Response to Dr. Peerzada

Dear Dr. Peerzada,

For fear of getting lost in the comment section of your video, I opted to write this out here. I trust you find this medium suitable for such a discourse.

I appreciate the initiative you’ve taken and especially the manner in which you approached the subject. In highlighting the significance of ideas in shaping the social and political milieu, you echo Allama’s own emphasis. He stressed the significance of “Reconstruction of religious thought…” as is evident from the title of the book, and took it upon himself to rid Muslims of a passive/defeatist attitude that had become so deeply rooted. So deeply rooted, in fact, that despite his best efforts, as the comment section of your video shows, the mentality still prevails. Unfortunately, the care with which you approached the subject was lost on most people who only caught on to a couple of catchphrases: “he was wrong” and “critical thinking.”

Developing a culture of critical thinking is incredibly important. The first step in thinking critically, especially with respect to a thinker as deeply rooted in Eastern and Western thought as Allama was, is to ask: did I understand him correctly? You were quite humble in this regard and opened yourself up for counterarguments. This attitude in itself is quite a rare commodity. My respectful response:

Allama maintained this criticism of Western civilization until the very end. This is obvious when he alluded to it as the West’s “dazzling exterior” in his Reconstruction lectures. However, reading Allama in this fragmentary manner is inappropriate. He complements this criticism by identifying that “the inner core of Western civilization is Qur’anic.”

It will take far more than a brief response to articulate how these two dimensions are to be reconciled. Indeed, it was Allama’s foresight that enabled him to state this toward the beginning of the 20th century. Even though hindsight is supposedly 20/20, we are still catching glimpses of what he had seen quite vividly. The number of “postmodern” turns, almost fifty years after Allama’s passing, speak to the weak/dazzling aspects of Western thought. The resulting crises, whether in the domain of climate, morality, or psychosocial problems, practically demonstrate that weakness. Nevertheless, as you pointed out, there are many promising developments as well. Allama, I dare say, would relate those to the fruitfulness of that Qur’anic core.

I am obviously biased—proudly, in fact. But when one of the most notable contemporary philosophers, Charles Taylor, says that “we must re-read Iqbal,” I find my biases corroborated from a rather distant source. His preface to Souleymane Diagne’s book, as one of my teachers taught me, makes a very compelling case for Allama’s relevance today.

Pakistan’s destiny, if it is to fulfill Allama’s dream, is to provide that balance to Western thought. There was not an instance in history where the West suddenly received revelation and was Enlightened. The “Age of Enlightenment,” in fact, was a consequence of deep engagement with the Muslim world. To engage with the West is not to mimic it. It is to confirm the good it holds, and in turn seek confirmation from it for ourselves. It is to identify its shortcomings and rectify its errors. It is to collaborate to pave the way for a better future. 

We, despite everything, still have a unique human resource: one with access to Western thought, traditional wisdom, and most of all, Allama’s legacy in ensuring that the twain do, in fact, meet. Just like an individual is likely to fall into neurosis if they do not fulfill their meaning in life, Pakistan is currently experiencing the neurotic pangs of neglecting its Iqbalian raison d’être.

Best regards,

Yousuf Raza