Tahzeeb Ki Taareef

Every nation possesses a distinct cultural personality. While certain aspects of this personality may resemble those of other cultures, there are unique characteristics that distinguish one nation's culture from the rest. It is by these distinct traits that every national culture is recognized.

Ever since Pakistan emerged as an independent state, our intellectuals have been engaged in identifying Pakistani culture and its constituent elements. They seek to determine whether such a thing as Pakistani culture actually exists, or if we have merely mistaken our own desires for reality and are now pursuing a futile endeavor. The quest for a Pakistani culture is based on the premise that every state is a nation-state, and every nation-state possesses its own unique culture. Therefore, Pakistan, too, either has or ought to have a national culture.

However, when reflecting upon Pakistani culture, we must keep certain factors in mind. First, a state is merely a geographical or political reality. Therefore, the boundaries of a state and a nation do not necessarily align. For instance, the German nation is currently divided into two independent states. The same is true for Korea and Vietnam. Yet, when we discuss the national cultures of Germany, Korea, or Vietnam, we must consider East and West Germany, North and South Korea, and North and South Vietnam as single cultural or national entities. Second, the territorial boundaries of a state are subject to expansion and contraction. For example, Pakistan's borders today are not the same as they were on August 14, 1947. In contrast, the boundaries of nations and national cultures rarely change.

Third, some states are inhabited by a single nation—such as the Japanese in Japan, the Italians in Italy, and the French in France. These are known as nation-states. However, other states are home to multiple nations, such as the British and French in Canada; the Czechs and Slavs in Czechoslovakia; the Arabs and Kurds in Iraq; and the Russians, Uzbeks, Tajiks, and others in the Soviet Union. In countries inhabited by a single nation, state culture and national culture are simply two names for the same reality. But in multinational countries, the formation and development of a state culture depend entirely on the harmony and cohesion between the behaviors, modes of thought, and sensibilities of its various nations.

If the forces of unity and camaraderie flourish, a transnational culture gradually takes shape. Conversely, if the forces of discord and hostility grow stronger—if different nations, rather than cooperating in industry, agriculture, commerce, and the arts and sciences, attempt to dominate or exploit one another, or harbor mutual hatred; and if an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust replaces mutual confidence within the country—then the standard of these distinct cultural units cannot be elevated. Consequently, no unified state culture can ever emerge from their convergence.

**The Definition of Culture**

Culture is defined as the system of a society's purposeful creations and social values. It is the very essence of a society's way of life, its modes of thought, and its sensibilities. Therefore, language, tools and implements, methods of production, social relations, lifestyles, fine arts, literature and learning, philosophy and wisdom, beliefs and superstitions, morals and habits, customs and traditions, expressions of love and romance, and familial ties are all diverse manifestations of culture.

In the English language, the term culture is used. Culture is derived from Latin. Its literal meanings include agriculture; the rearing or breeding of bees, silkworms, oysters, and bacteria; physical or mental cultivation and development; and farming.

In Urdu, Persian, and Arabic, the word *tehzeeb* is used as the equivalent of culture. *Tehzeeb* is an Arabic word. Its literal meaning is to prune, trim, or graft a tree or plant so that it may sprout new branches and fresh buds. In Persian, *tehzeeb* means to adorn and embellish, to purify and rectify, and to reform. In Urdu, the word is generally used to denote refinement or politeness. For instance, when we say that a certain person is highly *muhazzab* (civilized) or *tehzeeb-yafta* (cultured), we mean that their manner of speaking, their social conduct, their dining etiquette, and their overall lifestyle align with our traditional standards. It implies that they observe social etiquette with great grace and possess a refined taste for poetry and the fine arts.

This particular conception of culture is, in fact, a reflection of the lifestyle of the nobility and elites of Iran and India. These individuals did not actively participate in the creative processes of culture, nor did they grasp the profound relationship between creative endeavor and culture itself. They certainly knew how to enjoy the fruits of culture, but only as passive spectators, never as active contributors. Consequently, the creative essence of culture remained hidden from them, and they began to equate culture merely with the observance of social etiquette. When they spoke of *tehzeeb-e-nafs* (refinement of the self) or *tehzeeb-e-akhlaq* (refinement of morals), they were referring strictly to the purification or reformation of one's inner self or moral character.

In Urdu literature, we first encounter the term *tehzeeb* in *Tazkira-e-Gulshan-e-Hind* (1801, p. 129):

Those who are respectful, conscious, and imbued with *tehzeeb-e-akhlaq* (moral refinement).

Around the same time, Maulvi Inayatullah translated *Akhlaq-e-Jalali* under the title *Jami-ul-Akhlaq*. This book was published by Ahmadi Press, Calcutta, in 1885. In the book's introduction, Maulvi Inayatullah writes:

He civilized His chosen creations with the ornament of *tehzeeb-ul-akhlaq* and instilled reverence in the common beings through their allegiance.

Another similar text is by Kabiruddin Haider, also known as Muhammad Mir Lakhnavi. In the preface to his translation of Dr. Samuel Johnson's *The History of Rasselas*, he writes:

Translated into the Urdu language so that men of intellect and wisdom may thoroughly attain *tehzeeb-e-akhlaq*. (Published in Agra, 1839).

These examples clearly demonstrate that until the mid-nineteenth century, our men of learning and intellect still held onto the same traditional concept of culture that was prevalent in the Persian language.

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was perhaps the first intellectual to introduce the concept of culture as it was understood in the West during the nineteenth century. He provided a comprehensive definition of culture and critically examined its elements and driving factors. Thus, while outlining the aims and objectives of his journal, *Tehzeeb-ul-Akhlaq*, Sir Syed wrote in its inaugural issue (1870):

The purpose of launching this journal is to persuade the Muslims of India to adopt the highest degree of civilization, meaning *Tehzeeb*, so that the contempt with which civilized nations view them may be dispelled, and they too may be recognized among the respected and civilized nations of the world.

'Civilization' is an English word that we have translated as *Tehzeeb*, but its meaning is incredibly vast. It entails elevating all of human beings' intentional actions, morals, dealings, social life, culture, ways of living, use of time, sciences, and all forms of arts and crafts to the highest level of excellence. It means practicing them with such grace and refinement that it brings about true happiness and physical well-being, earns dignity, prestige, and honor, and clearly distinguishes humanity from savagery.

(Quoted from *Dabistan-e-Tareekh-e-Urdu* by Hamid Hasan Qadri, Karachi 1966, page 344)

Sir Syed conflated the concepts of culture and civilization, but this was not his fault. At that time, the distinction between culture and civilization was not yet clear even in the minds of most Western intellectuals.

Sir Syed also wrote two detailed essays on civilization in *Tehzeeb-ul-Akhlaq*. The first was titled Tehzeeb and its Definition and the second Civilization, meaning Refinement and Tehzeeb. As Sir Syed Ahmad Khan himself acknowledged, these essays were influenced by Thomas Buckle, a famous British historian. Buckle had intended to write a comprehensive history of world civilization in several volumes, but he passed away after only two volumes had been published (in 1861).

