Through Fire and Water

AS DALE CARNEGIE—that most pragmatic of modern thinkers— once remarked: The most important thing in life is not to capitalize on your gains. Any fool can do that. The really important thing is to profit from your losses. That requires intelligence, and it makes the difference between a man of sense and a fool.

It is seldom in this world that aspirants to wealth and fame meet with nothing but success throughout their careers. Many are the trials and tribulations through which they must pass before they can savour the fruits of their endeavours. The people who ultimately succeed are those who are undaunted by disadvantageous circumstances, who waste no time in lamenting over them, and who give their attention instead to overcome whatever difficulties they are faced with.

The truly successful person is one who can carry his ambitions into effect no matter what hurdles he has to leap over. He is the one who will arrive at his destination no matter what obstacles are strewn in his path

The idea of profiting from one’s losses may seem paradoxical, but it is something definitely worth aiming at, whether it be an individual, a group, or a nation whose welfare is at stake. It is not, after all, the man who has never had to face any difficulties whatsoever who is necessarily the most successful in life. The truly successful person is one who can carry his ambitions into effect no matter what hurdles he has to leap over. He is the one who will arrive at his destination no matter what obstacles are strewn in his path. He is the one who is prepared to battle through fire and water right to the very end.

Corruption has appeared on land and sea because of the evil which men’s hands have done. (30: 41)

For Mutual Benefits

WHEN a certain tyre company in the western world was on the point of launching its goods on the market, it ran an advertising campaign that promised that “whoever demonstrated a real defect in the tyres would win a prize of $ 50,000. People naturally flocked to buy them. If they found a defect, well and good. If not, they had nothing to lose, because they would actually have purchased a good set of tyres.

The company did then actually receive many complaints of which 20 percent appeared to be genuine. The complainants were duly sent invitations to a seminar, and their travelling expenses were to be paid for by the company. This allowed them to air their respective views as to how the tyres could be improved. A concrete proposal was finally arrived at by consensus and rewards were distributed at the closure of the seminar.

By taking into consideration the suggestions of its customers, the company was able to improve upon the quality of the original tyre. Although the cost had to be increased considerably, the tyres sold far outnumbered previous sales. Formerly the tyres had been manufactured according to the company’s own formula, while the improved version was based on the opinions and suggestions of the consumers as well. It was only natural that people should regard the product as being far superior to the original one.

It is only sharing and cooperation that can lead to success in this life. It is the principle of give-and-take that should be most active, like two-way traffic.

In this world, all people—not just manufacturers and consumers— are dependent upon one another. It is, therefore, only sharing and cooperation which can lead to success in this life. It is the principle of give-and-take that should be most active, like two-way traffic. A system of benefits can never be a one-way thing, Reciprocity should be the order of the day.

We often talk of peace in the context of war. But this is a very narrow and restricted notion of peace. Peace is deeply linked with the entirety of human life. Peace is a complete ideology in itself. Peace is the only religion for both—man and the universe. It is the master-key that opens the doors to every success. Peace creates a favourable atmosphere for success in every endeavour. Without peace, no positive action—small or big—is possible.

THE PRINCIPLE OF PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE

THE simplest principle of the religion of humanity is to treat others just as one would like to be treated by them. The Prophet Muhammad once observed: No one can be a believer until he begins to like for his brother what he likes for himself. (Fath-ul-Bari, 1/73).

With minor differences, these words of the Prophet have been recorded in all the books of Hadith. For instance, according to a Hadith mentioned in Sahih Muslim, the Prophet said: By the Being in Whose Hand is my soul, no one can be a believer as long as he does not like for his neighbour (or brother) what he likes for himself.

No one can be a believer until he begins to like for his brother what he likes for himself

All individuals, be they literate or illiterate, able-bodied or handicapped, whether of one class or another, are certain at all events of their own likes and dislikes. Now what is required is that they simply follow the principle that whatever behaviour they want from others, they should themselves accord to others. Conversely, whatever behaviour towards themselves they abhor in others should likewise be eschewed by them.

