Bol Ke Lab Azad Hain Tere

"Bol ke lab azad hain tere”

(Speak, for your lips are free),

Inspired by the words of the Urdu poet Faiz Ahmad Faiz,

I write with the hope to express some of the things I have contemplated over the past few months, even years.  

We take for granted the ability to read, write, and speak freely, isn't that right?  Not simply because we have the right to do so, but because we use these skills to do what?  

Manage day-to-day tasks, write reports at work, maybe write emails, send text messages, update twitter and facebook statuses, or even just sit around and talk, sometimes aimlessly, sometimes with an actual purpose in mind.

I do wonder however (and I know I’m not the first), how have we used these skills compared to anyone else in the world that might not have these ‘skills’?

What have we done that is perhaps superior to anyone else in the world who interacts with others and might not know how to read or write?  Of course, western nations take a great deal of pride in their ‘development’ and so do many of the educated elite in countries that are not so ‘developed’ – but what is so wonderful about using knowledge to hoard wealth, and of course hoarding knowledge in the process?  Obviously, not everyone has access to knowledge, (and that is topic for a different day), however, what is so great about those who do have access to knowledge? 

How is their knowledge used?  Is it used to do things on Facebook all day long, talk about mindless things? Does their knowledge enlighten them? Or are they just a more modern version (on the outside) of any person who lacks such skills.  And I guess that is what they are in the end, just skills.  Not everyone with “skills” is enlightened or spiritually elevated (besides its not like that was ever the goal), nor is everyone without those “skills” any less because they then lack the means to produce a superficial appearance that would grant them the status that an “educated” person has (i.e. material wealth, dress, or even city structures).  We can take it even further, knowledge, acquisition of wealth of one person/or group of people, can and does lead to oppression of nations and people who then hope to prevent the free flow of any sorts of ideas that might conflict with their agenda thus silencing many voices.   Oppression can very easily be linked to mastering those skills.  I ask these questions to those who have a blind allegiance, if not some sort of elitism associated to the pursuit of education.  After all, great scientific success was behind the creation of the Atom-Bomb which devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  We take pride in education, the pursuit of sciences etc., but do we ever stop for a minute to ask what kind of damage has occurred due to these ‘advancements’?   It seems like, when it comes to humans it doesn’t matter if they are educated or not, if they are greedy, selfish, and obsessed with power and dominance, they will produce the same result whether it is with or without those “skills.”  It is interesting that “religion” (whatever that might mean, or refer to), is often labeled as the source of conflict, but if we think of the largest massacres on earth I highly doubt we can link those to some kind of “religion” - - it is an easy way out for those who do not want to face the facts about human nature, mixed with advanced technology – not to forget – western technology that is considered superior throughout the world.  So much so that I often find Muslims trying to credit themselves based on what the West has discovered, i.e. “we are legitimate too” – “our knowledge means something because the West has also said so” - -i.e. ‘we are worthy’ -  Why should any people have to legitimize themselves in the face of a people who have brutally colonized people for hundreds of years?  Perhaps, because throughout those hundreds of years the “west” has been able to make them believe that they are inferior, so now they must reestablish their sense of personhood through the ethnic nationalisms or dialogues that relate to what I described above.  (Talal Asad has written a book titled Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity in which he discusses the manner in which religion is often brought up as the source of wars and other societal problems, while the worst crimes to take place in the modern century have been based in secular thought/regimes.  For example, Pol Pot executed/disappeared a large number of his “educated” population in order to further the aims of his regime in Cambodia.  Let us not forget the Khmer Rouge).

Getting back to the issue at hand, I ask, to what use is this vast accumulation of knowledge?  I ask this while knowing very well, that we do not read very much in this day and age (nor have we ever!), and that which does come through our eyes into our minds is more often than not: commercial garbage… that we then start to imbibe in our spirits and also aspire to.

So, what is the content of what you read, write, or communicate or listen to?  And, do you read more or talk more?  I am sure you would agree that we all talk more.  Why?    Isn’t it interesting how much we love to talk? And how that sustains us on so many levels?  I once read somewhere that human beings are gregarious animals, sticking with the pack, being social these are all means of survival.  I am not surprised to see that it is in our nature.  But I am amazed at how the modern world exploits this by isolating us, and then giving us various tools (if not games) to keep us occupied or somehow connected through irregular/virtual means!

While I am on the topic, I wonder about how many love to listen.  Some are great at listening, others are not.  Reminds me of a poem I saw in a 4^th grade classroom:

The Wise Old Owl Sat in the Oak,

The More He Saw, The Less He Spoke,

The Less He Spoke, The More He Heard,

Why Can’t We Be, Like The Wise Old Owl.

Reminds me of a Japanese roommate I once had as well, she used to tell me that in her country there is a saying: Silence is Gold.  Knowing how natural it is to speak, and how hard it is to control the urge to speak, I think I would agree, silence really is Gold:

a scarce natural resource that is very expensive and difficult to attain.  Not in the sense of wanting there to be silence.  But in the sense of knowing the weight of words their true value is indeed a treasure that can be likened to Gold.  It is interesting that there is a Punjabi proverb that also relates to this idea:

Pehle tol,

Fir bol.

