Fate of things

(Source)

Coal stock for boys on the naughty list....

Term of the day - chinoiserie

chinoiserie

Syllabication:    chi·noi·se·rie

Noun:

1. A style in art reflecting Chinese influence through use of elaborate decoration and intricate patterns. 

2. An object reflecting Chinese artistic influence.

Etymology:

French, from chinois, Chinese, from Chine, China.

__________________

*  (Source) The American Heritage^® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

Natural Practices

Umer: You say that if someone transgresses from the 'eternal principles' of morality as taught by your religion of Islam [trying to be funny] and 'time', it's going to hurt society. But, then why your religion promote fanaticism, fundamentalism and extremism (in one single breath of wispher)?

Master Agha: They, the so-called extremists too transgress from the 'ruh' (essence) of it. Secondly, let me tell you this: be very, very careful and clear when using 'terms'. Terms have denotative and connotative meanings, as you know, unlike mere words which are not like concepts. This term 'fundamentalism' has been dubbed wrongly for Islam, out-of-context. Fundamentalism was originated in Christianity. There was a sect which wanted to implementt its own made rules as absolute, which no one could challenge or oppose. This sect was called Fundamentalist Christians, [added with the a particular name of the sect]. Islam, on the other hand, is the most liberal, most natural religion in religions [said with firmness]. But as I said they too transgress from the 'ruh' (essence) of it.

Umer: (Impatiently) Well, but [notice yes-but syndrome] how does your Islam differ here from Christianity, on this particular point?

Master Agha: It has no 'priesthood'.

[Umer was silenced.]

Beauty of Chinese Landscape Art

1. Seyyed H. Nasr says that man has deep roots in this world and it is difficult, very difficult for him to detach from his root (i.e, this world) for a 'thing', or purpose which demands him to detach for its own sake. 

2. However, if man's existence were to be analyzed, we find there are two realities connected to it: one is tiny being, traveller ; and, the other is the 'background', or the 'environment' through which this mortal man journeys. This is the duality that always persists. And, Nasr adds, "It is the basis of every human experience, whether it be physical, psychological or religious."

2 (a). This distinction has been observed centuries ago especially during Tang dynasty, when it started to cripple down and its men of arts and scholarship retreated into the nature. They made paintings of nature, which we call 'landscape art of Chinese'. These, Chinese, landscape paintings portray the huge physical or external world 'through which a physically minute traveller is passing' (same thing has been capitalised on in Mr. Bean's Holiday, in which the small funny figure of Mr. Bean is shown passing through the vast vistas of non-urban France, which on gigantic cinema screen must be unique an experience). Following are some Chinese landscape paintings, in every painting there is a being you've detect .

Images Source

Of Our Language 'Urdu' - An Opinion

Umer: Do you think we lack cultural expression, in our idiom and language? Is it unoriginal?

A Philosopher: I think Urdu language is the most developed of all the local languages of sub-continent. This language is comparable to English. Urdu can excellently express feelings, emotions, events and stories. It also can express philosophies. The only edge of English is the better capacity of it to express and preserve scientific and technical knowledge. Quantitatively Urdu literature is not sufficient as compared to English. But Urdu has manifested quality literature comparable to that of  English.

[Do you agree?]

Missiles Are Said to Kill (freshly) 8 in Northwest Pakistan

Source: The New York Times

"Published: December 22, 2008

Filed at 3:56 a.m. ET

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan (AP) -- Suspected U.S. missile strikes killed at least eight people Monday in volatile northwest Pakistan, officials and witnesses said." Read more here.

Immortality

I believe, this thought of Aristotle resonates in the hearts of those how wish to leave behind themselves a legacy of their own, who do not merely desire of food, clothing, and all benefits of matter. I did felt this urge of very minute magnitude a few years ago and now its dim almost to darkness.

"We must not listen to those who urge us to think human thoughts since we are human, and mortal thoughts since we are mortal; rather, we should as far as possible immortalize ourselves and do all we can to live by the finest element in us - for if in bulk it is small, in power and worth it is far greater than anything else."

-Aristotle

Nicomachean Ethics

General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani World's No. 20 Global Elite!