Buckle attempted to write the history of human civilization in the light of scientific knowledge. Based on inductive principles, he formulated certain laws of human history—such as the law of climate—and argued that the physical environment and climate have a profound impact on human civilization. Although Buckle's theories were entirely contrary to historical facts (the physical environments of the ancient civilizations of the Indus Valley, the Nile Valley, and the Tigris and Euphrates valleys were different from Europe, yet no one can deny their greatness), the Europeans still welcomed his ideas with great enthusiasm. This was because he framed the dominance of white nations and the subjugation of Asian nations as a law of nature, thereby providing an ideological justification for Britain's imperialist interests.

Although Hegel, Marx, and other Western thinkers had discovered the laws of the evolution of human civilization long before Buckle, Sir Syed was likely unaware of their ideas. Nevertheless, it is no small achievement that Sir Syed introduced us to the modern concept of civilization. Explaining civilization, Sir Syed writes:

When a group of humans gathers and settles in one place, their needs and necessities, their food and clothing, their knowledge and ideas, the things that bring them joy and the things they despise, all tend to become uniform. Consequently, their concepts of good and evil also become uniform, and the desire to replace evil with good is shared equally among them. This collective desire for change, or the change brought about by this collective desire, is the civilization of that nation or group.

(*Maqalat-e-Sir Syed*, Volume 6, Page 3. Lahore, 1962)

Over a century ago, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan made such rational observations about humanity and human civilization that they remain true today. Reflecting on them greatly helps in understanding the true essence of civilization. For instance, Sir Syed stated that there is a close relationship between human actions and the laws of nature (Ibid., Page 35), meaning that the laws governing the movement of human society and nature are identical. Secondly, human actions and their social interactions are subject to specific laws; they are not accidental. Thirdly, human actions are not the result of their desires, but the result of preceding circumstances. Fourthly, no human society is devoid of civilization, and fifthly, man changes nature, and nature changes man, and all events arise from these mutual transformations.

A detailed review of Sir Syed's intellectual contributions falls outside the scope of this essay. However, we must point out that Sir Syed was our first thinker to explain the continuous changes occurring within the universe and human society through the laws of motion inherent in society and existence itself. He did not attribute these changes to the will or intent of any supernatural power.

**The Characteristics of Civilization**

Civilization and humanity are inseparable realities. That is, civilization cannot exist without humans, nor can a human truly be called human without civilization. Civilization is the specific individuality of the human species. It is this individuality that distinguishes humans from other animals on a species level. In other words, humans possess certain species-specific traits that are neither present nor possible in other animals, and it is because of these traits that humans are capable of cultural and civilizational creation.

For example, because of the spinal cord, a human can stand upright on two feet. This leaves the hands completely free. The structure of the joints in the shoulders, elbows, and wrists is such that a human can rotate the entire arm in any desired direction. The three joints in each finger and thumb allow them to bend with great ease, enabling humans to perform a wide variety of tasks with these fingers, such as moving heavy objects from one place to another and creating entirely new things. Thanks to these natural tools, humans have become capable of making all kinds of instruments and implements. Other animals cannot separate their tools and weapons—claws, teeth, beaks, quills, etc.—from their bodies. Humans, however, can separate all their creations from their bodies, whether those creations are physical or mental.

Another physical characteristic that distinguishes humans from other animals is having two eyes with a single focal point. This greatly assists humans in determining distance, making tools, hunting, and leaping.

Man is the only animal that possesses the capacity for speech. This is not merely an innate or God-given ability; rather, humans have developed a vast system of meaningful words using the brain, tongue, teeth, palate, throat, and breath, combined with the rhythm of sounds.

Language is humanity's most magnificent social creation. Through it, humans convey their experiences, thoughts, and feelings to others, and connect things to time and space—meaning they can converse with others about the past, present, and future, as well as the near and far. In this way, they leave behind an incredibly precious civilizational legacy for future generations.

Apart from humans, no other animal is a social creature in the truest sense of the word. Flocks of sheep, herds of deer, and gaggles of geese may appear to be social units, but in reality, they lack any genuine social connection. Even while living together, they remain separate entities. They neither forage for food collectively, nor does their survival depend on mutual cooperation. In contrast, these are the very natural characteristics of human beings.

Similarly, animals cannot assign specific meanings to objects or events; in other words, they are incapable of creating symbols. Humans, on the contrary, constantly endow objects and events with new meanings. For instance, to an animal, there is no difference between water from an ordinary spring and water from the well of Zamzam. Yet, for millions of human beings, the water of Zamzam is profoundly sacred. The same applies to Eid, Baqar Eid, Shab-e-Barat, Muharram, and other historical days—they hold special significance for humans, whereas for animals, all days are identical. Furthermore, animals cannot establish familial bonds. They have no concept of a grandfather, grandmother, uncle, aunt, brother, or sister. Even the bond between parents and offspring completely dissolves once the young grow up.

The nature of sexual relations among animals also differs from that of humans. It is true that animals mate, but they have specific seasons for mating and reproduction. Unlike humans, they are not capable of engaging in sexual relations or procreating in every season. Furthermore, the sexual behavior of animals is not governed by any social code, nor is it affected by changes in time or place. In contrast, human sexual codes and regulations are subject to constant change.

Apart from humans, no other animal possesses a belief system involving gods, goddesses, ghosts, spirits, jinn, Satan, heaven, hell, exorcisms, or amulets. Similarly, animals can neither commit suicide, nor do they possess an awareness of death.

The renowned American intellectual Benjamin Franklin once stated that man is the only tool-making animal. However, this claim is inaccurate, as apes and monkeys also fashion tools to suit their needs, although these tools are exceedingly crude and primitive. It is also incorrect to assert that only humans can produce the things they need, since certain creatures (such as honeybees) produce their own food. Yet, no animal possesses the ability to improve its tools or alter its methods of production. Humans, on the other hand, continuously refine their tools and instruments, and both their production and their relations of production are in a constant state of evolution.

These are purely species-specific characteristics of human beings, which are absent in all other animals; nor can animals develop these traits through training.

Discussing the species-specific attributes of humans, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan writes:

The organs and faculties of a human being are superior and more refined compared to those of other living creatures. This is not his only distinction; rather, the tasks he can accomplish with the aid of his intellect, and the work he can extract from his hands—which are his highly obedient executors—grant him an immense superiority. Through these two means, he can secure for himself a life of profound comfort and ease amidst all other creatures. He can, so to speak, transform his very self into an artificial entity, providing himself with far greater luxury than what his natural state of existence would otherwise afford.