Essentially: “Weigh it, before you say it.”   But not in the way that you would stand on a weight machine.  In this context it is an actual old fashion scale (tol), like the type used to measure the weight of Gold!

Anyhow, I am not rejecting our need to speak, I just contemplate the actual matter of our words, and what if everyone was anxious just to listen to others?  To really gain from someone else’s knowledge, skills, or experiences? 

There is a Turkish proverb that I really love:

Bin bilsende bir bilene danış.

Even if you know a thousand things, still consult the man who knows just one thing.

(or woman).

And one more quote I’ll add here by Ralph Waldo Emerson,

“Shall I tell you the secret of the true scholar? It is this: every

man I meet is my master in some point, and in that I learn of him.”

- - -

I have found that people just love to be heard, and if they find even one good listener, well then that is what makes them most happy. 

What does it all mean, this drive to speak?   To be heard. And what does it mean when this fundamental aspect of daily life is taken away?  Most importantly, what does it say about human nature?

I find that the ones who came before us were in tune with this natural human propensity and to me this highlights the logic behind oral cultures and oral histories.  

The Arabs memorized volumes of poetry and African societies also memorized and passed their history through generations.  Such oral renderings persist to this day in Punjab where the qissa is often memorized and recited (chapters of Sufi poetry).  Not because they were not 'advanced' in the fields of writing and composing, but perhaps because they had a greater understanding of what was likely to remain.  I find this to be much wiser, and much more human in fact, compared to an elite system that requires a decoding—in isolation, in order to acquire any sort of knowledge. 

Meaning, whereas with the Greeks certain types of knowledge were only for the select few,  that is true to this day (everyday people cannot handle classified information), whether it is political or even religious/spiritual.  Also, not all information was orally related in the societies I mentioned, however, I find a system that is oral to be all-inclusive. – No special skill is needed in order to take part in a society’s narrative, one must simply know how to speak, or listen (and memorize). I find that it is closer to the so-called ideals of equality than the farce put forth by western ‘democratic’ nations “education for all” ?  yeah right!

I find that the human propensity to be oral is indeed why it is so easy for the media/marketing machines to orally disseminate so much garbage, and to therefore, achieve success in doing so.  People are oral, they will absorb what they hear on the news, and are less likely to pick up a book to deconstruct that which has been hammered into the oral knowledge that has been programmed into them.

--

Though I’ve discussed one’s ability to speak, listen, even memorize – none of the above actually speaks to the idea of ‘thinking’ – Although being oral is part of our nature, simply memorizing anything and retaining it only signifies our ability to do so.  Does it tell us anything else?

Filling ourselves with narratives is indeed worthy of recognition, that which we contain inside of ourselves cannot be taken away.  We can be imprisoned for our words or even thoughts, but nonetheless they remain inside of us.

There is a piece of Urdu poetry I once heard, 

"Diloon mein bharo ilam ka mal-o-zar

Na Aatish ka khatra na choroon ka dar" 

"Fill your hearts with the treasure of knowledge, 

you will never be in danger of fire nor will you fear robbers.”

I do not know the author of these lines, but I do know that Faiz  himself was a poet (like many others) who was imprisoned for his words, and thoughts.  All of which were inside of him, until he wrote them down and spoke them.  In the end, what is inside of us though it cannot be taken away, can be suppressed.

But, like I said earlier, though many of us have the opportunities to read, speak, listen, memorize, do we recognize what it means to 'think' freely-- or to think at all.   (I think therefore I am? (cogito ergo sum).

But how often do we really think? How many of us function on autopilot? (based on the oral culture that has been instilled in us) and do we have the ability to "think" if all that we come to know is engrained in us from the very first words we speak?  Whether its from our oral history/culture or anything else?   Regardless of the tabula raza/clean slate that we are born with?

I’ve always found it interesting that the first verse revealed from the Qur'an also invites man to speak: Iqra meaning, recite ("recite in the name of the Lord who created  you from a clot of blood, who taught man what he knew not")  However, here man is not simply implored to speak – he is told what he should speak – and that is the name of God – i.e. the manner in which he came to be. Not very much like “I think therefore I am” but moreso, “I speak therefore I know God” or, “I know where I have come from.”

I find that the first impulse to speak is highlighted by this “IQRA.” 

Then again there are many instances in which the Qur'an advises man to think, to ponder which comes only after one can speak:

“This is a Book full of Blessings that we have revealed unto you so people ponder upon its verses and men of intellect may reflect.” (Quran 38:29)

By no means do I mean to compare Faiz to the Quran, but I do hope to get to something deeper.

I wonder, why didn't Faiz say, "soch, ke dimaag azad hain tera" (Think, for your mind is free?) 

Perhaps he assumes that one has already passed that stage of contemplation, or perhaps he knows that this is our first instinct.  We speak.  We speak without knowing, with knowing, with compassion, without compassion, with feeling, or without.  Inevitably, we speak.  It is man's greatest desire. To speak and to be heard: to have a voice.  Perhaps Faiz knows, there is no such thing as a free mind, just as there is no such thing as a free person.