Source: Newsweek (Read rest of them there)

In theory this mumbling, chain-smoking general answers to President Asif Ali Zardari. But Kayani and his troops remain the dominant power in what could be the most dangerous country in the world. He's responsible forPakistan's nukes; for the battle against Al Qaeda and its tribal allies along the Afghan border; and for managing tensions with neighbor India. So far, his army has kept itself out of politics and seems focused on the battle against jihadists. In the wake of the November terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Kayani stood firm on Pakistan's sovereignty while also taking measures against the alleged sponsors of the outrage.

Kayani insists he's a committed democrat, but he nevertheless argues that military interventions (there have been four since independence 61 years ago) are sometimes necessary to maintain Pakistan's stability. He likens coups to temporary bypasses that are created when a bridge collapses on democracy's highway. After the bridge is repaired, he says, then there's no longer any need for the detour.

If not words, what then?

And, even if with words, what's worth enough? This is the answer that I found satisfying

"A knight proves his worthiness through his deeds."

Freak The Mighty, (a movie adaption of the novel by Rodman Philbrick).

What do you think?

Hafeez Jalandari

Sometimes, I am entranced by the way honest poets and writers live, true to what they do. (OK, one may have different levels of threshold, but truth is truth and falsehood, falsehood.) And, I often wonder that possibly what do they eat which make them so fearless and sublime in thought that they tend to become priceless?

They never stop committing the crimes of innocence. Are they childish? No, they don't look funny nor are they vindictive. Then what are they? What feed their hearts, which are like omnibus books of dreams and truths? And, they mean it, i.e, their outwardly 'fanciful' looking hopes. What is more worrying to me is the degree of their certainty and unshakable faith in good. They're my gladiators, whom pen's ink is more nobler than a martyr's blood. It may for one reason be so that their job is to decode the nature and the revelations it contains. Just as one such poet, Allama Iqbal, once wrote beautifully:

The world-spirit conceals the various phases of her inner life in symbols. The universe is nothing but a great symbol. But she never takes the trouble to interpret these symbols for us. It is the duty of the poets to interpret them and reveal their meaning to humanity. It would, therefore, appear that the poet and world spirit are opposed to each other; since the former reveals what the later conceals.

Today, it is said, Hafeez Jalandari died. And this post is a tribute to him. No matter what ideologies you may have. You may be critical of his writings in the first place that, you might like think, he took a wrong approach for reforming his decaying nation by singing the glories of past and deploring the present. Instead, you may be of the opinion, he should have been extracting lessons from the history which led to the downfall of his nation and not the other way around. Criticism accepted. But, for many reasons I will support the cause of this man who wrote "magnum opus Shah Nama Islam in four volumes" and created the National anthem of Pakistan. Even though I detest being a strict nationalist.

First, that the duty of poet is not conveying the rigorous 'logical truth(s)', rather he's yearning for beauty and imagination. Therefore, by appealing to emotion, his success lies in moving the hearts of his audience, and better be, stimulating them to reflect and act. He had a part in the creation of a nation. He had a dream. He went beyond the frustrated hopeless men. To quote again poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal from his Stray Reflections, he said:

Nations are born in the hearts of poets; they prosper and die in the hands of politicians.

But, what about a politican who is also a poet?

On Logic of Induction and Cause

(There is no formal, or even informal definition or explanation of either logic or inductive logic, its sub-branch. But a simple discussion.)

Master Agha:

I told you before that saying of Voltaire that even if there was no God, man would have created it.....!

.... Look, J. S. Mill has tried to fooled the whole world with an illogical argument. When we talk about humans, we're forced to acknowledge something is behind him, of course inductively, whereas deductive language is 'formal' enough not be discussed here. The thing that is behind him (i.e, man) cannot be like him, it thus follows. It is acknowledged by these logicians that there must be some criteria of the Perfect and how 'it' is to distinguished from the 'relative' and 'imperfect'. Man is imperfect. It is a burning human rights issue that why man has no independent will over the choice of his birth? That he should have the liberty to choose to be born or not to be born? But he has, practically, no control over it and like on many other things. So man is imperfecter than 'he' who created him and sustains him. Thus, inductively even J. S. Mill, whose blunder I'll mention later, could not refute the argument that following must be the criteria for the perfecter being who created imperfect man:

He must be infinite,
He must be eternal, independent of time,
He must not procreate, i.e, all-powerful,

Read Surah -e- Ikhlas from the Koran, you'll find the same logic. It is but natural that the thing which is the 'final cause' of all causes must have no 'cause', as Aristotle said. J. S. Mill refuted this argument by putting forward his counter-argument like this way:

'monday' comes before 'sunday'. Is 'sunday' the cause of 'monday', he questions? That is, did 'sunday' create' monday', or did 'saturday' create 'sunday' and so on and so forth? Obiviously not.

