Opinion: Why Pervez Hoodbhoy Loses; Iqbal & Sir Sayyed Win
PKKH Exclusive | by Mhummad Umer Toor
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy (PH), a believer in the dictum of “Science for its own sake,” has to come to pass unqualified judgements on the poetry and message of Iqbal – as if PH was dean of literature & philosophy at Al-Azhar University. He has reduced Iqbal’s rigorous and universal poetic work to mere sensational sentimentalism. He has degraded Iqbal by equating him to an emotional awami poet, who continues to misguide many in the Dr’s opinion. If anything lacks an intellectual judgement, then that is Dr PH’s (mis)understanding of why Pakistan breathes and sees things from Iqbalian lungs and eyes. Perhaps repelled by deeply Islamic and anti-modernist message of Iqbal, he is doing so to vent his frustration. Why is he frustrated? Majority of Muslims seem to have rejected the pseudo-liberal, secular-fundamentalist interpretations of Islam by the likes of Dr Pervez in the favor of holistic understanding of Iqbal, who critiqued modernity at the deepest level both in verse and prose. (We would concede the argument that at some important levels Iqbal too was an Islamic modernist – but nothing of the sorts of PH & co.)
- PH begins by saying, “In the battle for Pakistan’s soul, Sir Syed’s rational approach ultimately lost out and the Allama’s call on emotive reasoning won. Iqbal said what people wanted to hear — and his genius lay in crafting it with beautifully chosen words. Unfortunately, his prescriptions for reconstructing society cannot help us in digging ourselves out of a hole. Iqbal’s politics, routed through his soul-stirring poetry, is the real reason why he is Pakistan’s supreme icon today.”
Routed through his intellectual public lectures and writings addressed to the political and intellectual elite, Iqbal’s message makes him not only a “supreme icon” but a spiritual and intellectual guide as well. Moreover, Iqbal’s poetry is not divorced from his serious thought and philosophy expressed in English or Persian. Content is more or less same both in prose and poetry; underlying thoughts and worldview are consistent; but expressions are different. Poetry cannot allow itself to be formally logical; philosophy cannot afford to be informal. PH has confused content with manifestation. He misunderstands nature of poetry, and denies its relation with philosophical and metaphysical truth. What’s more, allegation that Iqbal said what people wanted to hear is saying that Iqbal was dishonest and only wanted to please people. How can anyone verify that? One can only reject it given Iqbal’s admonitions and criticisms of 20th century Muslim in his poetry (compare Shikwa and Jawab-e-Shikwa).
PH’s (mis)reading of Iqbal’s poetry is superficial and rejectable. To call his poetry, which clarifies one’s vision of reality and calls one to action, as “emotive” is a serious intellectual blunder, if not outright dishonesty. By calling it emotive he seems to imply that Iqbal’s poetry is irrational and fundamentalist. What else can be the implication? Certainly Iqbal’s poetry is an illumination, a direct intellection that speaks to the qalb, a source of intelligence as per Qur’an. One might call it the nur of Allah by which a momin sees and understands things – a way of knowledge & understanding that a haughty, modern physicist is most likely to deny. (He said that every verse descends on him in final form – showing directness, an aspect of revelation.) Iqbal’s poetry was a meta-logical crystallization of what he had learned directly from Qur’an, this is even truer for his philosophical Persian poetic works: at least this is how Iqbal described his own works!
Sir Sayyed’s 19th century apologetic essays have, however, been hailed as beacon of light for centuries to as per PH. The ghosts of 19th century Muslim modernism have been invoked in PH’s article: submission to Western imperialism & Eurocentrism, rebellion against the revealed religious doctrines & view of nature & reality, surrender to wholesale materialism, etc. This is what Sir Sayyed preached, with all due respect to him as a Muslim leader and educator. Sir Sayyed was under pressure vis-a-vis modern Western thought and civilization as per Iqbal. He did not have the tools to respond to its intellectual challenges (lacking training in philosophy and science, for instance). His writings – no wonder simplistic – had tinges of inferiority complex. We might say that the greatest gift of the efforts of Sir Sayyed to Islamic world was Iqbal, who outgrew his predecessor. Iqbal understood the shortcomings of Sir Sayyed, namely, his submission to the dogmatic claims of 19th century science, modern philosophy and an attitude of West-worship. But, Iqbal always paid huge salutations to SS’s efforts and viewpoints. In that sense, Sir Sayyed and Iqbal emerge out as winners in my mind.