(Maqalat-e-Sir Syed, Volume 12, Pages 63-64, Lahore, 1963)

Elucidating the species-level distinction between humans and animals, Karl Marx also identified the creation of an artificial world as humanity's greatest achievement. He writes:

An animal's life activity is its entire life. It cannot distinguish between itself and its life activity. In other words, its sole function is to maintain its physical existence. (Alluding to this very point, Sheikh Saadi employed the eloquent phrase *zeestan baraye khurdan* [living to eat]). It is true that a human being also works to sustain his existence, but he does not restrict his life merely to eating. Rather, work is only one component of his life activity. Secondly, human life activity is governed by will and intention; that is, it is conscious. It is this conscious life activity that distinguishes him from other animals.

According to Marx, another distinguishing characteristic of human beings is that:

Through his actions, he creates a new objective world alongside nature. Although this capacity is found in certain other animals as well—for instance, birds build nests, mice dig holes, jackals burrow dens, and bees and wasps construct hives—the difference between humans and animals is that animals produce these things solely for the immediate needs of themselves or their offspring. Their creative process is one-dimensional. In contrast, human creative activity is not confined to physical necessities. An animal merely reproduces itself; it creates itself. An animal's creation provides immediate and direct sustenance for its body and remains a part of its physical existence. Conversely, human creations exist independently of their bodies and, at times, even become their adversaries. Humans themselves become slaves to their own creations.

(Economic and Philosophical MSS 1844, Pages 75-76, London 59)

Thus, it becomes evident that civilization is a purely human creation, and humanity is its sole guarantor. However, a human being does not bring the seeds of civilization from the mother's womb, nor does he instinctively participate in the civilizational process. He must learn how to converse, use tools and instruments, and fulfill his social obligations from society itself. In other words, although the foundation of civilization rests upon the physical structure of human beings, the character of civilization is non-physical. Civilization cannot be transmitted from one generation to the next through biological means.

It takes humans longer to reach the age of consciousness than any other animal—even twice as long as the whale, the largest animal in the world. For several years after birth, a human child is so weak, helpless, and dependent that it cannot survive a single day without the care of others. This is why children must remain subordinate to their social and cultural environment for an extended period. They are compelled to learn the language spoken in their homes. They must eat whatever food their parents can provide, and wear whatever clothes are put on them by others. Consequently, the personality of every new generation is forged within the civilizational framework of the preceding generation. It is through this very process that continuity is maintained in every human civilization.

**The Constituent Elements of Civilization**

Every new and old civilization in the world is formed by four constituent elements: 1. Physical conditions. 2. Tools and implements. 3. Modes of thought and feeling. 4. Social values. There is no distinction of East and West in this, nor any restriction of cold and warm regions. Thus, these elements are present in the civilization of those living in the jungles of Indonesia and Malaya just as they are among the inhabitants of Moscow, London, Peking, or Paris. It is possible that the form of these elements varies across different civilizations, or that one element is more prominent than another, but it is impossible for any civilization to completely lack any of these four elements. There is an unbreakable bond between these elements, and they continuously influence one another.

**Physical Conditions**

Physical conditions play a major role in the formation and construction of a civilization. That is, every civilization has its own specific geography. Its rivers and mountains, forests and plains, fruits, flowers, and vegetables, wildlife, climate, and weather—in short, its external environment—profoundly impacts its behavior, means of livelihood, lifestyle, food and clothing, temperament and tastes, morals and habits, and emotions and feelings. Essentially, it affects every aspect of the lives of the people in that region. This is why the civilization of desert regions differs from that of the snow-covered plains of the North Pole, and there is a world of difference between the civilization of those living on the shores of seas or rivers and the civilization of mountain dwellers. Thus, if the civilization of the Arabs is different from ours, the primary reason is that their physical conditions are different from ours.

External conditions do not merely determine the civilization of a nation; the external environment also plays a major role in shaping or distorting the personalities of individuals. The personalities of children who live in dark, cramped rooms and play in dirty, foul-smelling streets, who do not get enough food to fill their stomachs, and who have no access to medical treatment or education, are vastly different from the personalities of children who enjoy the comforts and conveniences of life.

In the early stages of civilization, every moment of human life was dictated by the physical environment. Man neither had the power to control this environment nor had he developed the ability to change it. However, a time came when, compelled by his growing needs, man began the struggle to alter his physical environment. Thus, viewed from one perspective, the entire history of humanity is the history of the struggle to conquer nature and the physical environment. Consequently, developed nations have now altered their physical environments to such an extent that if an inhabitant from two thousand years ago were to come back to life, he would not even be able to recognize his own birthplace.

In countries where there is no trace of coal or iron, steel mills have been erected. Where not a single drop of oil is found, the deafening roar of oil-powered machines and motor vehicles drowns out all other sounds. Where there were once deserts and barren plains, fruit-bearing trees now sway and grain crops flourish. Where not a single drop of water was available, canals and springs now gush forth. Where there were desolate and vast wastelands, brightly lit roads and buildings have been constructed, and vibrant shops and markets have been established. In short, due to the ever-increasing progress of industry and technology, the importance of the physical environment is now becoming secondary.

**Tools and Implements**

In reality, the edifice of civilization rests upon tools and implements, and the progress of human civilization depends entirely on them. The nature of a civilization will reflect the nature of its tools and implements. This is why Western scholars have categorized the various evolutionary stages of civilization according to tools and implements—for example, the civilization of the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age. This means that during the era when humans used tools and implements made of stone or bone, their lifestyle, customs and traditions, mutual relationships, habits and manners, and ways of thinking and feeling—that is, their civilization—were of a specific type. However, when bronze tools and implements became prevalent, the entire superstructure of society changed. Instead of wandering aimlessly through jungles and wildernesses, people established small settlements. They raised livestock, began farming, and made pottery and metal vessels. Then, gradually, formal states and empires were established. New skills and professions came into existence. Social classes were formed. Laws were enacted, and codes of morality and religion were developed. In short, a new system of behavior, lifestyle, and modes of thought and feeling was established in society, which was entirely different from the social system of the Stone Age.

To understand the revolutionary changes that occur in every sphere of societal life due to the transformation of tools and implements, the example of a grain of wheat—which is our staple food—is sufficient. For instance, if wheat is cultivated using a plow and oxen, the rural society will take on one particular form; but if it is cultivated on massive farms using tractors and heavy machinery, the structure of society will look entirely different. Human will and desire play no part in this transformation, because this social change is the inevitable and logical consequence of the change in tools and implements.

The profession of farming with a plow and oxen indicates a specific agrarian system. In this system, people are interconnected through the production process. The primary relationship is between the landowner and the cultivator. The owner hands over his land to the cultivator under certain conditions. However, the cultivator cannot complete the various stages of agriculture all by himself. For agricultural tools (the plow, spade, trowel, hoe, sickle, etc.), he seeks the help of the village carpenter and blacksmith. The potter makes pots and utensils for him. The cobbler provides leather goods, the weaver provides clothes, and the oil-presser provides oil and oilcake; in return, the cultivator compensates them for all these services in the form of grain once the crop is ready. He can neither irrigate the fields nor harvest the crop alone. Instead, the cultivators of the village perform these agricultural tasks collectively, based on the principle of mutual aid. Women cook food, grind grain at the millstone, look after the livestock, fetch water from the well and firewood from the forest, and perform other household chores.