This is such a comprehensive principle that it is useful in relations between men and women, individuals and nations, in the homeland as well as in foreign lands. If people were to adhere to this principle, their family life as well as their social life would improve. National life as well as international life would run more smoothly. It is like a master key to human ethics, one single key which suffices to open all locked doors. One who does not differentiate between his own people and others is a man of principle. His is a contradiction-free personality. And this trait, when properly developed, will turn him into a noble person.

A Lesson from the Mahatma

MAHATMA GANDHI was very shy by nature. In his book, My Experiments with Truth, he confesses that it was a long time before he managed to shake off his shyness. While studying in London, he joined a vegetarian society. At one of its meetings, he was asked to make a speech. He stood up but was unable to express himself. Finally, he brought himself to voice a few words of thanks and sat down. On another occasion, when he was invited to express his ideas on vegetarian food, he set his thoughts down on paper but was not even able to read out what he himself has written. Someone, however, taking pity on him, read his discourse for him.

After passing his examination in law from London, he started his practice in Bombay (now Mumbai). Here again, his shyness was a stumbling block. When he appeared before the judge in his first case, he was so nervous that he could not say anything. He had to tell his client that he would not be able to pursue his case and that he should choose another lawyer for himself.

Mahatma Gandhi was well-known for his thoughtful and economical manner of speech. But this outstanding trait only came from another trait which few would consider outstanding

But, as Gandhiji writes, this apparent disadvantage turned to his advantage:

“My hesitancy in speech, which was once an annoyance, is now a pleasure. Its greatest benefit has been that it has taught me the economy of words. I have naturally formed the habit of restraining my thoughts. And I can now give myself a certificate that a thoughtless word hardly ever escaped my tongue or pen.”

Mahatma Gandhi was well-known for his thoughtful and economical manner of speech. But this outstanding trait only came from another trait which few would consider outstanding. Initially, his shyness prevented him from speaking in public; later, it made him thoughtful and economical when he spoke.

A Chastisement from the Past

MYRIAD hurdles and eventual failure were encountered in implementing the communist ideal of public ownership. This experience has conclusively shown that efforts to collectivize what is essentially a private concern amount to more than a fight against a man-made system. Such efforts are a fight against nature itself, and such a struggle is doomed to failure. One of the basic principles of the Communist ideal is that there should be public ownership of all enterprises, and all goods should be free.

One of the first departments to come under the influence of this ideal was agriculture. Ever since the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, there had been continual attempts, in Russia and other communist countries, to collectivize agriculture, and bring farming entirely under the control of the state. These efforts, however, met with failure.

Private enterprise is not a man-made system. It is an integral part of human nature, and efforts to change human nature are doomed to failure.

The big thrust towards collectivization was initiated in the 1930s by the dictator Josef Stalin (1879-1953). It soon became clear, however, that the transition from private to public ownership would not be smooth. To ward off the threat of starvation, the state awarded plots, averaging 0.3 hectares each, to collective farmers. These plots were to be farmed privately, in order to augment the farmers’ income and ensure that they were not swamped by the wave of the sudden transition from individual to collective farming. This was considered a “temporary evil”, a concession to necessity, which would be disbanded once the legacy of the previous economic system disappeared.

Far from being a temporary evil, however, the predilection for private ownership proved to be more a permanent part of human nature. It is always painful for man to be torn away from his natural environment, and this was no exception. An estimated 5.5 million people died of hunger and associated diseases when they were forced into state and collective farms on Stalin’s orders.

But an even more conclusive indictment of the state-owned system of agriculture came from the fact that, despite massive investments in the public sector, the private sector continued to flourish in the Soviet Union. Thousands of private farmers owned small plots of land in Georgia and central Asia. According to a November 1984 article in Questions of Economy, a monthly journal put out by the Academy of Sciences, Moscow, plots and small holdings accounted for 25% of total agricultural production in the Soviet Union. More than half the nation’s potatoes and roughly a third of its meat, eggs, and other vegetables were produced privately. These figures were even more astounding when compared to the proportion—just 2.8%—those private plots constituted all the farmland in the country.