We ask him, k bhai, time is indivisible, you're dividing time into separate things. Moreover, time is a separate thing from something which could be behind man. We have divided time into days and months for our own comfort, time does not become divisible by saying so. This is how his argument, that there can be nothing behind man who is the final cause of all causes, becomes invalid, without going into further dtail.

So, Mr. Umer now you understand that he who knows himself knows his Lord?

A Young Man's Quest (I)

(*Intro*: A letter once a time ago I wrote for dispatching it with the book Spiritual Perspectives and Human Facts, by Frithjof Schoun, I presented to my teacher (not in the formal sense), which I as usual forgot to dispatch with the book. Written with an unconscious manner, it amuses me often how much wordplay I like.)

********

A Letter To A Teacher Far Far Away

Once A. K. Coomaraswamy, the great twentieth-century Indian expert on traditional metaphysics and art, said, “In Modern society the artist is a very special kind of person, while in traditional society every person is a special kind of artist.” Seyyed Hossien Nasr adds that this holds true for traditional Islamic society as well, where no distinction was made between fine arts and industrial arts or major and minor arts or religious and secular art.

While I recognize in you, every time, blend of both these kinds of artists, as, primarily, a special person and a special artist too. Because you made it possible for me to imagine and comprehend that this is a world an integrated form and element of psychic and material, i.e. in our terminology, soul and body. What Martin Lings made me aware recently of, is the world of Spirit, which happens to be transcending both the psychic and material world. But to be able to reach there, they say one needs highly tuned intellectual intuitions and a fitting mind to receive its rays - a discerning, discriminating mind, not merely a ‘brainy’ one.

This book which you have very graciously accepted bears testament and account to this world, i.e., of Spirit. What true intellect or art is, as this book lay bare is in transcending both psychic and material world (I know its confusing). The purpose of this practice is to evolve meaning out of weary material and psychological etc, facts which are evidences of that transcendent world. This is to find an end, purposeful and meaningful in our vision. Love of wisdom- philosophy- is to find our ways to reach that end, a journey that might never end in this mortal life. This quest, this question - who are we? - and many more like it, I am enthralled to observe in the mind of every child, every human being, no matter what his/her intellectual or religious environment be (and there fairy tale(s) help a child a lot in providing him answers to such universal questions, in a contemplative manner, not in scientific or rational).

I must end this letter here with a request: I am too young and unperceptive to decode the meaning and symbolism of this book. Frankly, I am much desperate in making sense out his symbolism, or of any artist because, firstly, I am not a serious and experienced an artist and intuitionist as you are; secondly, I have such inadequate diet of, no less infinite, ‘human facts’ which an old (not in terms of spirits but period of life) soul keeps locked and manifest in his memory and personality. I know an artist and intuitionist or be an ‘analytical’ mind, penetrates easily into the ideas and theories of the ‘specie’ of his/her kind. I am looking very much forward learning from you, and decipher mysteries and secrets of our cosmos and what may happen to be lying beyond it.

Seeker of the true path,

Yours faithfully,

Muhammad Umer Toor.

Thought of the Day

Image Source

I do not create; I only tell of the past.

Confucius

That has been the 'pedagogical way' of teaching thousands of students of Confucius. Source

Quality of Relationship

Quality of relationship among humans matters everywhere, where ever humans are to interact. That's the universality of it, which we might ignore due to our likeness or idslikeness, or what we call as having 'narrow visions of our mnd'. Previously, and regretfully, I thinked of importance of 'quality of relationship' as a prime variable in persoanl matters alone, more than anywhere else. How wrong I was, I realised when I read the following paragraph somewhere: 

"The Gallup Organization, which has polled millions of empolyees and tens of thousands of managers, has found that the single most important variable in employee productivity and loyality isn't pay or benefits or workplace environment; it's the quality of the realationship between employees and their direct supervisors."