A specific village civilization is born from this production process. It gives rise to songs sung while fetching water, grinding grain, turning the potter's wheel, and harvesting the crops; folktales, folk dances, seasonal fairs and festivals; and domestic handicrafts that are not made to be sold in the market but for the use of the household, through which women express and satisfy their aesthetic sensibilities. Poets use these very creations and tools as symbols. For example, the lyrics of Kabir Das's *doha* (couplet) are:

*Chalti chakki dekh kar, Kabir roye*

*Do paatan ke beech mein, saabit bacha na koye*

[Watching the turning millstone, Kabir wept;

Between the two grinding stones, no one survives intact.]

In these verses, Kabir Das compares the earth and the sky to the two stones of a grinding mill. Even if someone is entirely unfamiliar with the society of Kabir’s era, they can easily deduce that the poet belonged to a time when grinding grain in a hand-mill was a common practice. Similarly, there are songs about fetching water and harvesting crops that reflect a specific way of life.

It is not just the sensory experiences and modes of expression in such an agrarian society that are distinct; its entire system of thought is fundamentally different. Viewing earthquakes, floods, storms, hail, famines, and plagues as divine wrath; believing in fate; attempting to resolve misfortunes through exorcisms, prayers, amulets, offerings, and spells; serving clerics, priests, mystics, and mendicants; and considering pilgrimages to shrines and tombs as a means of salvation—these are all defining ideological characteristics of this agrarian system.

Now, let us compare this agrarian system with one where crops are cultivated using heavy machinery rather than plows and oxen. While fields in the traditional agrarian system might span only an acre or two, farms in the modern system cover thousands of acres. The management of such a farm is entrusted to an agricultural expert. Machinery is used for plowing, sowing, harvesting, and storage. The operators and repairmen of these machines are known as mechanics. Instead of animal manure, synthetic fertilizers are applied to the soil. These fertilizers are not produced locally; rather, they are manufactured in distant factories and transported to the farm via the market. For irrigation, engine-powered tube wells replace traditional Persian wheels. A single tube well can supply the fields with as much water in an hour as twenty to twenty-five villagers could draw from a well over an entire day. Machines are installed to clean the grain and grind the flour, and the farm's produce is not meant for the owner's personal consumption but is sold in commercial markets.

The nature of work for those employed on traditional fields differs vastly from those on industrial farms. Consequently, their creative character is also different. Workers on these modern farms are not called peasants or cultivators, but laborers. Thus, the relationship between farm laborers and the owner or manager is entirely different from the bond between a traditional cultivator and his landlord. A landlord is unconcerned with whether the cultivator works in the field for a couple of hours or toils all day, whether he works alone, or if his entire family labors alongside him. Often, the landlord does not even know which crop his tenant or sharecropper is sowing.

In contrast, the working hours of farm laborers are strictly fixed. They receive regular wages, and if they are absent, their pay is deducted. If the farm is entirely modern, the very layout of the laborers' settlement is distinct. Women do not go to the well to fetch water, nor do they grind grain, spin the wheel, or engage in domestic handicrafts. Even their homes are the property of the farm, equipped with running water and electric lights. Pre-ground flour is bought from the market. Instead of pure ghee and oil, hydrogenated vegetable oil (banaspati) is used. Rather than sewing and embroidering by hand, women operate sewing machines. And when there are no hand-mills, no spinning wheels, and no communal festivities during the harvest season, how can the impulse for folk songs, folk music, and folk dances arise? When the very conditions that nurtured these arts cease to exist, how can the arts themselves survive? Consequently, in a settlement where radios play and televisions are turned on, people become mere spectators of art rather than its creators. Their participation is reduced to observing from a distance.

Similarly, if spinning wheels and handlooms are replaced by machines for spinning yarn and weaving cloth, or if traditional sugarcane presses are replaced by sugar mills, or if factories are established to manufacture plastic, aluminum, and porcelain utensils, the entire structure of society is transformed. A gradual revolution takes place in people's ways of living, their habits and manners, their customs and traditions, and their modes of thought and feeling.

Whether it is a civilization of the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, or the Iron Age, it is ultimately the product of human physical and mental labor. It comes into existence only when human mental and physical faculties are set into motion. Therefore, the rise and fall of any civilization depends on the extent to which its bearers have utilized their physical and mental energies. It depends on how much they have augmented this energy through their own energy-generating inventions (automated machines being one such example), and how much they have refined and polished it. If a society fails to satisfy its individuals' urge for self-expression or avoids nurturing their creative potential; if it insists on using outdated tools that can no longer meet its growing needs, and refuses to adopt new technologies...

...If a society turns a deaf ear to the spirit of the age and continues to tread the old, beaten path; if the avenues for new experiments, research, and exploration are blocked, then the plant of civilization freezes and withers. Its growth halts, and eventually, it dries up entirely. The history of the decline of the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome, Iran and Arabia, India and China, is fundamentally the history of the stagnation of their tools, technologies, and social relations. These great civilizations failed to keep pace with the evolving needs of their societies and ultimately perished. Darius of Persia was not merely defeated by Alexander the Great; rather, a decaying society was vanquished by a progressive one. Similarly, the Aryans triumphed over the Indus Valley Civilization because their level of energy—manifested in their superior tools and weaponry—was far greater than that of the indigenous inhabitants. The reasons behind the British subjugation of India, and the subsequent defeat of the Indians in the uprising of 1857, also lie in the West's superior technology and its more advanced social system.

**The System of Thought and Feeling**

We can define the human being as a conscious animal, for consciousness is an exclusively human trait not found in other animals. Even within humans, consciousness is not an innate racial or biological characteristic, but an acquired one. Thus, much like language, consciousness is a product of fundamental human needs. Among these, the need for mutual communication and social relationships is of paramount importance. These relationships, as we have noted earlier, are also uniquely human. Therefore, from its very inception, consciousness has always been a *social* consciousness. Its evolution, too, is inextricably linked to social evolution.

The source and repository of our consciousness is our mind, and the center of the mind's activities is the brain, wrapped in delicate membranes and protected by our skull. This part of the body is so fragile and sensitive that if the head sustains an injury, a person’s entire body can sometimes become paralyzed. The power of sight and speech fails. All past experiences and events are erased from the mind. Memory stops working completely, to the extent that even the faces and names of close relatives and friends are forgotten.