The prices that privately grown vegetables fetched in Moscow’s central markets made a mockery of the communist ideal of free food for all. According to a Reuter report from Moscow, dated December 28, 1984, tomatoes from Georgia were fetching 15 rubles a kilo on the Moscow market. Cauliflowers from central Asia were going for 12 rubles apiece. Muscovites complained about the high prices, but it was a question of paying them or going without vegetables:

“While Muscovites complain at the swarthy “millionaires” from the South whose big houses and flashy cars are legends, without them fruit and vegetables would be hard to find at all.” (The Muslim, Islamabad, December 29, 1984)

A conclusive indictment of the state-owned system of agriculture came from the fact that, despite massive investments in the public sector, the private sector continued to flourish in the Soviet Union.

All this goes to show that the communist state had failed to provide people with their basic needs of life, let alone provide them free of cost. People had to fall back on the private sector for elementary provisions. The private sector went on to outstrip the public sector, despite the advantages which the latter enjoyed under the patronage of the communist state. Even Russian leaders, faced with the reality that the state alone simply could not meet the nation’s needs, had admitted the importance of the private sector. State planning chief Nikolai Baibakov told a session of the Soviet Parliament:

“Economic leaders should devote more attention to giving help to collective farm workers in managing their private plots.” Thus, communism did a complete U-turn since the days of Stalin when complete collectivization was considered the ideal. There was a grudging acceptance of the inevitability of private enterprise, and the need to assist it.

It is not very difficult to see why the system of private enterprise should be so resilient in face of encroachment by the state. It is because private enterprise is not a man-made system. It is an integral part of human nature, and efforts to change human nature are doomed to failure. Furthermore, the state in itself is not a separate entity. It exists only as a conglomeration of individuals. The incentive for buying and selling, giving and taking, earning and paying wages, must come from the individual; it cannot come from the state. That is why, however much “the state” may seek to accumulate powers to itself, it cannot do so, for eventually the state boils down to the individuals that compose it, and it is inevitably they who will inherit the power, both economic and political, which “the state” apportions to itself.

A person should reflect on the point that he is helpless in every respect, that he cannot survive even for a moment without the life-support system on earth. Even within the life-support system, a virus (e.g. Covid-19) invisible to the naked eye, renders him weak and helpless. These events serve to teach us that man is not the master of the world. The master of this world is God, the Lord of the worlds, who is running it. Therefore, it is proper for man to surrender himself before his Creator.

The State of Emergency

TODAY he came to see me unexpectedly, at an odd hour, and he did not even accept the offer of a cup of tea. He said, “I have to reach home soon. My wife must be waiting for me.” And then, in a hurry, he started his scooter and set off. Barely half an hour later, the telephone bell rang. It was his wife. In a greatly agitated tone, she stammered, “Your friend….” I could hear her sobs and cries, and the meaning of the sentence could be guessed. Putting the receiver down hastily, I rushed to her house. Having said goodbye to me he had reached home, but while climbing the stairs he stumbled and fell. Some people carried him upstairs and the doctor was immediately called, but he could only declare him dead.

When he rode off on his scooter, he had apparently set off for his home but, in truth, he was heading toward death. This is not an unusual event. Such events take place every day and in all kinds of places. On May 26, 1979, a jet aircraft took off from O’Hare airport. Shortly afterward it crashed and burst into flames. All 271 passengers were burnt to death. This accident happened with a small number of people, but such is going to be the fate of all human beings. All men who are on the move are actually heading toward death.

Death is closer to man than life. Everyone is in danger of having come to the end of his period on earth and of being taken off at any moment to the next world from where he will never come back.

Death is closer to man than life. Everyone is standing on the verge of death. Everyone is in danger of having come to the end of his period on earth and of being taken off at any moment to the next world from where he will never come back. Then his residence will be one of either eternal Hell or eternal Heaven.

When a blind man comes across a well on his way, everyone knows that the greatest thing at that moment is to warn him of it. How strange it is that the whole human race is standing on the brink of the most dangerous precipice, yet one never feels the need to give warning of it. When a servant of God gives a danger signal, far from being appreciated he is ridiculed and labelled a traitor. He is accused of wanting to lull the nation into the comfortable sleep of cowardice, of trying to dampen the spirit of a holy war among the Muslims, and of wanting to shift the emphasis from real issues. He is vilified as being not the messenger of life but of death and doom. Humanity stands on the brink of a precipice, but people are so disinclined to look in front of them that they have the illusion of being safe at home. People are heading toward death but are happy with the thought that they are advancing on the journey of life.

