affairs, but at the same time they were not disposed towards worldly enjoyment that led to a neglect of their duties. In short, they managed the affairs of the world in a manner that was very much amenable to a permanent residence therein and yet were still able to avoid worldly desires by treating the world as a wayside inn where they had put up merely for a short while.
Later, when Islamic influences waned and Muslims began to be influenced by other civilizations, true Islamic glory was naturally no longer to be seen in their characters. Thereupon, they behaved in ways that were contradictory to the Islamic ideal of temporal life. They drowned themselves in hedonistic amusements and pleasures, constructed grandiose palaces, indulged in music, painting, sculpture and other fine arts, and, on the whole, adopted a way of life that was replete with wastefulness and ostentation which were totally contrary to the Islamic way. In spite of all this, the Islamic concept of the ephemerality of worldly life that had been embedded in their hearts invariably left its mark in some manner or another and at some point in time or another. It was this influence that created within them a distinction when compared to other rulers. A Muslim king2 built a magnificent palace on the banks of the River Jamuna within which he provided every manner of pleasure and amusement that could be imagined at the time. Yet, within the confines of the most enjoyable amusements, he had the following quatrain inscribed on the side farthest to the river – in the direction of the qiblah.
O you whose feet are bound, and whose heart is sealed, Beware! O you whose eyes are sewn up and whose feet are stuck in the mud, Beware!
You intend to go toward the West but you have turned your face toward the East;
O you who have your back toward your destination, Beware!
That palace is certainly not without precedent. Even better royal residences can be found in other countries. Still, there is no example amongst any of the numerous nations of the world of the thought and inspiration represented by the verse and which warns the maker of this earthly paradise to be aware of his real, ultimate destination.
Islamic history is replete with instances in which rulers who, while otherwise reigning like Roman caesars and Persian emperors, displayed unique behaviour at that moment in time when they had vanquished their opponents: instead of proclaiming their greatness, they immediately fell in prostration, submitting in gratitude to God. On many an occasion when the most vicious of rulers, infamous for their murderous ways, attempted to go against the dictates of Islamic Sharīʿah, some God-fearing commoner openly raised his objection in a manner that indeed caused those kings to tremble with the fear of God. At many a time, the most wayward amongst the élite and the worst of powerful evildoers were cautioned by some very ordinary mortal; history is witness that all of a sudden the whole complexion of their lives changed. The hearts of people who were totally obsessed with temporal wealth were suddenly struck with the impermanence of the world and overcome with the thought of rendering account in the Hereafter; they then distributed all they possessed and adopted a simple ideologically-driven lifestyle.
Briefly, in spite of all the non-Islamic influences that have made a place in the lives of Muslims, one can find, at every step, in some form or another, the radiance of Islamic idealism in the national ethos of Muslim groups. Time and again, one truly feels as if a bright light has suddenly been beamed from an unseen source into a very dark milieu.
1 Satan, according to the Qur’ān (18:50), was a jinn, another category of beings specifically mentioned in the Qur’ān as being distinct from humans and angels – Translator.
2 The reference here is to the great Mughal Emperor, Shah Jahan, and the building referred to is the Red Fort at Delhi – Ed.
After determining the worldview of a civilization, the second question that occupies a central place in the analysis of its positive and negative aspects is, ‘What ideal of life does that civilization present?’ The importance of this question lies in the fact that the natural direction of a person’s intentions and practical efforts is necessarily towards the one end and goal that he has declared to be his ideal of life. The formation of a mindset, right or wrong, good or bad, and the appropriateness or inappropriateness of a lifestyle is fully dependent upon the correctness or lack thereof of this goal. Contingent upon this ideal being right or wrong are the highs and the lows of thoughts and concepts, the superiority or the inferiority of ethics, and the loftiness or the diminutiveness of economic and social pursuits.
Contingent upon this goal being clear and well directed or blurred and misdirected is the basis of life’s totality – and that includes the organization or distortion of a person’s thoughts, constancy and inconsistency of the pattern of everyday life and the utilization of energies and capabilities in a focused or dispersed manner. Taken as a whole, the ideal is that criterion on the basis of which a person is able to choose his path from the many available paths of thought and action and then spending all of his mental and bodily energies as well as material and spiritual resources in that direction. Accordingly, when we wish to measure any civilization on the scale of excellence, an investigation into its ‘Ideal of Life’ is indispensable.
The Essential Characteristics of a True Collective Ideal 1
However, prior to taking the first steps in the direction of research and discussion, we should clearly determine as to what we mean by this ‘True Collective Ideal’ or ‘Ultimate Civilizational Ideal’ (which as we go along will, for convenience sake, be simply rendered as ‘ideal’). It is quite clear that when we use the word ‘civilization’ we do not mean the ‘personal views of civilization’ of the component people but the collective view and definition of that civilization. Accordingly, individual personal ideals cannot be the ideal of the civilization as a whole. On the contrary, it is fundamental that whatever is the ideal of a civilization also be the ideal of every one of its members, whether or not they are consciously aware of the same or not. Thus, the ideal of a civilization is that ideal which, consciously or unconsciously, has become the common collective aim of a large group of people and which has so overcome the ‘individual ideals’ of those people that by now individuals – in their personal capacities – also espouse the ideal that is held by the group.
There is one essential condition for this kind of collective ideal to be valid: that it should be in total consonance and agreement with the (separately held) individual ideals so that it is able to simultaneously be both the ideal of the individual singularly as well as that of the group collectively. The reason for this is that if the collective ideal were not in accord with the ideals of the individual members, then, it would be difficult for it to become the collective ideal because a concept that is not individually acceptable to the members of a group is not likely to become collectively acceptable. And if, by virtue of some strong external pressure, it does become the group’s ideal, a subtle conflict between the group and individual ideals would then ensue until such a time that the individuals reverted to their personal objectives whenever the collective philosophy was weakened. Thereupon the centripetal or communicative forces that maintained the collective structure dissipate in a process that not only nullifies the group’s ideal, but also ensure that no sign of the civilization itself remains.
Therefore, the true civilizational ideal can only be one that is wholly and indisputably the natural aim of the whole group of people. A civilization’s true merit lies in its ability to present a collective ideal that is or can also become the individual ideal of its members in an unaltered form.
From this viewpoint, two questions arise. Without answering them, we cannot move ahead with our analysis. These are, first, ‘What is the natural (normative) personal ideal of human beings?’ And, secondly, ‘What