All human actions and intentions—moving one's hands and feet, seeing, speaking, eating, and drinking—in short, every physical and mental act is subordinate to the brain. If the brain ceases to function, a person is deprived of their humanity while still alive; they become a living corpse. Idealist philosophers, perhaps influenced by these very characteristics of the brain, claimed that the phenomena of the world are merely reflections of our mind, and that outside the brain, they have no real existence. But these ideas are now obsolete, because modern science has proven that not only has planet Earth existed for millions of years before humans and their brains, but humans themselves are an evolved embodiment of the Earth's matter, and their brains are also made of the Earth's material components. In such a case, how can that which precedes be a reflection of that which follows? Today, physiology has progressed so much that the structure and functioning of the brain are no longer a mysterious enigma to be solved through philosophical speculation. Now, even an ordinary doctor can explain how our brain receives impressions from the external world, as well as how the brain's cells and arteries are connected to the rest of the body.

The axis of our nervous system is the brain (and the spinal cord). The brain contains between ten billion and one hundred billion nerve cells, and each cell is connected to other cells through a thousand fibers. All information from inside and outside the body reaches the various levels of consciousness through these labyrinthine pathways. Consequently, the millions and billions of forms of our knowledge, memory, and imagination are indebted to these nerve cells. For example, the eye with which we see has a retina containing 130 million cells that receive external stimuli. This retina is connected to the brain by more than a million nerve fibers.

The brain performs its duties through these billions of nerve cells. For instance, suppose you get hurt. As soon as the striking object touches your skin, an excitation will arise in the skin cells. This impulse will race through your central nervous system (the brain and spinal cord), and you will feel the injury instantaneously. If you have prior experience with the nature of the striking object, your brain will also tell you what caused the injury. And all this information will be received in the blink of an eye, faster than a telegraph. The nature of any information reaching the brain is electrical and chemical.

First of all, electrical impulses are generated in human sensory organs—the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and skin. There are countless types of these impulses, and they are incredibly complex. Then, this electrical wave begins to travel across the membrane covering the junctions of the fibers that connect the nerve cells. This process releases a very minute chemical transmitter, which triggers an impulse in other cells. In this way, the action of one nerve cell affects another, and that one affects a third, continuing until the information reaches the brain.

Humans first became conscious of their sensory environment—that is, the environment immediately surrounding them. Then, they became aware of the limited relationships they had to establish with other individuals or objects. Along with this, they gained a slight awareness of their own self, and then they became conscious of the phenomena of the world—of nature. However, up to that point, the human connection with nature was essentially an animalistic one. It was only when human needs grew, when they created tools and implements to satisfy those needs, when the division of labor became customary, and when physical and mental labor were separated, that the foundation was laid for the misconception that consciousness is an independent, self-existent reality, separate from the surrounding environment and social conditions of life. In reality, consciousness is always the consciousness of realities outside the human mind—whether these realities are material or immaterial (such as justice, equality, democracy, etc.)—and it is bound by social conditions.

Every civilization has a specific system of thought and feeling. This system reflects the nature of the relationship established between the individuals of a society and the world around them. Therefore, the level of human consciousness will correspond exactly to the level of their conditions of existence. The nature of their interaction with minerals, plants, animals, and other humans will dictate their way of thinking and feeling, as well as their beliefs and tendencies. A human in the savage era could not have developed the consciousness of a single God, heaven and hell, or the Day of Judgment; nor could a human in the Middle Ages have discovered the theories of evolution, relativity, and atomic energy.

These transformations occur due to changes in tools, implements, and social relations. In fact, a change in the system of thought and feeling is itself proof that the creative foundation of society is no longer what it used to be. Take the civilization of the Stone Age, for example. At that time, humans fulfilled their needs merely by hunting with bows, arrows, and spears, or by foraging for the fruits and flowers of wild trees. They could make minor alterations to the form of matter (such as sharp stone points, bows, etc.) and its state (creating fire from wood). Through their daily social experiences (and with the help of the power of speech), they had discovered the properties of surrounding objects and assigned names to them. However, they were completely unaware of the causes and underlying reasons behind the movements of natural phenomena, nor did they have any consciousness of the laws of physical change. For instance, they considered all entities—rivers, mountains, the sun, the moon, the earth, the sky, animals, trees, storms, tempests, floods, earthquakes, hail, and rain—to be active, intentional personalities just like themselves. Since they constantly interacted with these things—indeed, their very survival depended on the behavior of these phenomena—they liked the things that brought them comfort and feared the things that caused them pain (later, these very things were designated as the forces of virtue and vice, good and evil).

Consequently, to conquer these forces, he resorted to magic and incantations, or he engaged in worship and ascetic practices to seek their favor. He could not even distinguish between life and death, nor did he possess any concept of death in his mind. His entire system of thought and feeling revolved around the fundamental needs of reproduction and food gathering. This is why he elevated the female sex above the male. His own observations dictated that, whether human or animal, new life emerged solely from the female womb. The Stone Age cave paintings and sculptures discovered in Spain and France fully corroborate this assertion.

As far as self-preservation is concerned, modern humanity has conquered most diseases, and both preventive and curative medicine have made immense strides. Early humans, however, were entirely ignorant of the causes of illness and knew nothing of medical treatment. It took millions of years of trial and error for them to discover the healing properties of herbs, salts, and other botanical and mineral substances. Countless lives must have been lost in this process of experimentation before the foundations of medical science were finally laid—a development that occurred scarcely five or six thousand years ago. Thus, even during the Bronze Age, the prevailing belief was that illness was caused by the wrath of a deity, a god or goddess, or a malevolent spirit. Consequently, people placed far greater faith in exorcisms, amulets, incantations, and ritual offerings than in actual medicine. Even the Holy Bible depicts Jesus Christ performing his messianic miracles by casting out evil spirits from the bodies of the sick.

Such is the rigidity of these beliefs that even today—when science has empirically proven that all mental and physical illnesses have material causes and that no supernatural force is responsible for these ailments—millions of people in our country still believe that diseases can be cured through amulets, incantations, or by making vows at the shrines of saints and mystics. This is particularly true for psychological and neurological conditions like insanity, epilepsy, and hysteria, for which our country still lacks adequate medical facilities. This stagnation of consciousness proves that in many parts of our region, social conditions and the tools of production have barely evolved since the Bronze Age. Life continues to tread its ancient, well-worn path, and the ruling classes persistently strive to keep the masses deprived of the light of scientific knowledge, ensuring they remain shackled by superstition.

The mode of thought and feeling in Bronze Age civilizations was far more advanced. During this era, the tools and implements of production had significantly improved. Both agricultural output and population had grown, leading to a more complex division of labor. While Stone Age society was nomadic and reliant on hunting, Bronze Age society was settled, urban, and agricultural. The ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, the Tigris Valley, the Indus Valley, the Ganges-Yamuna Valley, and Iran were all Bronze Age civilizations. It would take volumes to adequately describe their magnificent creative achievements. The humans of the Bronze Age cultivated the land using the plow and the ox, having learned through experience that as you sow, so shall you reap.

The plow for tilling the earth, the potter’s wheel, wheeled carts, and spinning wheels for cotton and wool were the primary tools of production during this era. Their skills included baking clay pottery in fire, smelting metals, weaving textiles, constructing buildings, establishing cities, and inscribing phonetic symbols onto clay tablets, tree bark, or animal skins—marking the invention of writing. In short, it was during the Bronze Age that humanity first gained mastery over a diverse array of material creations. It was as if, for the first time, humans had become truly human.

