INTRODUCTION
The
Asrár-i Khudí was
first published at Lahore in 1915. I read it soon afterwards and
thought so highly of it that I wrote to Iqbal, whom I had the
pleasure of meeting at Cambridge some fifteen years ago, asking
leave
to prepare an English translation. My proposal was cordially
accepted, but in the meantime I found other work to do, which
caused
the translation to be laid aside until last year. Before submitting
it to the reader, a few remarks are necessary concerning the poem
and
its author.[1]Iqbal
is an Indian Moslem. During his stay in the West he studied modern
philosophy, in which subject he holds degrees from the Universities
of Cambridge and Munich. His dissertation on the development of
metaphysics in Persia—an illuminating sketch—appeared as a book
in 1908. Since then he has developed a philosophy of his own, on
which I am able to give some extremely interesting notes
communicated
by himself. Of this, however, the
Asrár-i Khudí
gives no systematic account, though it puts his ideas in a popular
and attractive form. While the Hindu philosophers, in explaining
the
doctrine of the unity of being, addressed themselves to the head,
Iqbal, like the Persian poets who teach the same doctrine, takes a
more dangerous course and aims at the heart. He is no mean poet,
and
his verse can rouse or persuade even if his logic fail to convince.
His message is not for the Mohammedans of India alone, but for
Moslems everywhere: accordingly he writes in Persian instead of
Hindustani—a happy choice, for amongst educated Moslems there are
many familiar with Persian literature, while the Persian language
is
singularly well adapted to express philosophical ideas in a style
at
once elevated and charming.Iqbal
comes forward as an apostle, if not to his own age, then to
posterity—
“
I
have no need of the ear of To-day,I
am the voice of the poet of To-morrow”—and
after Persian fashion he invokes the Saki to fill his cup with wine
and pour moonbeams into the dark night of his thought,
“
That
I may lead home the wanderer,And
imbue the idle looker-on with restless impatience,And
advance hotly on a new quest,And
become known as the champion of a new spirit.”Let
us begin at the end. What is the far-off goal on which his eyes are
fixed? The answer to that question will discover his true
character,
and we shall be less likely to stumble on the way if we see whither
we are going. Iqbal has drunk deep of European literature, his
philosophy owes much to Nietzsche and Bergson, and his poetry often
reminds us of Shelley; yet he thinks and feels as a Moslem, and
just
for this reason his influence may be great. He is a religious
enthusiast, inspired by the vision of a New Mecca, a world-wide,
theocratic, Utopian state in which all Moslems, no longer divided
by
the barriers of race and country, shall be one. He will have
nothing
to do with nationalism and imperialism. These, he says, “rob us of
Paradise”: they make us strangers to each other, destroy feelings
of brotherhood, and sow the bitter seed of war. He dreams of a
world
ruled by religion, not by politics, and condemns Machiavelli, that
“worshipper of false gods,” who has blinded so many. It must be
observed that when he speaks of religion he always means Islam.
Non-Moslems are simply unbelievers, and (in theory, at any rate)
the
Jihád is
justifiable, provided that it is waged “for God’s sake alone.”
A free and independent Moslem fraternity, having the Ka´ba as its
centre and knit together by love of Allah and devotion to the
Prophet—such is Iqbal’s ideal. In the
Asrár-i Khudí and
the Rumúz-i Békhudí
he preaches it with a burning sincerity which we cannot but admire,
and at the same time points out how it may be attained. The former
poem deals with the life of the individual Moslem, the latter with
the life of the Islamic community.The
cry “Back to the Koran! Back to Mohammed!” has been heard before,
and the responses have hitherto been somewhat discouraging. But on
this occasion it is allied with the revolutionary force of Western
philosophy, which Iqbal hopes and believes will vitalise the
movement
and ensure its triumph. He sees that Hindu intellectualism and
Islamic pantheism have destroyed the capacity for action, based on
scientific observation and interpretation of phenomena, which
distinguishes the Western peoples “and especially the English.”
Now, this capacity depends ultimately on the conviction that
khudí (selfhood,
individuality, personality) is real and is not merely an illusion
of
the mind. Iqbal, therefore, throws himself with all his might
against
idealistic philosophers and pseudo-mystical poets, the authors, in
his opinion, of the decay prevailing in Islam, and argues that only
by self-affirmation, self-expression, and self-development can the
Moslems once more become strong and free. He appeals from the
alluring raptures of Hafiz to the moral fervour of Jalálu´ddín
Rúmí, from an Islam sunk in Platonic contemplation to the fresh and
vigorous monotheism which inspired Mohammed and brought Islam into
existence.[2]
Here, perhaps, I should guard against a possible misunderstanding.
