Dr Muhammad Maroof Shah

“Each of us is guilty before everyone for everyone, and I more than the others,” writes Dostoevsky in  The Brothers Karamazov . This statement expresses the quintessence of traditional ethics as developed by mystics and in modern times by Dostovesky and Levinas. Sufi ethics is an elaboration of this theme. This great idea of answerability or responsibility is a response to Ivan, the famous character in the same novel who says: “If there is no God, all is permitted.” In Kashmir we behave as if there is no God and all is permitted and none is guilty. Let us analyze the question of responsibility in the particular case of scenario of water bodies in Kashmir. Our water bodies are fast becoming history. Most of the springs are gone. The Dal is politicized to death. Anchaar story is getting repeated in the Wular as it is dying a silent spectacular death. Glaciers are melting. Pure water in streams or rivers is becoming a fiction. We have to pay for water bottle and business of water purifi

Is Sufism Parallel Religion or Root of Religion Javed Ahmed Ghamidi appropriates the old Socratic philosophical method of raising questions regarding the opponent’s view. He hardly concedes anything to the opponent and puts up his case as an expert lawyer. His approach is deceptively simple. The same applies to his classic refutation of Sufi doctrine, especially Unitarianism and Sufi view of prophecy, especially its ending. However, today I use the same old Socratic method to analyze his key arguments and hope that a refined group of students and scholars of Ghamidi responds to clarify. Ghamidi Sahib has a lengthy essay on Sufism in his Burhan , and a few televised debates and lectures on Youtube, on Sufism. He argues that Sufism is a parallel doctrine to that of religion, that unity of being can’t be corroborated from the Quran, that Sufi view of saint’s access to divine truths puts the thesis of Khatmi Nubuwwat in danger and that we can point out numerous statements in Sufi t

Mulla Nasruddin is said to have accidentally hit someone on the road and he fell. He was abused and called names like mad Mulla. He coolly said “Yes I am mad” and the argument ended there and then. Onus often lies on us. Or at least assume it lies on us and we will see things in a different light. Perhaps we will have conscience to prick if we are not totally given to blame mode. There is a sentence by Dostovesky’s character  that may be phrased as ‘I am responsible for any crime that happens anywhere’ that should be enough to lead us to blame ourselves rather than the other. Jesus’ “Judge not” also implies the same thing. Levinas’s view of self-other relationship in which we have infinite responsibility towards the other as the other is ultimately none other than God also implies the same attitude. Most of the troubles in the world can be traced to assertion of will or ego and Islam demands nothing but its surrender. Getting angry when abused or humiliated is, at root nothing but

In the light of Ancient Futures by Helena Norberg-Hodge Tourism can be a scandal. It can lead to destruction of not only land but cultures and sacred traditions It can ultimately create, rather than cure unemployment. It can, especially when unregulated, open up Pandora's box that are not foreseen by planners. This is one of many other important theses of the greatest book written on Ladakh ( Is it not ironic that one of our tourism ministers has been from Ladakh in the past? The sordid side of tourism – in the name of development we can turn sanctuaries of spirit into deserts where even devils would not dare to tread – is not kept in consideration.) The book, that every Kashmiri who is concerned with development discourse, tourism and identity of pir-waer should read, argues quite lucidly and brilliantly many theses that almost all of us would intuitively consent to. . It also argues the importance of Ladakh culture for the world that has severed ties with tradition.  Fir

It is not usually recognized that Islamic spirit is utterly incompatible with present day consumerist culture sponsored by free market capitalist economy. It is not a serious matter of debate in theorists of Islamic banking what to finance and why to finance. Any financing enterprise that calls itself Islamic must make very clear its often undefined policy regarding extent of compatibility between Islam and the very question of business, manufacturing commodities as dictated by market demand fulfilling often unethical desires of people, warrantability of current currency models that use fiat money and assume dollar’s sovereignty, artificial or manipulated inflationary pressures and the very question of market in a unipoloar world manipulated by big bosses. The question is how ethical or Islamic is capitalism sponsored modern individualism that fuels demand for separate houses even at the cost of agricultural or other productive enterprises, need of private transport at huge environmen

There is neither any knowledge divorced from power relations, nor possibility of either peace or sustainable development in a unipolar world may not be governed by the immoral ecocidal logic of corporate globalization. There is piling information overload and lack of real discernment or knowledge in the age aptly called the Age of Information. The age valorizes surfaces and has little use for depths, essences, reality behind appearances and truth behind illusions. Postmodernism is content with illusions and is committed to the “ontology of singular events.” Knowledge of reality is denied to most people in an age that puts onus on utilitarian or pragmatic consideration and maintains subtle control on media. The true story of exploiting financial structures, of neocolonialist banking masquerading as aids/loans, of dissolution of gold standard, of inflation, of recessions, of remote controlled speculative businesses of markets especially stock markets, imposed myths of national interest

Engagement with the great questions - of death, of meaning of life, of self and its destiny - are what constitute the important themes of great philosophers. And all great thinkers have provided almost similar answers though emphasized different points, or in their own ways. And these largely agree with the answers provided by prophets and saints across cultures. It is sad to note that so few religiously oriented people and scholars take note of this point, and have been suspicious of philosophy. Philosophers help to understand grammar of theology or scripture better and are best antidote to sectarianism and ideological battle fought in the name of religion. Both religious and secularist fundamentalisms are best tackled by philosophers. I know lay critics of philosophy who think we don’t need it as the Prophet is the greatest philosopher, so why go elsewhere. My answer is: all genuine philosophy is illumined by the prophetic lamp and what is not or what contradicts it is not what trad