The scope of this essay does not permit a detailed exploration of the profound relationship between the creative activities of the Bronze Age and its prevailing systems of thought and feeling. Otherwise, we could illustrate exactly how the beliefs, intellectual trends, literature, and fine arts of that era mirrored its social conditions and way of life. For instance, when social classes emerged, private property became the norm, and economic and political power was consolidated in the hands of absolute monarchs, courtiers, and priests, these ruling classes propagated new cosmological beliefs that perfectly paralleled and reflected their own hierarchical social order.

Just as absolute monarchs ruled over the earth, a similar absolute sovereignty was projected onto the heavens. Just as the life and death of ordinary people lay in the hands of the king, and their destinies were decreed by the ruler of the time, identical authority was attributed to the omnipotent gods of the cosmos—Zeus, Ra, Marduk, Baal, Ahura Mazda, Ishwar, and others. Concepts of reward and punishment, heaven and hell, angels and divine courtiers, demons and spirits, the day of reckoning, resurrection, the divine scales, and the ultimate court of justice—in short, an entire, systematic framework of thoughts and beliefs was formulated. Upon closer inspection, this celestial hierarchy reveals itself to be an exact replica of the absolute monarchies of that era. Lacking the intellectual maturity to scientifically explain the physical world, humanity interpreted the workings of the universe through the lens of its own social structures. People mistook the reflection of their social order for the ultimate reality, and conversely, believed that their earthly reality was merely a reflection of the cosmic order.

Similarly, the poems and epics of the Bronze Age, its songs and melodies, its sculptures and vibrant paintings—indeed, all of its intellectual and sensory creations—offer a captivating and thought-provoking portrait of the people. These works vividly depict their way of life, their emotions and desires, their joys and sorrows, their likes and dislikes, their habits and customs, the intimate experiences of love and romance, and their morals and etiquette.

Every society’s system of thought and feeling is subordinate to its social consciousness, which in turn is shaped by its social conditions. For thousands of years, for example, humanity firmly believed that the earth was the center and axis of the universe, and that the sun and moon revolved around it. Another prevailing belief was that the earth was flat, spread out like a vast floor. Our eyes seem to confirm this; indeed, the very foundation of this belief was personal observation. If an intellectual dared to challenge these dogmas, arguing that the movement of the sun and moon was merely an optical illusion and that it was actually the earth that rotated, they were swiftly condemned with fatwas of heresy and atheism, and often burned alive. It was only with the invention of the telescope, the microscope, and similar scientific instruments that it was definitively proven that the entire Ptolemaic system—whose absolute truth had been justified through sacred texts—was, in reality, nothing more than conjecture and an illusion of the eye.

Then, gradually, more tools were invented, and through experience, humanity learned that rain, floods, storms, lightning, earthquakes, and droughts all have material causes and can be predicted with certainty. Similarly, it was discovered that the earth, the moon, the sun, and other natural phenomena are simply different forms of matter. Their movements are governed by material laws, and matter is never destroyed; it merely changes its form. The profound revolution these discoveries and inventions brought about in human thought and belief is as clear as day.

The same applies to the concept of creation, which forms the foundation of every religion. The doctrine of creation rests on two main points. First, all things in the universe are created entities; they did not emerge from nothingness on their own, but must have a creator. Second, from the day of creation to the present, all these entities—animals, humans, plants, and minerals—have existed exactly as they were made, and they will remain unchanged for all eternity. Although several ancient Greek, Roman, and Indian thinkers (such as Heraclitus, Lucretius, Gautama Buddha, and Charvaka) rejected these beliefs, they had no concrete evidence to support their denial beyond rational arguments. However, in the nineteenth century, when Darwin and other scientists introduced the theory of evolution, they used concrete evidence and fossils to prove that living beings were not created by a specific entity, nor have they remained unchanged since the beginning of time. Instead, they have undergone biological mutations. Once it was established that all animals, including humans, evolved through various stages to reach their current forms, it triggered massive shifts in human thought and belief.

From the preceding discussion, we can conclude that our thoughts and emotions do not simply fall from the sky, nor are they free from the constraints of time and space. Rather, like other elements of civilization, they are the product of social conditions. Furthermore, the intellectual and emotional framework of every civilization undergoes periodic changes driven by shifting social conditions. However, these social conditions do not change until a new social force emerges within the society itself to challenge and negate the status quo.

This does not mean that ideas are merely a passive or inert state of mind, or that they have no impact on our behavior or society. In reality, ideas possess immense power and vitality. Ideas mobilize human action. They determine the direction of our endeavors, instill faith, conviction, and passion within us, and help us define our philosophy of life. However, the moment we ask why a particular philosophy emerged in the tenth century rather than the second, or why a specific theory appeared in the nineteenth century instead of the fifth, we are inevitably forced to examine the human living conditions of that specific era.

We must ask: What were their basic needs? How did they fulfill them? What were their means and tools of production? What were the interpersonal relationships like within their society? When we reflect on the answers to these questions, we realize that humanity is both the author of its own history and the actor in its grand drama.

Take, for example, the ideas of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. His contributions to the intellectual and emotional reform of the Muslims of the Indo-Pak subcontinent are well known. Yet, we see that in 1848, he was busy editing the *Ain-i-Akbari*. When Mirza Ghalib wrote to him, essentially saying, My friend, what is left in these relics of the past? Move beyond them and look at the astonishing scientific inventions made by the wise men of the West, Sir Syed took offense at Ghalib's advice. However, twenty years later, this very same Sir Syed Ahmed Khan founded the Scientific Society, earning the epithets of a Naturi (Nature-worshipper), infidel, and heretic from the traditionalists.

Was this intellectual revolution within Sir Syed a mere coincidence, or were there underlying social causes and catalysts? Anyone with common sense would conclude that the shift in Sir Syed's thinking was brought about by the growing influence of Western administration, Western lifestyles, and Western education in the country. Had Western influence not become so dominant, Sir Syed would likely have remained engrossed in the study of antiquities.

We must also not forget that when a civilization is divided into classes, the nature of its ideas also becomes class-based. The class that controls the material forces of a society inevitably controls its intellectual forces as well. In other words, it is their thoughts and ideologies that hold currency in society. For instance, in an aristocratic civilization, virtues such as keeping one's word, valor, generosity, hospitality, and honor were highly prized, because practicing these ideals was essential for the survival of the aristocracy. However, with the rise of industrial civilization and the dominance of the capitalist class, these traditional concepts lost their former utility. They were replaced by the ideals of liberty, equality, and democracy, as these concepts served the interests of the capitalist class. Without popularizing these ideals, the capitalists could never have unseated the aristocracy from power.

