The Forgotten Commandment of Appreciation
If we could truly say Alhamdullilah (God be praised), our worries would dissolve and life turns into a feast of joy. Religion may be defined as learning to say Alhamdulillah. “Mankind will die for want of appreciation,” as Heschel has remarked. If we knew how to appreciate the gift of life or wonder at the mystery of being, we would understand the rationale and grammar of hamd o na’t – the tradition of appreciation or praise of Eternally Living, Vivifying Principle, Life.
We would also understand why hamd and na’t imply each other and why to believe is to praise. The call for iman or faith is call for gratitude for the Praiseworthy or what deserves our gratitude. If we knew how to appreciate the gift of life, we would understand the rationale and grammar of hamd o na’t – the tradition of appreciation or praise of Eternally Living, Vivifying Principle, Life and the Principle of Manifestation. We would also understand why hamd and na’t imply each other and why to believe is to praise. The call for iman or faith is the call for wonder, gratitude and praise for the gift of life. Just to be is a blessing, a great gift and holy as mystical thinkers would put it.
As one writer in the volume edited by Jowhar Qudusi, known for pioneering work on Kashmiri software and compilations of na’t studies, writes that na’t is the very heart of life, a principle of Illumined life. Na’t is the life of life, so to speak.
The grammar of hamd-na’t na’t is the grammar of life lived in the shade of eternity or life and time consuming beauty and love. Devotion to the Prophet is grateful acceptance and love for the Principle of Manifestation, for the grandeur or miracle of existence, for the wellspring of mystery of being. To be is to be beholden to the Other, to be in waiting for the great consummation of love affair with the Absolute, to revel in joy that comes from loving non-self or the Prophet as the Centre and envoy of the Absolute.
Why is hamd-o-na’t most universally cultivated genre? Because it is the heart of aspiration for perfection, for transcendence, for wonder, for beauty, for appreciation, for joy, for love. God as the Ground of being, as the Vivifying Mystery, as the Fount of beauty and joy is what should be our ultimate concern and the Prophet shows us how to unlock these treasures. As such poetry defined in terms of life of imagination or creativity and love – as formulated in Shelley’s great Defense of Poetry – is what is characteristically human activity that ennobles and beautifies life. Man doesn’t live by bread alone but by virtue of beauty. Na’t is an attempt to cultivate and cherish beauty. The world is the splendor of the visage of the Prophet. We can say genre of Na’t is a species of devotion.
Jehan- e- Hamd- o-Na’t series of works has emerged as a landmark in na’t studies in Kashmir. It is recording an archive of studies on na’t and selections from the best of contemporary na’t writings. Debatable issues have been elaborately discussed and we find diverse viewpoints represented. A theologico-legalistic critique of popular na’t writings has been presented showing great gulf between popular “Sufi” paradigm of na’t and what may be called Salafi reception of it. It gives space to na’t of non-Muslim poets. Versified Seerah is a sort of tribute to the Prophet (S.A.W) that has also been covered. The Tradition of dotless na’t is also presented.
The editor has taken great pains in bringing together and classifying different approaches and themes under different headings and it appears it is a coherently deigned work that covers all important key questions. Almost every shade of opinion is represented. In its attempt to present a comprehensive guide to na’t writing, stylistic, theological, legalistic and other perspectives are reviewed. There are articles of more general nature and some focusing on case studies. The volume incorporates/sums up so much that is written on na’t by the authorities and scholars.
Majid Amjad has warned (though this warning is little heeded by most writers on na’t) that a very little mistake in the praise of the Prophet may get one into the dominion of disbelief. A very little carelessness can turn praise into condemnation and very little hyperbole can be classified as misguidance.
Some of the articles make certain points that question much that is taken as standard na’t theology. Mufti Muhammad Ishaq Nazki has presented examples of great na’t writing across languages, especially Arabic. He has explained how we can take the often discussed hadith transmission of which has been debatable as hasan hadith from which one can argue a position, as many ahadith agree with the central theme of hadith Lau laaka lamaa khalaqtul aflaak (If you were not, I would not have created the celestial spheres.”) As this hadith is often invoked in works on Sufism or its criticism, a few clarifications, reproduced from online resource, are in order:
Maulana Abdul Hayy Lucknawi writes: “I say that just as how the meaning of 'Awwalu ma khaqullahu Noori' (The first thing created by Allah is my Noor) is proven but its exact wording is not, likewise the following, “Lau Laaka…” which is common among the public, Ulama and orators (i.e. its meaning is proven and correct but its precise wordings with the word 'Aflaak' is not).” (Al-Athaarul Marfoo'aa, p. 35)
Imaam Dailami, Qastalaani and Shaikh Abdul Haqq Muhaddith Dehlwi have mentioned this Hadeeth with several wordings in their works, Musnadul Firdous, Al-Mawaahib and Madaarijun Nubuwah, respectively. Various other celebrated Muhaditheen and Scholars of Islam have narrated this Hadeeth albeit with different wordings in their works.
