Nightmare

Now I am Half. - a poem


A bit of the Earth fell off from our place
Snapped in too
Fell into the sea.

Except we did not hear the swish of the waves
Nor ever did we see the wash of its tale.
So far from there we did not look back.

Except to see as more bits did cave.
Whilst we did run as fast as the March Hare
Driving her car without any bloody care.

Oblivious to please
Only one did we save
A youth with promises to keep

That soon all harm would be repaired
Forgotten in the amnesia of youth
Whilst we who had a care

Remember it all:
A bit of the Earth fell off from my face
Snapped me in two
And now I am half.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Home

Orthodoxy not CONSERVATISM

There is a strong current of conservatism that runs throughout Turkish culture, history and even life. This even extends to their conception of the religion: there, it appears that, they often conflate conservatism with orthodoxy.

It's also interesting to note that whilst Ataturk brought Turkey into the modern era, his was just a different brand of conservatism.

It still was a top- down, hierarchical, system of organisation that probably still pervades every Turkish institution.

Even more interesting is that my conception of the religion is completely at odds with that idea, that Islam is for the people and there to help the people and is essentially grassroots. That it is revolutionary, inspiring and empowering. That it's precepts are clear and known and that nothing new can enter this concise body of religion.
Here is no specialism, no hidden message, no elitist ideal.

And even then it's book is a wonderful well of good fortune: the deeper you dig the sweeter the waters that gush from it. And that that book is full to the brim of questions just waiting to be asked.

And when you ask a question then those generative possibilities and opportunities become endless.

It's quite unlike the static conception of the religion that I believe the Turkish institutions have and uphold.

For the great Islamic Turkish thinkers failed to imprint their thoughts on the mainstream. Rumi's intelligence could only acceptably shine in Sufism, whilst Said Nursi approach towards the religion was again tangential. Both were great men, and yet both realised that they could not make an impression in a culture that viewed orthodoxy as being conservation in all of what went before.

They forgot the greatness of Abu Haneefa (rh) who revived a Sunnah that many after have derided him for. For did not the Prophet (saw) warn us not to write down anything from him. Most likely as a means that the great oral tradition of the Arab people would keep his words alive with meaning.

And did not our Prophet (saw) also impress on us, to not ask over many questions. That taken with the fact that the book is full of questions should not be taken to mean a blind acceptance of what went before.

But in fact that questions are powerful and generative, and sometimes they should not be quenched with answers, written down and set in stone.

That each man, and each community, and each time frame needs to explore those questions within their own narrative.

A prescription that is as anti-conservative as there can be, whilst at the same time being fixed within an unchanging milleu that is our religion, and the religion of our fathers. A revolutionary and yet orthodox ideal.