Yet, in class-based civilizations, rebellious ideas constantly emerge to challenge established, orthodox beliefs. The ruling class ruthlessly suppresses such ideas. Those who propagate them are branded as enemies of the state, the nation, or even of God. They are silenced, their writings are burned, and, if necessary, they are put to death. The emergence of these rebellious ideas reflects the subversive demands of the subjugated classes within the society. For example, during the Umayyad Caliphate, the doctrine of predestination was dominant. This theological stance bolstered the oppressive rule of the Umayyads. In contrast, the opponents of the Umayyads championed the philosophy of free will. This was because the philosophy of free will permitted the overthrow of the ruling monarch, making it highly advantageous for the Abbasids. Consequently, the Abbasids initially offered great patronage to the Mu'tazilites (the proponents of free will). However, once their own power was consolidated, they persecuted the Mu'tazilites just as ruthlessly as their Umayyad predecessors had done.

Social values refer to the prevailing standards of interpersonal relations, behavior, morals, habits, lifestyles, customs, aesthetics, and artistic expression within a society. These values are not drafted in any legislative assembly, nor are they enforced by law. Rather, they are backed by centuries of historical tradition. They are born from a society's collective struggles and endeavors, its experiences and observations, and its aesthetic sensibilities. It is from the synthesis of all these elements that social values gradually take shape.

Members of a society adhere to these values to the best of their ability. In ancient times, these values were enforced with great rigidity, and those who deviated from them were outright expelled from the tribe. For instance, the foundation of the Arab tribal system rested on *Asabiyyah*—loyalty to the tribe. This loyalty was so unconditional that if the tribe ordered a man to divorce his wife, he dared not disobey. Professor Montgomery Watt describes this concept as tribal humanism. If a man failed to avenge the blood of his father or brother, his fellow tribesmen would view him with profound contempt, making his life utterly miserable.

A famous anecdote about the Arab poet Imru' al-Qais illustrates this perfectly. When he set out to avenge his father's murder, he stopped along the way at the temple of Dhu al-Khalasa to seek divine guidance. Following the custom, he drew lots with arrows three times, but each time the oracle advised him to abandon his quest for revenge. Infuriated by the deity, Imru' al-Qais hurled the broken arrows at the idol's face and cried out, Curse you! If it were your father who had been murdered, you would never have forbidden me. Similarly, if a man hesitated to grant asylum to a traveler—even if the traveler were a murderer or a bandit—people would consider him a coward. In the tribal system, cowardice was regarded as the most shameful of moral failings.

A society guards its social values because its very survival depends largely on their preservation. If these values were neglected, the social fabric would unravel, and the society would lose its distinct identity. For example, in pre-Islamic Arabia, bloodshed was strictly forbidden during the month of Dhu al-Hijjah. The reason was practical: a massive trade fair was held in Mecca during the Hajj pilgrimage. Merchant caravans from distant lands would arrive to participate, and bustling trade would continue for weeks. The livelihood of the Meccans depended entirely on this fair and the influx of pilgrims. (This remains true even today.) Had tribal warfare been allowed to continue during the Hajj season, the entire Arab economic system would have collapsed.

Similarly, in our own country, the social values of certain nomadic Baloch tribes are founded on the principle of *Shirkat* (communal sharing). This means that every individual has an equal right to the assets of the tribe's members. For instance, if a family runs out of salt or flour, they can simply take these items from another tent. They are neither required to seek the owner's permission nor pay for what they take.

Certain circles believe that social values descend from the heavens through a religious leader, a social reformer, or a ruler. In reality, however, social values are not imposed from above. If we trace the origins of values attributed to specific individuals, we find that they were already prevalent in society long before. The true greatness of a religious leader or a social reformer lies in their ability to reject obsolete and harmful practices from among the prevailing customs, while organizing the beneficial ones into a coherent code. Ultimately, a society shapes its own social values based on its needs. Yet, over time, we lose sight of this reality; we detach these values from human interactions and social necessities, elevating them to an objective, independent status.

For example, during the era of *Jahiliyyah* (the pre-Islamic Age of Ignorance), the Arabs considered *Muruwwah* to be the intrinsic essence of a human being. The literal meaning of *Muruwwah* is manliness or chivalry. This trait was expressed through bravery, generosity, and the honoring of pledges. Similarly, eloquence, archery, and horsemanship were ranked among the highest virtues. However, the Arabs did not establish this standard of the ideal man merely for amusement, nor was it divinely revealed to them. Rather, these traits were a matter of life and death. In a land where tribes were locked in perpetual warfare, life would have been impossible without *Muruwwah*.

Certain social values are shared across almost all civilizations of a given era. For instance, before the institution of slavery took root, prisoners of war were routinely executed. Society could neither afford to feed and clothe them nor risk setting them free. At the time, this shedding of human blood was not considered a moral crime; it was simply the norm. However, once conquerors realized that captives could be subjected to grueling labor in exchange for mere sustenance, thereby increasing economic production, the practice of executing them was abandoned in favor of enslavement. Slaves and concubines became the personal property of their masters, and their trade became a standard practice. Even great moral philosophers like Plato and Aristotle found no fault with the institution of slavery.

Yet, certain non-productive values governing social relations are also universally shared. Examples include truthfulness, hospitality, compassion, justice, sympathy for the oppressed, appreciation for artists, reverence for learned elders, a fondness for poetry and music, celebrating at weddings, and mourning at times of grief or death. These values are prevalent in virtually all civilizations, though the customs and manners of expressing them may vary.

Conversely, some values are unique to a specific society, and it is not necessary for other societies to adopt them. For example, certain cultures relish the meat of lizards, frogs, snakes, pigs, and even dogs, whereas others would loathe even touching these animals. Similarly, public nudity is considered highly taboo in our society, yet some tribes live completely naked; their nakedness causes them no embarrassment, nor does it provoke sexual arousal. In some civilizations, polygamy is strictly forbidden, while in others it is entirely acceptable. Some societies permit divorce, while others do not. Consider the standard of beauty itself, which varies drastically among Aryans, Dravidians, Abyssinians, and Mongols.

In one civilization, gleaming ebony skin, a flat nose, and full, prominent lips are the hallmarks of beauty, while in another, a fair complexion, a straight nose, thin lips, and narcissus-like eyes are idealized. Thus, when a Christian painter from Abyssinia paints a portrait of Jesus and Mary, their facial features and skin tone reflect the artist's own cultural standards of beauty. Therefore, we cannot judge the beauty of an Abyssinian or a Japanese person by our own aesthetic standards; we must evaluate them using the criteria prevalent in their respective cultures. The same principle applies to other social values. We have no right to judge the social values of others using the yardstick of our own.

If there is any universal standard by which to judge social values, it is whether or not these values foster the internal capabilities of individuals—that is, their mental and physical potential. Do they enhance human creativity and energy? If the answer is yes, then we have no right to object to them simply because they differ from our own. However, if the answer is no, we are entirely justified in our objections, regardless of whether those values belong to us or to someone else.