The Most Harmful Emotion

WHEN the Delhi Sultanate suffered a decline in the late 15th and early 16th centuries, many independent Muslim and Hindu chiefs and nobles, declared their independence.

Among these kingdoms, the most powerful was the Bahmani Kingdom of the Deccan, which was established in 1347 after a revolt against Sultan Mohammed Bin Tughlaq. The first ruler, Ala-ud-Din Hasan Bahman Shah (Hasan Gangu), traced his ancestry back to the ancient King Bahman of Iran. Hasan established his capital at Gulbarga and set about extending the boundaries of his kingdom. After he died in 1358, he was succeeded by his son Muhammad Shah I, who established the new city of Bidar, to which he shifted his capital.

During the 180 years of its existence (1347-1527), the Bahmani Sultanate saw its most successful and prosperous period between 1463 and 1481, when Mahmud Gawan was the minister. Muhammad Shah III ascended the throne when he was only 8 or 9 years old. Mahmud Gawan was appointed vizier (chief minister) to help manage the affairs of the state. Given the power to act for the King, he not only extended the empire but also gave it great stability, through the wisdom of his policies. Duly acknowledging his abilities, the Encyclopaedia Britannica calls him “the most notable personality of the period…, a leading administrator.” (9/372)

Though the entire reins of the administration fell into the hands of Mahmud Gawan due to the lazy, comfort-loving temperament of the reigning monarch, Mohammad Shah III, he never misused his powers. Indeed, he lived his life with the utmost simplicity and devotion to duty, eating out of earthen vessels, sleeping on a mat, working with great industry, and never wasting a moment of his time. That his objectives were worthy may be judged by his having donated over three thousand books from his personal library to a school which he had set up in Bidar. The ruins of this school are still in existence. But the nobles of the court, ignoring his uprightness and the progress he had brought to the country, could think of nothing but the position of prestige and authority which he held.

Consumed with envy, they resolved to oust him. By devious methods, they obtained possession of his official seal and used it on a forged letter, purportedly from Gawan to Rajah Rainer Singh, the then ruler of Vijayanagara, which they then showed to Muhammad Shah III, to prove to him that his minister was about to enter into a conspiracy to overthrow him. Convinced that Gawan was a traitor, the King had him put to death on April 5, 1481. He later realized what a grave mistake he had made, and, grief-stricken and filled with remorse, he himself died less than a year later on March 22, 1482.

The main culprit in this plot was Malik Nayeb who, a mere five years after the death of his victim, was himself brutally murdered by his opponents. After the death of Gawan, the Bahmani Sultanate could not recover its stability, and it came to an end with the death of its last king. After numerous rebellions, this one sultanate was split up into five separate kingdoms.

Jealousy and envy are the opposites of well-wishing. These are destructive emotions that a person may harbour towards fellow human beings. The Prophet of Islam warned against these emotions on many occasions. He said, “Beware of jealousy. Verily, it destroys good deeds the way fire destroys wood.” (Abu Dawood) That is why believers are instructed to seek refuge in God ‘from the evil of the envier when he envies.’ (113: 5)

Goodword Books is an award-winning publishing company with a splendid range of Islamic Books in many languages. It offers innovative products for children, including Quran stories, moral stories, craft and activity books, gift packs, Islamic games, Arabic and Islamic readers for home and school.

Name of the Book: The Greatest Stories
from the Quran
Author: Dr Saniyasnain Khan
Pages: 64
ISBN: 9788178980973

Saniyasnain Khan is a children’s author, with over 100 children’s books to his credit. These are on subjects relating to Islam and a number of them have been translated into more than a dozen languages. He hopes that his books will be a true companion on the path of spiritual development and will help children know the true purpose and meaning of life.

Bring Quran Stories to Life for Your Kids! 30 action-packed Quran stories cover the periods from the Creation of the Prophet Adam to the devastating floods of the Prophet Nuh, from the days of the cruelty of Firawn to the times of the Prophet Musa, from the days of the Prophet Isa to the advent of the Prophet Muhammad. Each one of these stories is short enough to finish in one sitting. Use The Greatest Stories from the Quran in the classroom or at home, at bedtime, or at any other time. It’s the perfect way to begin your child’s lifetime adventure of reading the Quran! Here is a selection from the book.