- “Sir Syed accepted the Holy Quran as divinely revealed … He proposed a radical reinterpretation of the Holy Quran to make it compatible with science and modernity … Among other matters this involved understanding miracles, which science cannot accept as factual. Sir Syed therefore explained the Great Flood, as well as various miracles of Jesus, to be purely allegorical and symbolic.”
Like most modernized Muslims, PH suffers from the plague of scientism, which takes science as an ideology. For many 19th century Muslims, “modern science had become god, unconsciously – and not the God of Islam.” The attempt was to make Quran look compatible with science to prove Quran’s credibility! “That was a major disease worse than cholera that entered Muslim world,” deplores physicist-philosopher Dr Nasr. Today things are better we believe. A young muslim scientist today is more likely to believe in unseen realities than a diffident graduate of Sir Sayyed’s institution. PH has not, however, reformed himself (nor the modern science which still has its mechanistic & positivist moorings intact).
The impulse to interpret Qur’an according to dominant scientific view is an old one. For instance, in old days, it was believed that bees produced honey not in their stomach but in the glands of their legs. Qur’an says that Allah produces honey in bees’ batoon, which literally means stomach. To conform Qur’an to the scientific view of his time, Al-Razi said that one meaning of batoon was also gland of bees legs. Today, we know that the literal meaning (i.e., stomach) is correct!
This is not to suggest that the cold scientific interpretations are unjustifiable; they do show us that there’s nothing illogical or irrational about Qur’an. However, to deny angels, miracles or higher realities which cannot be confirmed in a physics laboratory is an illegitimate attitude; because, this is beyond the vocation of science as such. As Bertrand Russell told the young MIT scientist, Dr Nasr, that “Physics doesn’t concern itself with the nature of reality of things per se but with mathematical structures related to pointer readings.”
- PH considers the prescriptions of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan more practical and vivid than Iqbal’s.
Iqbal’s metaphysical and practical poetry on one hand and his “serious” English works on the other hand do not qualify for PH’s recommendation as useful and clear guides for Muslims. Just because Iqbal didn’t write “2+2 = 4” kind of essays for public?
Iqbal, unlike Sir Sayyed, was at the frontier of intellectual efforts of his time, and at the same time involved in many projects: social, political, and educational – although he was not a man of action in the sense Sir Sayyed was. He had read many texts of Einstein and on higher physics, such as theory of relativity, as well. This allowed him to critique classical physics under which 19th century man was spell-bound. And, if we are to believe that the change comes at the highest level – intellectual, philosophical and spiritual – then Iqbal was that change agent par excellence. PH’s dull and simplistic notion of Iqbal’s “impracticality” and “vagueness” is neither justifiable nor wise. Intellectual matters are inherently complex; whereas, operational procedures or policy recommendations are not. By the way, who ‘clearly’ dreamed of Pakistan (as it is today, geographically)?
- PH sees Sir Syed as a man of rationale who tried to bring back Muslims from “backwardness.” Iqbal, in his opinion, hardly offered any clear solutions to end the suffering of Muslims.
Backwardness is a western ‘innovation of misguidance’ to pass value-judgements on other civilizations which have not ‘developed along purely material lines’. The idol of ‘indefinite economic progress is what the moderns worship, and everyone in the world is made to prostrate before it. PH’s sentimental call for revision of Islam is no exception. Most, if not all, of the mental efforts of moderns are not invested in purely intellectual pursuits but in increasing GDP, inventing luxurious items, performing academic acrobats by saying new things and making ‘smart bombs to kill dumb Muslims’. It is precisely to save themselves from western domination that Orientals have to build the machine – and not to be part of a League of the ‘Civilized’ ‘Developed’ of West. For the Oriental, spirit, contemplation and harmony with nature is Real; and destruction of nature, pursuit of self-interest and greed Unreal.
