The manner and the firm practical logic of the Holy Prophet and religions opponents -1

Theosophy is of Two Kinds
Philosophers believe that theosophy is of two Kinds: Speculative (theoretical ) and practical. Theology, mathematics, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music, natural sciences, physics, zoology and botany are all called speculative theosophy, whereas ethics, politics and home economy are called practical theosophy.

Such a classification has not been made in logic, but this is also true of logic so far logical criteria are concerned Therefore, we can have ‘t theoretical criteria’ which are referred to as the common logic and practical criteria which are called methods and manners.

Every individual should base his actions on firm logic and follow it in all circumstances of time and place and throughout one’s lifetime, never violating it. The Holy Prophet (S) did the same. He followed a certain logic in his actions, and we Muslims have to endeavor to recognize his practical logic and behaviourial methods in order to use them in our actions.

From logic is absent in Marxism. Life is very much influenced by conditions of time and place, especially when class trends and power-seeking are concerned. Marxism grants no originality to one’s thought, opinion and belief while considering social and economic conditions and class situations. It asserts that it is basically impossible to have a one trend thought pattern, saying that human beings change their mode of thinking and logic while they move from affluence to poverty and vice versa. In fact, a deprived individual who has always been subjected to oppression, strangulation and torture and has tasted all kind of deprivation, shall willy- nilly have a certain mental setup framed by the special living conditions of life. He speaks of justices, equality and freedom and he believes in he says because specific situations of his induce him to do so. This very individual will change his conceptions should his living conditions change to affluence after having lived in poverty. He will then negate his previous beliefs and offer a different interpretation of equality, freedom and justice. At all events Marxism expounds, will the appearance of change in living situations, one’s interests change as well, and since man cannot ignore his interests, his thinking will of necessity change. This is because one’s thought by nature revolve round one’s interests, When a person is deprived, his thoughts turn round the interests of the deprived class. On the contrary, when he joins the affluent class, he will necessarily think about interests of his class.

In the past, we usually considered these words lightly, but today we find that fact a chain of philosophy is rooted in them. There was a joke narrated by the students of the theology in Mash ad about a friend of theirs who once said: “I follow that person in prayer who gives me money and my prayers are correct.” “ How?” they had asked him. He had answered: “I believe that the one who doesn’t give me money is sinner! so my prayers will be incorrect should I follow him. But as soon as provides me with money my opinions changes and I come to believe that he is a just person.”

We always regarded this lightly, but today we see that it has turned out be a kind of philosophy which expounds the idea that man’s thought cannot turn but round his own interests, for historical and economic determinism so warrants. This is, of course, not more than a mere claim and we should, in practice, find out whether it is true or not. We should consider human beings and find out whether their conscience is that much a plaything of their ( personal) interests. Isn’t this a completely anti- human theory? Careful study will show us that this claim is basically wrong. The faithless will no doubt support such a claim, but we can never assert that all human beings necessarily and compulsorily think only of their own interests, for there are hundreds who don’t.

Ali’s ( p.b.u.h) behaviour in his life
Ali Al –Vardi is an Iranqi writer and a university professor who has written a few books in Arabic, of which some have been translated into Persian. He is a Shiite and at the same time, a Marxist. Thus, his books have a Marian touch, yet since he is religious as well, he does speak at time against Marxism. He is unbiased enough to say that Ali (A.S) in his lifetime had invalidated this Marxiam principle that a human changes his mode of thinking as per his degree of affluence or poverty and that thoughts change under different social situations. Ali’s life- account shows that his is not true, for we saw how, when he was at the lowest level and at the highest, his mannerism or thinking did not change in the least. One day he is a simple laborer and a poor soldier, who earns his living through dredging underground canals, planting trees and agriculture, another day, he ascends the apex of power when Islam had extended its territory and had access to spoils and riches. However, his mode of thinking never changed. It is should course be admitted that ten and hundred of Muslims lost their faith when the flood or riches inundated the world of Islam. In fact, the adverse effect of wealth on many a people is undeniable, but we cannot accept it as a general principle.

Who was Zubair and what did corrupt him? The huge sums of money and the booties which came to him, making of him the owner of thousands of horses and slaves and many houses in Egypt, Kufa and Medina.