The word “Aflaak” was not proven in these narrations, but its synonym “Samaa'un” is proven. According to the elucidation of Ulama of the principles of Hadeeth, narrations of the same meaning is permissible (refer to Sharah Nukhbatil-Fikr, pg. 67). Allama Aloosi Baghdadi has also mentioned this Hadeeth in his book, Tafseer Roohul Mua'ani, Vol. 1, pg. 51. is clear that the meaning of the Hadeeth, “Lau Laaka lamaa Khalaqtul Aflaak”, is Sahih (correct) and established. Narrating this Hadeeth with the words “Samaa'un”, “Dunya”, “Jannat” and “Naar” is correct and narrating it with the word “Aflaak” in relation to the meaning “Samaa’un”, is Riwaayatul bil Manaa and is permissible.
Some articles in this volume deal with the controversial issues in na’t criticism. One article lists in detail aadab of writing na’t, common errors of na’t writers and requisite moral, spiritual and literary qualifications/standards. As such everyone who proposes to write na’t should read it to note what na’t writing entails – its moral, spiritual and literary aspects. To write a na’t is a great responsibility . Many popular verses counted in the genre of na’t are analyzed to be problematic. Ibn Hani and Muhammad bin Saeed Booseri are alleged to have begun the cursed trend of getting shirk into na’t.
Shuab Nigrami’s contribution contains highly problematic assertions. Farsi na’t writers despite their entry into Islam haven’t been able to step aside ancestral religion of Zorasterianism and associationist belief of wahdatul wujood. It names Atar, Rumi and Jami. It asserts that Rumi has argued that God is manifest in the form of Muhammad (S.A.W).
Several religious scholars including such figures as Mawlana Moududi and Mufti Taqi Usmani are brought into question oft quoted na’t verses as maligned with failure to respect theological boundaries and lists as problematic belief in hazir o nazir.
Dawood Rehber has pointed out his inability to comprehend contradiction between Islamic Shahadah and Sufi formulation La moujood a illallah as the later involves denial of existence of prophets.
The special volume has given space to diverse viewpoints. And it is hard to find unifying narrative.
Some points could have been edited out. For instance, Sajid Lakhnawi’s claim that the na’t is the only genre of which in every language culture and religion there is significant material available (as many languages and cultures haven’t produced any na’t literature as traditionally understood).
This is a meta book covering review of various hamd o na’t numbers, contributions of lesser known na’t scholars and critics such as Tahir Sultani, Hamad Unjum, Rasheed Warsi, Chander Bhan Khayal’s versified Seerat-i Lawlaak, impressions of various scholars and a comprehensive review of previous number of Jehan e Hamd o Na’t by Hasan Anzar. The latest compositions of scores of hamd o na’t writers including selections from major figures in the twentieth century – Hali, Suleiman Nadvi and Ahsan Danish. One may quote two verses from Ahsan Danish that speak about life lived with dignity and the final question of death.
Guzri hae muflisi mei badi aabroo kae saath/Allah ka karam hae inayet huzoor ki
Danish mei khoaf i marg sae mutlaq hi bay niyaz/Mei manta hu moat hae sunnat huzoor ki
A few words to clinch all controversies on na’t:
We live by virtue of praising the Praiseworthy and what manifests/evokes the Praiseworthy. Blessed are those who know how to praise and only to praise, like Rabia Basri. Those who are consumed by love can’t be accused of transgression against law. Great people praise and praise – deep down there is nothing to judge against but only to celebrate – and smaller ones are niggardly in praising. Not to have written a na’t for a poet is a crime against poetry. To be a poet is to be in love with life and embellish it – na’t is essentially about this love and beautification of life. Life spent in reciting – and living the rhythms of na’t – is life well spent.