Location:Istanbul

Just the Ticket

Just the Ticket.
~~~~~~~~~~~

A turn of phrase
Is all it takes.
To turn from disdain,
full of praise.

Whilst how so many?
Might turn by side,
Before they even reach that telling tide?

That swell
that might propel them
Onward, to uncharted shores.
Or else to climb those steeple spires.

From vantages you might see.
How little is your life, when
measured
Against the many vast intricacies.

Or against the needs of others,
Far more, better than ours

But folly calls all such disdain
And those who heed it, fall before it,
The cold calculating enumerator
That accountants' blow.

Whilst our heroes celebrate their own anonymity.

They soldier on,
Proud to pass from baton to hand,
And back again.
The esteem pursuit of selfless giving.

That once did,
And can do again
This Nation arising.

From phrase,
to inspire,
to raise.

And all start
With that badge of honour.
That pass that we all hope to die with.

---
Written whilst on the way to Bera Hotel, Alanya. (Turkey Med Coast- Halal Hotel).



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Alanya, Turkey

Duplex Vision

Duplex Vision



I see the heaps of rubbish piled high,
their empty lies grandiosely plied.
With colour, venom and satire.

Corn coloured cobs whittled down.
Tabloid noise, not fit for fish 'n chips,
Though soiled no less.
Drear wrappings of blurb, discoloured by scorching sun.

Each eaten through truth's core of bone.
And yet the pack of lies still stand,
Precarious upon the precipice.

What whilst, will dash them upon the cliffs?
Then to sink their lies,
And make disappear?
No treasure will you ever find upon that sea.

Except dried truthless bone, gnawed cob and paper mash.
Let those lies stay buried out to sea.
Where the salt may eat them eternally.

To find truth, you must assume
That everything they sweetly ply
you with
Is solely but grandiose lie.

And not to follow their blind machination.
Where they make out that every true courageous spirit.
That fights against this Zionist lie.
Or says other then they would want believed.

And to question is all that it takes
To bash the brains out of their
Insolent lies.
Before you taste the bitter seas of tears
Crashing, grinding you against the cliff's high walls.

Ere you climbed high upon that stench filled heap.
And were one of those stick fleshness men,
Who cannot smell the reek of lies.
Becoming accustomed
Because you never questioned why?

Be brave my young soldier
You have my heart.
To battle against those grim lies
You will never be alone.

Shafees
An earlier version missing the last stanza is found on my blog press account.
This is better.

Location:SpecSavers

Frozen Bones

Frozen Bones

I know the frozen bones
That will dog me till I die.

I know those searing eyes
That accuse me even now.

I know the creeping grey
That some say distinguishes me.

I know the want to do
That every time defers awhile.

But what I like to forget
Is that my memory will fade.

Will fade.
Whilst I intern in my grave.

But the good that I do,
By His glorious grace,

My LORD will forever keep.

Location:Claverton Down, Bath

Barry Schwartz and a Wandering Nobody

My friend asked: 
"If Barry Schwartz is right to say that choice has made us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied, is there a case today for taking some of it away from us?"

Barry, here, defines choice within a commodity culture.

The great choices, that determine who we are, existed before modern liberal democracies, and their free market promotion, and they will exist long afterwards.

Whether we are true to our word?
How we choose to see others who are different from ourselves?
Our relationship with authority?
Whether we choose to believe that there is more than can be seen?

These choices have not diminished but their import may have been occluded by choices that are merely cosmetic.

So because we are swamped with only cosmetic choices, that really do not affect who we are, as people, those important choices that do are often overlooked or put off.

And because of being swamped with commodity choices the choices that really matter are paralysed to us.

For choices are either driven by motive or impulsive in nature.

When our impulses are satisfied by a plethora of choice we then loose the capacity to be driven by motive.
There are no motivating forces, no ethics or rules that you hold because you want to hold them and you become dissatisfied with life because everything is wishy-washy, or a game with no finality, no direction to where you want to be.

So, do I think that there may be a case for taking some of them away?

Certainly there is a case for stopping manufacturers making one item and then branding it in several ways to give the illusion of choice.

And if a clear message could not be provided through the marketing a single entity for multiple differing consumers then it might force manufacturers to restrict their branding activity. This could open the door to other manufacturers which might be a good thing for the marketplace.

However, the free market should never be called into question precisely because who other than a parent of a child should hold the authority to restrict choice?

There is a strong case, here, for education to focus on the important choices that people would never have to confront if the marketplace were king.

This suggests that the free market should have no power over our schools.

And the curriculum of schools should not just be focused on academics or job-related courses, but should foster dialogue on philosophy as a means of addressing issues without really providing a right or wrong answer.

In such classes, where children should be encouraged to explore those choices, the government should be excluded from dictating their values, nor should our teachers be dictating values past those of discipline and hard work.

