. He avoided bathing and washing the face and became upset at the thought of it. He avoided going out, but when he had to, he was heard loudly sighing in grief while changing into formal dress. He slept with one forearm under his head but often his foot would be moving, indicating that he was not really asleep. He snored loudly and produced such frightening sounds that children often got scared. He was lazy by habit and was always late to functions. He preferred half-lying on bed during which he would forget that had eaten his meal and would ask “Have I eaten my meal or not?” He took two rounds of the yard and had no other physical exercise. He was fond of “murgh qorma, pilao, zarda, firni, shami kabab, karelay gosht, allu bharta”, and loved “khamiri roti”. Among fruit, he liked (sucking) mangos and “more mangos and more mangos”, which he often enjoyed in great quantities while resting in the mango orchard of Mian Nizamuddin with Mian Amiruddin, Mian M. Aslam and Muhammad Din Taseer. His wife often quarrelled with him for not being a good breadwinner and wanted him to take to the profession of law seriously and give up his laziness because she was sick of toiling in the rented house and scraping to save money. He reacted to this with an embarrassed laughter.
Javed Iqbal’s memoir is a touching one although he tells it quite deadpan. His mother died when he was 11 and his father died when he was 14. The suffering of his mother can only be imagined; his own is strongly subliminal. All his life, he says, he lived under the shadow of his great father, who was never really dead because his genius presided over the state of Pakistan. It was his right to grow up his own person. And there is ample proof that he achieved much in life, professionally and as a creative person of great scholarly depth. His voluminous biography of his father “Zindarud” remains the most authoritative commentary on Allama Iqbal. As a Muslim scholar writing on the theory of the state today, he must stand on his own, but the Muslims of today ignore him because they simply cannot give up their “arrested” vision. As a result he is more recognised abroad than in Pakistan. Yet, he is his father’s son. Allama’s last will and testament asked him to be a non-sectarian Sunni and to be kind to his step-siblings. He has remained respectful to the people of the Ahle Bayt and has never uttered a single word against his step-brothers, including Aftab, who left behind a pretty damaging account of the family. He thought correctly that his father wouldn’t have liked an unreconstructed enforcement of the medieval Islamic “fiqh” and he stuck to this view while the “ideological” state ignored its “imaginer” at the time of enforcing the “hudood” under General Zia. He was right in his stance that Allama Iqbal would never have accepted the medievalisation of Pakistan in the name of Islam. His account of his salad days in Lahore and in England is deliberately presented to deflate the hype of ideology, proving that an honest and meaningful life could be lived without mouthing the shibboleths of the pious. If he had held back on himself, one could have accused him of bad-mouthing his father. The truth is that Allama Iqbal comes out a greater man in his memoir than the “manufactured” Allama Iqbal of the state-sponsored brainwash.
Writer Muzaffar Hussain stated in “Nawa-e-Waqt” (December 28, 2002) that Justice (Retd) Javed Iqbal was said by Majeed Nizami to be taking his anger out at being born the son of Allama Iqbal and not being able to excel him. Javed Iqbal protested that he was being misjudged as a person by being shut in the bottle of Allama Iqbal. Javed Iqbal said that he was commenting on his father’s thoughts as any other critic would. The writer protested at Javed Iqbal’s autobiography in which he confessed to having relations with young British girls. But he admired Javed’s courage in declining to do his PhD on the sufism of Imam Ghazali because sufism was an “internal” experience and could not be viewed “externally”.
It is ironical that the writer should praise Javed Iqbal for the wrong reason. He protests that Javed was truthful in describing his pursuit of “young British girls” and accepts quite supinely his pretext for not undertaking a study of Imam Ghazali. Allama Iqbal sounds strange rejecting sufism as a philosopher; Maududi doesn’t as an orthodox cleric. Javed could have studied Ghazali “externally” because he is such an extraordinary and “flexible” intellect. He was against the rationalists but argued rationally in his Asharite style. He was against philosophy but not against mysticism. He was also “pliable”. In his learned book “Sufism in South Asia” (OUP), Riazul Islam notes that he condemned contact with the rulers in his “Ihya-ul Ulum”, but 10 years later wrote “Nasihat-al Muluk” under the influence of the Seljuq court, in which he favoured the rulers, even quoting a dubious hadith enjoining obedience of a corrupt king. * |