What did corrupt Talha? the same things. In fact, a considerable number of the Prophet’s companions were corrupted either by worldly positions and a longing for the Caliphate or by avidity towards money wealth. The above mentioned principle, however, was not (and is not) general one, otherwise, all of the Holy Prophet’s companions would, God forbid, have tread the same path and would have been likewise influenced by money and position. Contrary to this, we are familiar with distinguished figures among the companions, who stood firmly against such floods.

Salman’s behaviour in his life
Ali (A.S) and his disciples, for instance, never changed in least when they acquired high positions and extraordinary sums of money. Salman was one of them. AS the governor of Mada’en, he remained the same as he was during the prophet’s life time. Mada’en was the capital of ancient Iran the Caliph of the time saw it necessary to send a Muslims Iranian governor there lest Iranians should get worried by having to face a man of a different race. Accordingly, Salman who a fithful Iranians believer, learned in Islamic matters, was appointed the governor of a territory which had previously been ruled by Anushirvan and Khusru Parviz, the Sasanian Kings, who kept thousands of salves and maid –servants and Yazdgerd, whose musicians were several thousand and in whose harem were confined twele thousands women. Salman’s furniture during the period of his rule did not exceed a single knapsack, which he could personally carry on his back at the time of his departure from Mada’en, although Islam was been victorious and with great conquests, unlimited spoils were within the reach of Salman.

Abouzar’s behviour in his life
Ali al-Vardi says that Ali’s life invalidated Marx’s theory, but I believe that Salman and Abudhar’s lives as well did the same. Abudhar lived enough to see the first half of othman’s reign. He had nothing, no worldly possessions except the right to enjoin good and forbid evil at a time when others possessed hoards of money and were rewarded by the Caliph to the extent of one hundred thousand dinars or dirhams with which to purchase flocks of sheep and horses, numerous salves and maid- servants. Othman did not succeed in his efforts to silence the tongue which was more harmful to him than hundreds of swords. He exiled him (Abuazar) to Damascus, beat and tortured him, but none of these proved effective. He gave his slave a money – bag and promised that he would be set free if he could couvince Abuazar to accept it. The glib- tongued slaved met Abuazar but he could not secure his consent despite all efforts. Abuazar, wondering whose money that was why it was being offered to him, questioned the salve: “ If this is my share ( of the treasury) which you are offering me, what did you do with other’s shares? Do you pay their shares too? If not, why do not pat mine alone ?” Failing to convince him, the slave tried to harp upon Abuazar ‘s religious sentiments. He asked: “ Don’t you wish a slave to be set free? “Yes I do ,” replied Abuazar, “I am othman’s slave and he has promised to set me free should you accept his money. Therefore, you pleace do so for my sake,” said the slave. Abuazar remarked: “I am very much desirous that you be set free, but if I accept the money, you will gain your freedom and I will become a salve in the hands of othman”

The Prophet’s behavious and practical logic
We ( Muslims) believe the prior to Ali, the Holy Prophet’s life had also demolished the principles laid down by Marx. The Prophet remained the same from the first days of his appointment ( to prohethood), at the shi’b-i- Abutalib, till the time of his death. At the shi’b-i- Abutalib, the prophet and some of his companions were confined without food, water and other requirements of life. Their conditions were so desperate that some Muslims, would secretly get in which in get touch with them, especially with Ali (A.S), in the dark of the night and sneak a meager amount of food which could only relieve their hunger.

The prophet lived under such conditions at the shi’b-i- Abutalib. The came the tenth year of Hijrah, when world governments counted on him highly, while at the same time. fearing his presence. Not only was the Arabian Peninsula under his influence, but he had also acquired unmatched power that the would politician of the time predicted the immediate expansion of Islam from Arabia ( and their own defeat). However, there appeared not a bit of change in the Prophet’s attitude at his time as compared to the time of his imprisonment at the shi’b-i- Abutalib.

Once a desert Arab went to the Holy Prophet to ask him for something. On approaching him, he began trembling, having heard about the exalted personality of the prophet. The Prophet got worried and asked him why he felt so. Then he embraced the man intimately and told him: “Bebold and courageous! What are you afraid of? I am not a despot. I am the son of woman who used to milk lamb with her own hands. I am like unto your own brother. So tell me whatever your troubled heart wants to.” It is from such a behaviour that say the Prophet did not allow himself to be in the least affected by the power, authority, large realm and possibilities at his disposal. Such examples cannot describe the spiritual state of the Prophet and Ali, their status was in effect too exalted. We should either look into the lives of such personalities as Salman, Abuzar, “Ammar,Uwais Qurani and hundreds like them.