What is knowledge and what are the sources of acquiring it? What is the reality of being and what is the relation between essence of being with our knowledge about it. These are perennial questions of philosophy and metaphysics, epistemology and ontology as they are called. From Plato right down to Sartre, the quest of human mind has been homogenous, the quest for meaning – meaning of self and the “other”. Man has been in constant quest to properly contextualize his position in the spectrum of existence. This quest for meaning sets apart man from his intellectually inferior fellow animals. Animals live by instinct, but man, in addition to instinct has an additional privilege of rationality. Man possesses the instruments of understanding, discrimination and subsequently volition. Man is not content with what he is; instead he exploits the natural “cause-effect” axiom to its full utility. Stability, in the sense of pure vegetative euphoria has nothing to do with human self. Man can’t be content, with what he is. He strives towards “what he can be” too. That’s why humans are few of those species that have an exceptionally high [average] life span. This restlessness manifests both at material and abstract plane of existential hierarchy. Our journey from primordial caves to modern skyscrapers on one hand and Plato’s Republic to Derrida’s “Of Grammatology” mirrors our material and intellectual journey. Though, much can be said, both positive and negative about this sequence of events. Is it a real progress or a mere change, whether has there been really any paradigm shift in our approach to comprehend the basic epistemological questions etc. But for now let’s skip this skewed issue. Let’s agree that we have not merely changed but progressed too, at least materialistically. But have we not simultaneously ended up in an ideological plethora, where everything is simultaneously proved and disproved by same tricks of rhetoric. In this ideological juncture, where to look for and what to hold onto, to arrive at a holistic understanding of life and universe. Epistemology, with its variants of positivism, skepticism, deconstruction etc is scaffolding our understanding instead of spreading it out. The essence of meaning is lost to the definitions of meaning. Reality is devoured by theory, map is taken as territory, pointer is taken as pointed, name is taken as person and ‘attribute’ is substituted for ‘being’. First thing that we need to pay heed to is that nature in its entirety is a symbol. Every object that sings the songs of existence is actually a participant to the larger song of cosmic theophany. Symbolism is to be taken as the master key in any attempt that aims at unlocking the locks of cosmos. This universe and every object thereof is a symbol – symbol of sacred and divine. But this theory of symbolism isn’t amenable to those who are used to literalist textual approach and go to the extent of reading religious texts (which have a heavy symbolic import in their text) in literalist manner. But, if manifest was really real and visible was actually actual, then nobody would have believed that log of wood is a storehouse of fire and energy. Thus, there are infinite illustrations within our immediacy that bring home the fact of symbolism. Ghazali, in his Mishkat has aptly dealt with this symbolism, Quranic symbolism at least. But to mystics we must turn to understand this symbolic theophany of nature in essence. This mystic tradition is common to all traditions in one form or the other, one way or the other. It stands above space time contours. The apparent ritualistic clash of religions melts down in their higher esoteric dimension. The mystics of every age and religion have spoken the same fact –the fact that creation is a symbol symbolizing the divine, eternal and absolute. But they haven’t stopped here, but rather worked upon “symbol-symbolized” relation with reference to absolute and relative, temporal and eternal. Mysticism is not an imaginary digression, it’s much concrete in it’s foundations that our contemporary positivist science. The laboratory of science is external to man out there and every time you perform an experiment you will get the same results. Likewise the laboratory of mysticism is here right within the man – wherever you go , this laboratory is with you and like scientific experiments, you can repeat your mystic experiences and get same results every time. Mystic thought is not merely confluence of philosophical question and scientific answers; it is much more than this. It not only integrates man, universe and God into an existential whole but also guides man to the presence of absolute where all questions melt away and silence plays an orchestra of meanings. But, the problem is with the path is that it offers an extraordinary reward – and bigger the reward, harder the toil. If we are ready for toil, the reward is already with us:-
Amir Suhail Wani is a freelance columnist with bachelors in Electrical Engineering and a student of comparative studies with special interests in Iqbaliyat & mystic thought.