THE IRON WALL

Long, long ago, during the sixth century B.C. King Dhul Qarnayn ruled the lands from the Aegean Sea to the Indus River. He was just and righteous, protecting the weak and punishing the lawbreakers.

When he took his armies to the Northeast of Iran, he reached the Caucasus Mountain range which runs between the Caspian and the Black Seas. Once, in that region, he met a tribe who begged him to protect them from the wild tribes, the Yajuj and the Majuj (Gog and Magog) who kept coming through the mountain passes and attacking them.

Dhul Qarnayan asked for iron blocks and molten brass, and, with the help of the local people, he built a barrier across the valley to hold back the Yajuj and Majuj.

After conquering a major part of the then-inhabited world Dhul Qarnayan had lost none of his humility.

He gave the entire credit for his feats to the blessing of Allah. Of the iron wall he had built, he said:

“This is a blessing from my Lord. But when my Lord’s promise has been fulfilled, He will level it to dust. And the promise of my Lord is true.”

A Sure Way to Equanimous Living

THE Prophet Muhammad once observed: Moderate action is the best of all actions. The Caliph Ali advised the people: “Adopt the middle path.” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi, 154/2) The middle path means the path of moderation. One instance of it can be seen in the following verse of the Quran: Be neither miserly nor so open-handed that you suffer reproach and become destitute. (17: 29) The same point, worded differently, has been made in another verse which characterizes ‘the true servants of the Gracious One’ as “those who are neither extravagant nor niggardly, but keep a balance between the two.” (25: 67)

According to this verse, moderate spending means neither lavishness nor miserliness but rather a balanced expenditure that will make life much easier to lead. In the same way, as regards optional fasts, prayers, etc., a middle path is desirable for man, as this enables him to maintain such a pattern of behaviour over a long time.

This middle path—the best path to follow— relates to all spheres of life. Man must shun extreme paths in all matters, for this is in accordance with both the spirit of religion as well as with worldly success.

One who does not follow a moderate path will exceed all bounds both in friendship and in enmity. He will also be given to undue optimism and pessimism in respectively positive and negative situations.

The middle path, to put it differently, is the non-emotional way. If a man loses his mental balance when confronted with any difficult situation in life, he goes to one extreme or the other. But if he keeps his feelings under control, he will be able to determine the proper course of action by giving it ample thought. A well-considered deed is always a moderate one. One who does not follow a moderate path will exceed all bounds both in friendship and in enmity. He will also be given to undue optimism and pessimism in respectively positive and negative situations and will unnecessarily regard some individuals as too bad and others as too good. However, it is the verdict of nature that in this world a moderate approach in life always succeeds, while taking the path of extremes inevitably leads to failure.

From The Scriptures

The Quran is the book of God. It has been preserved in its entirety since its revelation to the Prophet of Islam between CE 610 and 632. It is a book that brings glad tidings to humankind, along with divine admonition, and stresses the importance of man’s discovery of the Truth on a spiritual and intellectual level.

Translated from Arabic and commentary by
Maulana Wahiduddin Khan

Have you seen one who denies the Day of Judgement? Who turns away the orphan, and who does not urge the feeding of the poor? So, woe to those who pray but whose hearts are not in their prayer. Those who do things only to be seen by others, who are uncharitable even over very small things. (107: 1-7)

This chapter, which has seven verses, draws our attention to the Day of Judgement when we shall be held responsible for all our good or bad actions. It also deplores the ways of those who deny the Day of Judgement, treat the helpless with contempt, and lead arrogant, selfish lives. They do not extend the slightest courtesy or kindness to their fellow human beings, their hearts being empty of Faith.

The hypocrites may put on a pretence of doing good deeds, but these hollow acts will not avail them. This chapter also warns those who are ‘heedless in their prayer.’

Belief in the reckoning of the Hereafter makes a man pious. One who does not believe in this will be devoid of all goodness; he will be neglectful of prayer to God; he will not be ashamed of pushing over a weak person; he will not think it necessary to discharge the dues and rights of the poor; he will not even give to others such things as will cause him no substantial loss—even if it be only matchsticks or his good wishes.