Talking of material poverty, Iqbal was deeply concerned with it. He said that poverty can lead to spiritual death of people. This is why he was so interested in economics. Economic vision of Iqbal was concrete and insightful for his time, and even relevant today philosophically. He wrote for the first time an up-to-date standard economics textbook in Urdu; spent years figuring out plans to tackle poverty as per shari’ah laws; and raised his voice at highest level for exploited under-privileged ones. Perhaps, PH needs some understanding of economic works & ideas of Iqbal.
In short, the real problem is that PH doesn’t know what he knows not. His appreciation of Iqbal’s poetry is not accurate; rather his criticism of it seems more sentimental than even poetry can be! PH’s worldview is based on the ideas of modernism, eurocentrism, materialism, and scientism – and it is from this platform that he attacks Iqbal; whereas Iqbal dismantles the very platform! Lastly, accusations on a poet-philosopher of being impractical and not clear are self-contradictory. No wonder why Iqbal and his mentor Sir Sayyed must win; and PH may lose, unreformed.
Muhammad Umer Toor is a wanna-be philosopher in distant future. Based in Lahore, with a BSc in Business, he blogs at www.toorumer.blogspot.com. He can be reached at i.umer.toor@gmail.com
Discuss this topic on Defence.pk
Opinion: Article 31 and 62/63 
An Open Letter To All Pakistanis, From Kashmir 
Opinion: Saudi Labor Law and Pakistani Expats 
Opinion: Shut-Up FEMEN! 
Opinion : Opinion: India – Women in Search of Identity in the Rape Capital of the World 
[...] Hoodbhoy Muddles Iqbal and Sir Syed to Score Win for Liberalism Opinion: Hoodbhoy Muddles Iqbal and Sir Syed to Score Win for Liberalism | PKKH.tv PKKH Exclusive | by Mhummad Umer Toor Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy (PH), a believer in the dictum of [...]
This man is a enemy of Pakistan’s national interests.
Perves hodbooy is child of one of those people british left behind to create fitna amongst muslims of pakistan…i wonder howe could so anti islam and anti islamic pakistan be teacher in a university of pakistan…
Leaving aside PH for a moment …..
Muslims are lost because they have lost the divinely ordained guides of Quran. According to Hadis, each verse of Quran has 70 external and 70 internal meanings. Who can explain these meanings to people?
When you have the Ahle Bait (Our Prophet + his family) as your guides, you will understand Quran correctly and not make false conclusions from Quranic Ayats. Then you will understand both Quran and Science simultaneously because they are the divinely ordained guides.
and the sahabah it should be added
Excellent. Precise and effective. Well done and thank you.
HOODBHOY is a douchebag a total and utter joke.
His arguments weak and watered armourey is of what the anti Pakistan groups/nations want Pakistanis become.
If ever a man made me sick to the teeth it was Hoodbhoy.
For all his filthy liberal views I always question why he has not been a target of the so called Pakistani Taliban operating from within Afghanistan under the ISAF/US umbrella allowing Indian consulate to spread their terror into Pakistan.
It is my speculation but I believe the TTP / Pakistani Taliban and hoodbhoy have the same powers signing the cheques all be it a different channel.
Hoodbhoy is an academic terrorist trying manipulate and misguided the young and is equally as dislikes The TTP.