Source: K. A. Tucker and V. Allman, "Don't Be a Cat-and-Mouse Manager,' The Gallup Organization, September 9, 2004. Visit the website.

My Love For Writing: A Few Reflections

'What do you think Umer, why writing is important in life, or is it?'

1. Since when I was asked this question by my teacher, I've never come to any conclusion - only pieces of fragments I've been able to gather at my own, which impede a great progress to me. If one person has found his place in arts, he's given time to it. But how many, you'd suppose, will be lured into the temptations of such a sublime and time-taking profession of extracting from the nothingness of space 'things' so concrete which persist so long, in this profession? A few. Historically. How many lofty and respectful poets we quote, and how many writers? Hundreds, thousands but not more than that.

1. (a). Thus, if writing were to be an integral part of life everyone should have an 'innate' capacity to learn writing, and triple the heap of printed books now we produce. But, if I consider that literature and philosophy, or simply writing is not a passion of rough minds, who insist or are condemned to remain as rough, only then the significance of writing may be properly hinted upon. Here I need to clarify by pointing to a historic trend among a spiritual class of people that those who negate writing need not be 'rough' that who cannot touch the skies. For simple reason, writing is only one type of communication among many others. We've world oral traditions, like of Persian, Red Indians and ours own, where a large part of education is given in oral medium.

2. Cultures can be differentiated on the basis of their associations with writing. We lack writing culture in Pakistan, on a larger scale. A college student at my native city studied at the most respectable institute of his city till high school level. The loneliest place he could find on the earth, he believed, was his college library, amassed with hundreds of book, some never opened! And, perceptually, I don't feel if he is an alien to me. But, if things are not like the way I see them that means the change is in the air. 

2. (a1). Americans, on the other hand, have a book-culture, my teacher has studied there for a few years and he's a witness to it. And, the difference is discernible with ease! (I do not mean to say as if it is a fault of our genes. It may be fault of generation(s).)

3. The little I think I know so far about writing I'm expressing my thoughts that are either derived or independent summarised in the following points, which I fear are far from being mature:

* Its a process not an event. Continues - our 'writing' shapes, reshapes, constructs and deconstructs.

*  The root word of book "liber' from Latin refers to the thin layer between wood and the bark, a book says. It also meant "liberty", "to deliver". Thus, traditionally the goal of a book is deliverance from the 'fetters of this world' and ignorance.

* Its a part of a bigger scheme. If I had no mind, or no innate capacity to learn language, how could I think? And, if I couldn't think, how could I write meaningful thing?

* I've found that in order to define writing and 'process' of writing, it requires a knowledge of writing and unusual 'way' of looking at it, for instance, understanding it with technicality has helped many a linguistic to use it in computers. Thereby, they're also able better to understand its strict structure.

* It is generating, expressing, labeling and creating with a structure that of a mathematical equation.

* Its material benefits are too obvious to mention.

* Its material benefits do not make writing unique. We learned writing only a few thousand years ago. And, now-a-days, benefits of other digital communications are more viable than writing by hand.

* Perhaps, the supreme reason for the uniqueness of writing lies in its quality as being a creative process of its own kind. Crystallizing intuitions is one thing, bringing feelings and abstract imaginable, or unimaginable ideas is another 'thing'. Techniques or principle of speaking do not absolutely match with those of writing.

* Writing is a physical creation of mental creation(s).

* Writings need not be logical or based on philosophical systems. A single idea may sum up in itself thousands of its inter-connected branches. We find many, many fiction and non-fiction writers who do not think from a philosopher's point of view. But, both can have a commonality in such a situation, both can think of abstract ideas as profoundly as the other one can do. For example, a writer may describe what he see is sitting on the table. And, taking those objects he can make them use in metaphorical or figurative sense. Or, relate one idea with another without any obvious connection between them (this technique is used to make brain run).

* If a 'writing' is an affirmation; it can also be a negation of an affirmation.

* Written words, not graphics, need not be spelled or spoken either by heart or tongue. We can develop enough reading skills by which understanding a writing by merely glancing at it.