Our children should be allowed to determine the answers to the great questions themselves through the exploration of great works of literature, thought, ethics and religion. The teachers job should be as chair as bring the question at hand to the table through the introduction of those works and ideas.

This also suggests a different calibre of teacher, one not affiliated with a specific school but a nomad between schools. A wandering nobody.

My perfect job description.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Tesco Central

Deconstructing Democracy through (for, of and from) Choice

Deconstructing Democracy through (of, by and from) Choice.

Emmanuel asked:
"If Barry Schwartz is right to say that choice has made us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied, is there a case today for taking some of it away from us?"

Is there an illusion of choice?
That we assume that since we have choice, that we are more free, or even that the choice is real.

Don't marketeers exploit this illusion when they brand equivalent products differently.
And isn't this a loss due to modernity that packaging is what makes things sell.

Even in politics many are dissatisfied with the political system because they "know" that there is no choice.
But what they mean is that there may well be choice, but the difference between the parties boils down to a piece of paper that everyone knows carries no weight.
And does congruence really mean that everybody is performing as efficiently as possible?

But when we think about it such a claim boils down to evolutionary theory.
For if such were the case then evolutionary pressure would necessarily mean that traits that increase performance push out those that don't. Whilst traits that are cosmetic may well become more attractive with rarity, thus ensuring a balanced distribution.

Difference in the evolutionary world is accounted for by circumstance.
For different environs create dissimilar evolutionary pressures that also account for the variety amongst us all.

But if we assume an evolutionary model for modes of social organisation then with increased globalisation, we would have to admit that this is no real choice; only cosmetic one.

That if Nation State democracies are the most efficient form of social organisation then the future is inevitable, and that we have no control over it. Except in catastrophic circumstance, of which, obviously, we also have no control.

A fatalistic philosophy that bases itself on a disregard for the fact that we each feel we have a choice, and can affect our futures.

So how do we square this circle where we have choice and yet no control, if not by reverting to fatalistic evolutionary theory?

Freedom of choice really means taking responsibility for your actions/ choices. And when we are willing to be responsible for those choices then that means we have been free to choose. If the question, "are you willing to bear the consequences?", makes any sense in the circumstances then you really could claim that you have chosen and have been free to choose.

Flipping channels on a TV is not choice because there are no consequences for the choice of one over the other. If someone would ask you that question above then it would just be a matter of a laugh, and would not be treated as a serious question.

Whilst rebelling against the authority within an institution does resemble a choice because you may have to bear responsibility for their sanction.

Voting for a political party represents no choice, and therefore no freedom, because how can you be said to be responsible for the choice of your peers? That is even on the off chance where there is a real choice between parties.

"Are you willing to best the consequences?" becomes a redundant question because willingness has got nothing to do with it. I am forced to bear the consequence of my peers decision, and the mismanagement a political system that allows for no choice.

What does this mean?
If this is the case then authority for democracy does not lie with the people. Because I'm sure it doesn't lie with me and I'm sure that you would agree, if you are true, that it doesn't lie with you.

And then phrase "for, off and from the people" becomes redundant.
Democracy in such terms is fallacious.

And yet being a Muslim, I believe in the democracy that people's voices must be listened to. For me the theory of democracy was always still born because of a prescription for action that is couched in something far greater than the minds of men;

An illustrious recitation and the example of the greatest leader of Mankind- Muhammad, may he forever be blessed.

Because contained in both is a real prescription for consultation in political processes, and then the building of consensus- shuraa'.
A real democracy that is something that Modern Nation States with their congruent political parties only scratch at.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:The Hague

Leadership

Leadership

When iron rusts, engines fail.

When a man vested with the interests of the many, uses it for the furtherance of his own interests then that is the rust on the cogs and wheels of our society.

Hypocrisy rusts the heart, and critical self examination is it's balming oil. For the heart is the engine through which our actions can mark themselves out as being good deeds.

Abu Bakr (as) when he was asked to take a stipend from the treasury so that he could best fulfil the affairs of state, was constantly anxious, in his heart, as to whether it was in excess of his needs. Umar (ra) scrupulously recognised where the affairs of state ended and his began, as when he extinguished the lighting of an oil lamp mid conversation.