This man has made it his mission denigrate anything Pakistani or Islamic with same vim and vigor as any hinustani or westerner would. I feel that his anti-Pakistani diatribes are reasons for bringing him up on charges of sedition and treason. The man is an unabashed Indian lover. His co-authoring of the book about Pakistani and Indian nuclear assets is really a naked bashing of Pakistan rather than some intellectual unbiased research of the two. No wonder, he is the sole Pakistani co-author along with 4 or 5 Hindus. Every time he opens his mouth, it is only to disparage Pakistan. He falls into the category Pakistani self-haters, inthe same class as Najam Sethi, Hassan Nissar and Asma Jehngir. May Allah save us from these vermin.
Well, the fact that you can write this on a computer, and send it all around the world is a testament to the progress of “modernism, eurocentrism, materialism, and scientism.” Yet you remain silent on your own “isms,” your own biases.
“scientism” is a cynical euphemism used by those who enjoy the sweet fruits of the scientific revolution and European enlightenment, but curse those who cultivate it.
“scientism” is a cynical euphemism used by those who enjoy the sweet fruits of the scientific revolution and European enlightenment, but curse those who cultivate it.
Frankly – no its not. Technology is not a gift of enlightenment. Please read this movement. How can this advanced form of craftsmanship be the property of modern west alone? Every nation is playing its role.
Scientism is a view that only knowledge of sense-perception/scientific method is the only right and valid way of knowing things.
As far as I know, Pervez Hoodbhoy is an atheist pseudo-intellectual, with leftist leanings. He is white inside and brown outside. He is one of a group of similar Western educated desi’s which includes Tariq Ali, and Salman Rushdie, among others. He has no idea of what Islam is- just like the Taliban, only the opposite end of the spectrum- thus he is not qualified to render any expert opinion on either Islam or Iqbal. He is entitled to his opinions, but they are just that – opinions
beautifully done,, need to de-construct the likes of Hoodbhoy,,
must say Hoodbhoy lacks the ability to assimilate the fine communication done through poetry, his outright rejection of the possibility of poetry throws him out of the possibility to analyse it in the first place,, poor Hoodbhoy..
It’s an opinion.. and everyone can have one. Who are you to judge who is right and who is wrong…. if you’re a wannabe philosopher, I think you better change your college….. or read a different book – one that teaches you about dissenting opinions.
Thanks for the advice.
SOME opinions in fact CAN be right or wrong depending on how they conform to facts…one of the dumbest things that is taught in schools is that ALL opinions cannot be judged as right and wrong.
ex:
in my opinion zardari is the best president pakistan has ever had.
is this not false?
For anonymous its NOT false, however
If u compare zardari with other presidents of pakistan u get either true or false. If anonymous is of the opinion that zardari is indeed the best, his opinion can only be right or wrong. There is no alternative to this type of an opinion. Why? Because its not beholden to personal preferences such as attractiveness.
Just to be clear i am saying that only SOME opinions are subjective. ONLY in general terms is an opinion subjective.
Sorry it should say “SOME opinions are not subjective”
I am deeply concerned with the issue of objectivity in humanities… Any books you can refer which explore this issue? I am studying logic and critical thinking – it does attempt to do it…
no sorry i don’t have any books that I can refer you to.
why not search amazon?
Try collected Dialogues of Plato. One particularly interesting for basic is where he use Socratese.
I’ve it. Will read it . THanks a lot !
PH should migrate to India, even better he should return to his Jewish home land of Isreal. We very well know whose agenda he is serving. My question is why are such elements tolerated in Pakistan. Or why are they given any media space. He is not worth it.
Well let’s not sully the name of Jews. They’re very scholarly people. It is not a question of toleration or intoleration it’s just an academic debate with profound practical consequences.
@umer toor, and acadmeic debate??? oh please dont make me laugh , “hoodwink” Hoodbhoy clearly has an agenda and bias thats why he struggles with his arguments and makes any sense. This is evident in the fact that he has failed miserably in convincing the masses. This is another problem with his supporters they dont blame the speaker BUT all those who dont come to hear him speak??!!