* Writing puts great focus on a well-written, well-expressed problem or 'confusion'; gives body to its soul and create patterns out of it. By writing, we can negotiate and re-negotiate with ourselves on a solid ground.

* A little piece of writing can tell tales, one such broadened my scope about writing. A new class-mate of mine wrote in the class on what he previously believed, and the dramatic shift in this thinking occurred. It was very brief, in two or three sentences, but it seemed just as if a saga has been told.

* Writing and speaking share a unique feature which is the quality of saying things we know not of, which may even not exist or which cannot be imagined by our mind as 'images'.

* Saying the truth in writing is not as easy as it isn't easy while speech-making. Beauty of expression can have affect on reader's mind and that definitely includes correct structure. Fowler say that a bad structure cannot be repaired, it can only be changed from top to bottom (if the writer is to save the day).

* Writing demands deliberate recollecting of our thoughts, while it also becomes 'exploring'.

* A very effective 'way' of examining life and world that has been lived.

* What is beyond perception, cannot be written off with any assurance. For instance, if I don't know what the word 'lap-top' stands for I cannot even imagine precisely a 'lap-top'. Writing about a fact out-of-our-knowledge becomes impossible.

* I write to attain beauty.

I like him, b'cause I'm like him

'How was your exam?', asked Mrs Weasley. 'Oh ... OK,' said Ron. 'Couldn't remember all the goblin rebels' names, so I invented a few. It's all right,' he said, helping himself to a Cornish pasty, while Mrs Weasly looked stern, 'they're all called stuff like Bodrod the Bearded and Urg the Unclean, it wasn't hard.'*

I hope all in vain if you too find yourself liking him. :-)

_____________________________________

Notes:

* Harry Potter: The Goblet of Fire, Pg. 671.

Why read daily newspaper in a barbaric society?

1. My uncle, my father's friend, says he hate newspapers. He even stopped subscribing them, though without hitting things hard. Because his wife had a literary kind of taste for reading. So there were numerous traditional rituals of spouse quarrels and as history bears witness to it, my uncle surrendered. Next day newspapers start pouring in my uncle's house. My uncle doesn't like picking them so early in the morning when even grass is waits to get dried. And, after the little 'come-back' of newspapers in their home, my uncle and ant are almost weeping in their hearts for three long days. 

2. The day when newspapers made its landing in his home again, he went out to fetch it for his wife. In doing so, he just caught sight of a day-to-day news, which informed my uncle of a little child who died by diving into a daeg (a large round pot in which food is made, especially on social events) of food at some marriage in some city in Pakistan. And, you must know why he died and what for and it'll be you entitled to decide who's who. That poor child hadn't had, as the newspaper reported, a handful of food for some three days. And, when he went into marriage asking for some, he had to secrectly dive into the daeg. And he was done! But, who's fault is this? It can't be mine for I shudder at giving away poors food off my table neglecting myself and my rich guests.

3. Time for you to think. And, note if their has been any factual mistake(s) in the post, forget them for a while.

It was Post Script...

A Ghazal to Aid the Settling Evening of Lahore

"Zahid Na Keh Buri...."

Zahid na keh buri kay ye mustanay adami hain...
Tujh ku lippatt parrain k ye diwanay adami hain...

Garoon ki dosti par quin aitbar kijay...
Ye dushmani karien gay bayganay adami hain...

Tum nay humaray dir mein ghar kar liya tu kia hai...
Abad kartay akhir viraanay adami hain...

Kia chore hai jo hum ko darban tumhara rokay...
Keh do key ye tu janay pehchanay adami hain...

Maay bondd bhar pilla kar quin hans raha hai saki...
Bhar bhar k datay akhir paimanay adami hain...

Poet: Adm
-----------------------

This ghazal has been sung beautifully by Madam Malka Parkhraj.

'And, he was shrinked into smiling'

Image Source

Abba Ji (My father): Beetay opper say meri check-wali-cap lay ana, master saab aye hain. (Son, bring me my check-cap from my room, Mr. Tailor is here for it.)                

Umer: Jee kuch aur bhi lay ayoon. (Should I bring thee any other thing also?)

Abba Ji: [With a smiling face]  Aap khud aa jaiye ga.! (It'd be enough if you come back.)!

                 

____________________________

I walked away smiling back shyly.