But with Uthman (ra) the insidiousness of corruption crept ever so silently in. For what harm could possibly come from appointing adept people to positions of authority, even though they might be related to you?

Uthman (ra) obtained his position at the table of the "blessed ten" because he did not retaliate nor did he unjustly slay any Muslim. He (ra) was a man full of heart.

That Uthman (ra) was of the blessed ten is not in doubt, nor that with his appointment entered a corruption that ended with the Kingship of the Ummayads.

This then suggests that corruption is inevitable; for when man is weak and not insightful enough, but good nevertheless, then corruption can and does inevitably creep in.

Plato suggested that statesmanship is an art, part learnt and part something that you are gifted with. And that people who have that ability will not suffer to let anyone less able determine the affairs of all others, including their own.

Was this a prescription of him who had seen the folly of democracy?
Or a description of it?

After all each man that claims the democratic right to lead, today, does so on the basis of his ability.
An improvement over the claims based on authority from before, but no less arbitrary.

A willingness to wield power, after all, does not guarantee neither the ability to do so, nor the foresight required of one, nor an incorruptible heart.

A democrat might argue that at the very least a Politician's ability lies in his persuasion. That is until you counter that big business has caught up with Politics, which now seems to be all about branding, and no substance. About where the quick advantage is had.

So what are the qualities that truly make a great leader?

In Muslim political theory the first is that he must not want it.
He must recognise that it is a sacred duty, not taken lightly.
He must have foresight, and lead by both example and through consultation.

And possibly the greatest is that he must be a man of heart, but an incorruptible heart.

Conviction is not nearly enough.
For whilst Tony Blair fought with conviction, a Mujahid fights with his heart evinced by his compassion. But the fight, though tempered by heart, is no less.

The affairs of state are a fight.
A fight with yourself against the slightest slip into corruption.

A fight against the favour that you might show to your family and friends, and the hypocrisy that goes with it.

For with nepotism whilst you might wash your hands, at night of it, by saying, "it was nothing, only a trifling thing", is the beginning of a corruption that you will be called to account for.
An account that you should fear no matter how small.

How much better the reply of the Messenger of GOD (saw) when the Ansar complained, after Fatah Mecca, that he had rewarded the nobles of Mecca and Taif but had forgotten them?

How much the worse the people who hope for leadership for themselves, or their sons, and think that by doing so they are performing a sacred duty towards the religion?
They neglect their hearts.
And their hearts tremble not with fear.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Damascus

The Outing of a Community

The Outing of a Community

Recently the Guardian ran a story on the suicide of a gay man.

Not an unusual occurrence given the statistics.

But of course the Guardian's take on it was where to lay the blame for which they claimed lay with the conservative attitudes of his community, family and parents. (1)

But the statistics paint a different story.

Off course the headline grabber is that LGBT young people are six times more likely to attempt suicide and six times more likely to succeed than their counterparts. (2)

Once again the propagandists would have that our schools do not go far enough in regards to eradicating homophobia in the classroom.
That is until you realise that a commensurate difference also exists within liberal Western society at large. (2)

Recent statistics show that liberal Western values have penetrated to our northernmost and remotest enclaves; throughout all urban, suburban, rural and industrial British communities. Interestingly when asked whether or not they would support a son or daughter of theirs in coming out, London because of its high immigrant and possible Muslim population fared the worst, in their books.

So it would seem that homophobic bullying is really at an all time National low, and people are generally supportive of such lifestyle choices and yet the significantly higher suicide rates, by a factor of six, of gays persist. (2)

After all Muslims really do only make up 4.8% of the population by the last census.

And I would even go so far as predicting that those rate differentials will not smooth down, no matter how much lobbying is done by the gay lobby to change the face of Britain.

This tells and interesting, but not politically correct, story that gay people are essentially unhappy.

Although countless time and money has been spent investigating the human genome to find the "gay" gene it has not been forthcoming.
And yet the illusion, in popular culture, that you can be born gay persists despite the science.

Some time last year, the up and coming socialist, Owen Jones wrote a piece essentially defending Muslims by saying that having Muslim friends he could easily see how much of their belief coloured everything that they do. I did not understand the disquiet that I felt on reading that piece until in fact I deliberated on what I say here.

What Owen was essentially saying was that you are born a Muslim, and can only very slightly affect your perceptions and views away from the dominant culture within Islam.
He was deliberately, and ever so quietly, equating being a Muslim with being a homosexual, off course not in substance.

After all modern socialism often finds it's crusading issues with the sidelined and undervalued, and during this age with the LGBT community.