His errors are primarily philosophical or let’s say, anti-love-of-wisdom. Wrong ways of thinking is the main problem. Political agendas are no comparison
Though i have not studied much of the works of Sir Syed, Allama Iqbal was way ahead than many of his contemporaries. In fact, he was one of the only few to have the bird’s view of the west and the east. Sorry, i wish not to comment on PH, but my view is we don’t need him since we already have lot of pseudo-liberals filled with Muslimophobia. Sadly, we are yet to invent any medicine to treat them. Glad that there are emerging thinkers like Hamza Tzortzis, Adam Deen, Abdullah Andalusi, your own Adnan Rashid etc. to tear them up.
us, Pakistanis, have a very bad habit of tolerating too much. people like PH should be given capital punishment on charges of treason.
Your sarcasm is going overboard
Wonder how it’s related to the article?
what? its related to PH and hence relevant.
Why should he be given capital punishment? Doesn’t make sense at all. Either you are being irrationally hateful or plain sarcastic.
No, he mustn’t be given capital punishment but rather be sent to the stake for a major ”cleanup”!
“Hoodwink” Hoodbhoy has been trying for a long to create disinformation and to disenfranchise the public at best he is trying to spread confusion and now that he is deliberately attacking the ideology of Pakistan based in Allama Iqbal i believe he has gone too far.
I just dont understand people like him if they dislike Pakistan so much that they are attack the very fabric of our country is based on, then why dont they just LEAVE! its simple leave Pakistanis to Pakistanis and go adopt some other alien culture and ideology, theis is a clear case of namak harami! another namak harami hasan nisar LIVED in america for 17 years and decided to come back and relentless as ever, there food, clothe and shelter will never be halal for then until they stop!
What would happen in America if the constitution was attacked?? people would be up in arms same in the UK where there is a drive to ostracise those who are constantly critical of their country we should adopt the same policies!!!
“Hoodwink” Hoodbhoy has been trying for a long to create disinformation and to disenfranchise the public at best he is trying to spread confusion and now that he is deliberately attacking the ideology of Pakistan based on Allama Iqbal i believe he has gone too far.
I just dont understand people like him if they dislike Pakistan so much that they attack the very fabric of our country is based on, then why dont they just LEAVE! its simple leave Pakistanis to Pakistanis and go adopt some other alien culture and ideology, this is a clear case of Namak Harami! another Namak Harami hasan nisar LIVED in america for 17 years and decided to come back and relentless as ever in his attitude towards Pakistan. There food, clothe and shelter will never be halal for them until they stop!
What would happen in America if the constitution was attacked?? people would be up in arms same in the UK where there is a drive to ostracise ALL those who are constantly critical of their country we should adopt the same policies!!!
well needed piece of writing .. PH openly preaching his false concepts full of deception under the umbralla of ‘rationalism’ which attracts youth. In my view, we need public debators/speakers who deliver lectures on such topics in universities and other such platefarms to remove confusion in youth.
Brother you are in UET. You have time and resources to arrange such kind of events. I request you to spend your energy in realization of this idea.
JazakAllah for the appreciation ! You need to write as well ! PKKH welcomes young writers.
PKKH – Do you have issues with what I post?
As you have removed my posts.
Afsos naam cheez bhi hain aur aap say yay umeed nehin thee.
Fine I will no longer comment and just passively read your regular digest.
Yar, please calm down, PKKH is run by volunteers. Moderating comments takes time and I agree its not prompt. Sometimes, comments of the authors are published very late. All kinds of comments are welcomed. And i ‘ve written now half a dozen of articles here and all have received praising and insulting comments.
yAHOOD BOY SCUM BAG DOG.
Have you ever met an orthodox or traditional Jew even online? I have (online). And they’re not like him or what you describe.
Hello.. I recently wrote a comment here, but it seems that you cannot not handle logic. Yet the comments calling for the death of Dr. Hoodbhoy are ok for your moderators. There is a reason why Pakistan is sinking into the abyss. It is because of cowards like you. You are a coward of the highest order.
Check above
“Handle the logic” ! 