Iqbal’s philosophy is religious, but he does not treat philosophy
as the handmaid of religion. Holding that the full development of
the
individual presupposes a society, he finds the ideal society in
what
he considers to be the Prophet’s conception of Islam. Every Moslem,
in striving to make himself a more perfect individual, is helping
to
establish the Islamic kingdom of God upon earth.[3]The
Asrár-i Khudí is
composed in the metre and modelled on the style of the
famous
Masnaví. In the
prologue Iqbal relates how Jalálu´ddín Rúmí, who is to him
almost what Virgil was to Dante, appeared in a vision and bade him
arise and sing. Much as he dislikes the type of Súfism exhibited by
Hafiz, he pays homage to the pure and profound genius of
Jalálu´ddín,
though he rejects the doctrine of self-abandonment taught by the
great Persian mystic and does not accompany him in his pantheistic
flights.To
European readers the
Asrár-i Khudí
presents certain obscurities which no translation can entirely
remove. These lie partly in the form and would not be felt, as a
rule, by any one conversant with Persian poetry. Often, however,
the
ideas themselves, being associated with peculiarly Oriental ways of
thinking, are hard for our minds to follow. I am not sure that I
have
always grasped the meaning or rendered it correctly; but I hope
that
such errors are few, thanks to the assistance so kindly given me by
my friend Muhammad Shafi, now Professor of Arabic at Lahore, with
whom I read the poem and discussed many points of difficulty. Other
questions of a more fundamental character have been solved for me
by
the author himself. At my request he drew up a statement of his
philosophical views on the problems touched and suggested in the
book. I will give it in his own words as nearly as possible, it is
not, of course, a complete statement, and was written, as he says,
“in a great hurry,” but apart from its power and originality it
elucidates the poetical argument far better than any explanation
that
could have been offered by me.
“
1.
The Philosophical Basis of the
Asrár-i Khudí
“‘
That
experience should take place in finite centres and should wear the
form of finite this-ness is in the end inexplicable.’ These are the
words of Prof. Bradley. But starting with these inexplicable
centres
of experience, he ends in a unity which he calls Absolute and in
which the finite centres lose their finiteness and distinctness.
According to him, therefore, the finite centre is only an
appearance.
The test of reality, in his opinion, is all-inclusiveness; and
since
all finiteness is ‘infected with relativity,’ it follows that the
latter is a mere illusion. To my mind, this inexplicable finite
centre of experience is the fundamental fact of the universe. All
life is individual; there is no such thing as universal life. God
himself is an individual: He is the most unique individual.[4]
The universe, as Dr. McTaggart says, is an association of
individuals; but we must add that the orderliness and adjustment
which we find in this association is not eternally achieved and
complete in itself. It is the result of instinctive or conscious
effort. We are gradually travelling from chaos to cosmos and are
helpers in this achievement. Nor are the members of the association
fixed; new members are ever coming to birth to co-operate in the
great task. Thus the universe is not a completed act: it is still
in
the course of formation. There can be no complete truth about the
universe, for the universe has not yet become ‘whole.’ The
process of creation is still going on, and man too takes his share
in
it, inasmuch as he helps to bring order into at least a portion of
the chaos. The Koran indicates the possibility of other creators
than
God.[5]
“
Obviously,
this view of man and the universe is opposed to that of the English
Neo-Hegelians as well as to all forms of pantheistic Súfism which
regard absorption in a universal life or soul as the final aim and
salvation of man.[6]
The moral and religious ideal of man is not self-negation but
self-affirmation, and he attains to this ideal by becoming more and
more individual, more and more unique. The Prophet said, ‘Takhallaqú
bi-akhláq Allah,’
‘Create in yourselves the attributes of God.’ Thus man becomes
unique by becoming more and more like the most unique Individual.
What then is life? It is individual: its highest form, so far, is
the
Ego (Khudí)
in which the individual becomes a self-contained exclusive centre.
Physically as well as spiritually man is a self-contained centre,
but
he is not yet a complete individual. The greater his distance from
God, the less his individuality. He who comes nearest to God is the
completest person. Not that he is finally absorbed in God. On the
contrary, he absorbs God into himself.[7]
The true person not only absorbs the world of matter; by mastering
it
he absorbs God Himself into his Ego. Life is a forward assimilative
movement. It removes all obstructions in its march by assimilating
them. Its essence is the continual creation of desires and ideals,
and for the purpose of its preservation and expansion it has
invented
or developed out of itself certain instruments,
e.g. senses,
intellect, etc., which help it to assimilate obstructions.[8]
The greatest obstacle in the way of life is matter, Nature; yet
Nature is not evil, since it enables the inner powers of life to
unfold themselves.
“
The
Ego attains to freedom by the removal of all obstructions in its
way.
It is partly free, partly determined,[9]
and reaches fuller freedom by approaching the Individual who is
most
free—God. In one word, life is an endeavour for freedom.
“
2.
The Ego and Continuation of Personality
“