But actually from a Muslim perspective neither is true. Muslims may well be born to Muslim parents, but still have to continually affirm their identity and most especially when the dominant culture is so very much opposed to them. Muslims choose to be muslims, and choose to honour the Messenger of God as the best of creation.

In a like manner homosexuals make a lifestyle choice. They are not born as such, but they use the ploy well.
In a like manner they would rather the air of respectability through marriage, even though its final moments could not mirror the unravelling of its counterpart's union. For "who would get the children?" would be a mystery best left to those future unfortunate judges.

Could a homosexual really go to court to claim divorce proceedings other than as a means of exerting their normality? Could it really mean anything once you remove the political dimension from it?

Dominant Western culture does tend to confuse love with lust. That if you have a lustful relationship then you are well loved.

And conversely also that if you love someone then it should be translated into a lustful relationship.
Monogamous relations there are paper thin.

Within Islam granted you are allowed up to four wives, but they are to be equally looked after. And lust can only exist within the limits set by God, that a man can only enter the tilth of his wife for pleasure. And the best of men is the one who is best to his wife, both loving and kind.

Whereas a man can, and is encouraged, to express his love for his fellow brothers in the religion.
For their love of one another is a sacred bond that is best and most easily expressed by the prophetic index finger touching of a forefinger; side by side and alongside.

A brotherhood of closeness.
A mutual love of friendship that will, by GOD's abundant grace, extend beyond eternity.

And not a frivolous sexual empty shell.

Shafees.
Telling it like it is.

(1)
(http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/mar/21/my-boyfriend-killed-himself-because-his-family-couldnt-accept-that-he-was-gay

(2) https://gactupdate.wordpress.com/notes/suicide/
Stonewall 2013 data: 3% of gay men compared to 0.4% of men in general for attempts to take their own lives.
For young people 16-24 years the figures are 6% as compared to 1% in general.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Stonewalled

Gaol of Conscience

What LOSS Modernity?

Guy Debord wrote: 'In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all of life presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation.'

Jack asked with that preface : "Have we become alienated from ourselves?"

-/////////-----

One would naturally assume that with the division of labour caused by modernity (specialisation), that with the increased efficiencies and associated cost savings, that people would have more free time.

But in modern urban society even with increased leisure time, we still find that we live an essentially primitive hand to mouth existence.
And this I talk from first hand experience.

That we fill, to the overflowing brim, our leisure time with things to do, achievements to pursue.

But what pushes us to this grind stone if it is not food?

Is it expectation?
Is it the sense that under achievement is failure?

That we must be seen to be successful?
"The accumulation of spectacle."

But there is another cause of a loss of humanity, no less sinister.

For when we specialise, specialise and further specialise does the human touch lack?

Necessarily not.
For in the medical fields, as in any other I am sure, it is the human touch that can set one apart from another. That sets one Doctor to be better than another Doctor.
That sets one Pharmacist over another. :)

Or is it that we miss the margin for error?

Where before an error could result in localised incidents now an error can have wholesale implication.
So we push our children into further education and away from experience in the hope to insulate them from error.

How we both laugh and identify with the apprentices when they, in hindsight, err. More so because we have no margin to err.

Our humanity is not eroded by specialisation itself, but when we cannot forgive and cannot overlook an error when it occurs. When we are not allowed that margin to do so.

And most perniciously when the greatest power in the land holds us to account for our personal beliefs.

For when the LAW encroaches on our personal lives then that is when we must worry.

When we cannot plead conscience.
When we refuse to house a gay couple within our own home, that we have given over to public convenience, because we believe it to be wrong.

When the greatest law in the land dictates which translation of the Qur'an we must read.

When the government dictates to us for what to believe, and refuses for us to form our own opinion.

That is when, worry we must.

And it encroaches now.
In this age.
At this time.

Then fight we must, with brain and brawn, against the gaoler of conscience. Our law.

That must be unmade through peaceful dissidence. Rightful argument.




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Parliament

Father and Son

Father and Son- two voices

Dad dad
Look at me
Care for me
Be there for me.

Son son
Don't bother me
I'm too busy
Looking after you

Dad dad
Look at me
Care for me
Be there for me.

Son son
Excel for me
All my missed opportunities
Are there for you.

Dad dad
Look at me
Care for me
Be there for me.

Son son
Don't disappoint me
Try harder, harder
Then you'll make me happy

Dad dad
Were you ever _ there for me?
Did you ever _ care for me?

Son son
Look at me
Care for me
Be there for me...



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Cat Stevens Former Recording Studio