A review of the article by a friend:
“I went through your article but before doing that I did my bit of research of PH once again, as I feel confident about my ‘bit’ of understanding of Hazrat Dr. Allama Muhammad Iqbal.
Analysis of the article is laid down in the following points
. The article lacked any substantial question put forward to be answered.
. The comparative analysis of PH and Iqbal was substantial mistake, they both don’t fit in for the right to criticize each other. A scientist should know his science and so should I philosopher know what he preaches as an idea, both can co-exist as long public benefit is what motivates them.
In my humble opinion neither of the two needs to get there lines drawn correctly by each other they can create whatever they want as long as it is the right direction.
. Thus comparing a scientist who prefers science with a philosopher who prefers philosophy is no comparison at all.
. You talked about liberalism and Islam or rather Islam or liberalism. Such a debate is counterproductive as well, the simple reason to say that is because any person who has a person bias or is already motivated toward either of the two would not come up a fair judgment which in my opinion end up establishing our own self as the righteous one and not understanding things for the sake of learning.
. There were hardly any references from either Iqbals work or PH work to substantiate your claim that PH thought that Iqbal and his work were at cross purposes with PH.
. Your claim that Iqbal was a ‘aawami’ Shair fail to appeal as well because his poetic work is for the highest of the intellectual level + a man with vision and sprit would only understand and feel his truth.
A common man knows nothing about him through his poetic work, they know him through a paragraph or two of their school texts books and slogans that Iqbal was the visionary who laid down the true idea an Islamic state(which is a false claim in its self because Allama appeals to the young beyond any boundaries).
. Sir Syed and his submission to the west was an emphasis in the article, PH was compared as being a modern day equalant that to my mind makes no sense Sir Syed was a politician and his work was mainly up bring the already fallen Muslim empire. What I fail to understand is that how can Sir Syed be criticized as being pro west when his focus was up lift the young of Muslim and to bring them to a level where they can compete with the rest of the world.
. Economics, Islam, capitalism or shariya, Iqbal were one of the last things mentioned in the article. The simplest reply is no one individual is capable of doing it all, “Afaraad Ke hathoon mai hai akwam ke taqdeer, har fard mai milat ke muqader ka sitara’. It’s for the people to decide how they want their country to work not for anyone person to lay it down and that thing to seen as the scared. How humans live and how everyone is benefited through systems does need motivation and guidance but also needs planning and hard work. My answer to that is forget modernism and forget backwardness, concentrate of human development.
. The last point was modernism and living in harmony with nature. Man I wished caves were still enough for everyone to live but sadly they aren’t so we have to make do with homes but nature is the only real
truth and is the most powerful thing as well so the best approach is forget development for the sake of development and concentrate on human benefit. Balanced approach is perfect approach.
PS: I am no expert in any of the matter, I did it all because you asked for it
Hashim Bokhari
26/2/2013
6:26Am”
How can a guy who doesn’t even acknowledge his own father as his father can be supposed to grasp the integrity and magnanimity of Iqbal or Sir Syed?? That man is none other than Pervez Hoodbhoy.
I have met Jews and they hate to hear any word against them or against Holocaust. To them the dead Hitler is still a nightmare as any Muslim is to Hoodbhoy.
Pervez Hoodbhoy is not a Jew but a born Aga Khani who detests all sects of Islam and their adherents except his own. He writes for the sake of teasing others as without puking out milk and thumb-sucking he knows nothing.I know he cannot comprehend Iqbal because he is too bad at Urdu. He is also not a history student to qualify as a commentator on the subject. Though he admits having spent more than 35 years idling in the University campuses purported to be teaching nuclear science but he hasn’t turned out a SINGLE PH.D to this date. After being kicked out from LUMS recently on charges of ‘questionable conduct” he seems to have been deranged with his pukings about Muslims and Pakistan. Thus he has a good reason to be pardoned–on grounds of insanity, and, moreso because he was recently divorced and got remarried to yet another unfortunate lady. May God bless his soul!
That was enlightening ! I hope i didn’t sound offensive earlier.