Social values are neither static nor immutable; rather, they undergo changes from time to time. For instance, in the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome, full-figured women were considered beautiful because, in an era of food scarcity, plumpness had become a symbol of prosperity. This standard of beauty persisted through the Middle Ages. Consequently, in the paintings of Raphael, Titian, and Michelangelo, the women's faces, breasts, abdomens, hips, thighs, and limbs all exhibit a distinct heaviness. Today, however, obesity is frowned upon because medical science has proven it to be highly detrimental to health. As a result, idle women from affluent households go to great lengths to stay slim, whereas working-class women are naturally protected from this affliction. Because of their physical labor, very little fat accumulates on their bodies.

Changes in the social environment and societal conditions inevitably impact these values. For example, there was a time when the Arab people considered *muruwwah* (chivalry and generosity) to be the very essence of humanity. Today, however, in Baghdad, Jeddah, Damascus, Cairo, and Beirut—the historic centers of Arab civilization—you will not find a single trace of this ethos. Instead, the same ruthless, transactional culture of profit and loss that characterizes other capitalist nations has now permeated Arab society. Although social values in every era reflect the nature and demands of their society, some values are *tawallai* (affectionate or matriarchal) while others are *maulai* or *aqaai* (authoritative or patriarchal).

Scholars of psychology and sociology attribute *tawallai* values to the matriarchal system, a structure in which a woman's status was higher than a man's. Tribes were named after women (such as Bani Kulthum), and lineage was traced through the mother (as seen in names like Mundhir ibn Ma' al-Sama, 'Amr ibn Hind, and 'Amr ibn Kulthum, the poet of the *Mu'allaqat*). Furthermore, women were the sole owners of property. Because love is inherent to a woman's nature, she loves all her children equally, regardless of whether they are good or bad. Therefore, it is said that human relationships dominated by elements of love and harmony are manifestations of a society's *tawallai* values. Examples include affection for children, caring for the sick, sympathy for the oppressed, providing for the needy, hospitality toward travelers, and refraining from causing harm.

In contrast, *maulai* values are attributed to the patriarchal system. This system emerged after the matriarchal era, alongside the division of labor and the advent of private property. In these values, the element of authority and dominance prevails over love. Examples include obedience to the ruler, respect for elders, the fulfillment of promises, the prohibition of murder, theft, robbery, illegal occupation, and social discord, as well as the avoidance of sexual deviance. Every society attempts to maintain harmony and balance between its *tawallai* and *maulai* values, as both types combine to create social cohesion. However, the more rigid and pervasive a society's system of private property is, the stronger and more intimidating the grip of *maulai* values will be upon its individuals.

The driving forces behind *maulai* values are predominantly property-based. Their primary objective is to protect the system of private property and its various institutions (the tribe, the family, the state, the government, and the church). Otherwise, the hostile takeover of someone's property does not alter the inherent nature of that property. Land remains land, whether it is occupied by me or by my enemy. Stolen wealth remains wealth, whether it sits in my possession or with its rightful owner. Yet, society does not permit such actions because they strike at the very sanctity of property relations.

Often, a single society will maintain differing standards for its social values. In a patriarchal system, for instance, the moral yardstick for women is entirely separate from that of men. Consequently, in our society, chastity and purity are considered exclusively a woman's ornament; if a woman lacks this virtue, she is viewed with profound contempt. A man, however, is never held to such strict accountability. This is despite the fact that both men and women are equal participants in sexual relations, and justice dictates that their moral responsibility should be equal. Yet, a man is permitted to sleep with a slave girl, while a woman cannot do the same with her male slave. A man can visit a brothel, or satisfy his lust in clubs, hotels, and other dens of debauchery, but a woman is strictly forbidden from such indulgences. And if a woman is even suspected of such behavior, the first stone will inevitably be cast by the very man whose own sexual transgressions are an open secret.

Similarly, in a class-based society, the standards of social values differ vastly between the common people and the upper classes. In a feudal system, for example, a good *hari* (peasant) is one who bows in submission to the *wadera* (feudal lord). He must stand before him with folded hands and consider absolute obedience to be his fundamental duty. He must plow and sow the land with grueling labor and dedication, harvest the crop with utmost honesty, and hand it all over to the landlord. He must never utter a single word of complaint, remaining content with whatever meager share he is given. Even when asking for his rightful due, he must beg for it as a beggar pleads for alms. Conversely, a bad—or rather, a wicked—*hari* is one who rejects the god-like authority of the *wadera*, who believes that the land and its produce are the rightful property of the peasants, who organizes his fellow workers, and who dares to challenge the power of the feudal lords.

On the other hand, a good *wadera* is one who cares for no one. He must be bold and domineering. When he walks down a path, the very earth should tremble in awe, and terrified children should hide in their mothers' laps. He must be a man of his word and unyielding in his resolve. He should never be stingy or calculating; rather, he must spend wealth like water, even if maintaining such grandeur drowns him in debt. He is expected to ruthlessly exploit his tenants, to the point where even the honor of their daughters and daughters-in-law is not safe from him. Yet, if another *wadera* so much as casts an evil eye upon his subjects, he must be ready to gouge out the rival's eyes. He must cultivate strong ties with those in power, lavishly arranging for their leisure and entertainment, ensuring that whenever he or his henchmen are implicated in murder, robbery, kidnapping, or cattle rustling, they remain completely untouchable.

These values of the feudal system are now dying out, but the nature of social values under capitalism is not much different. For example, if one strikes up a conversation with a mill owner or the head of a commercial enterprise about the mentality of ordinary employees, it becomes evident within a few words that, to him, a good employee is one who arrives at work early and continues to toil like a machine even after hours. He should be honest and hardworking. He should obey the administration's orders cheerfully. He should refrain from thinking and asking questions. He should not utter a single word about a wage or salary increase. He should shun union activities; in fact, he should keep the administration informed about the union's secret activities. He should neither take an interest in the country's political issues nor participate in rallies, processions, and strikes. Mill owners, corporate heads, and government officials consider such a worker or employee to be the ideal human being of the industrial age.

However, the criteria for the qualities of a good officer are different. His personality must possess aggression and push so that he can shove and crush others to move ahead in the competitive race. He must know the art of getting things done through bribery, lies, flattery, connections, manipulation, and other fair or foul means. He should consider workers and employees not as human beings but as objects. He should be hard-hearted and insensitive. He should even use human emotions like love, friendship, and sympathy to serve his own ends. He should have no personal problems of his own, nor any private life apart from the company or office. Instead, his days and nights should be spent on the progress of his institution, even if his family life is ruined in this rat race.

This disparity in the standards of moral values is a characteristic of every class-based society. Consequently, the scales used to weigh the personalities of the city's elites and officials versus those of the common people are different everywhere. Government departments, police stations and courts, factories, mills, banks, commercial enterprises, shops, and offices—even places of worship and educational institutions—none are free from these discriminatory practices. It was on this basis that Plato said that every city contains two cities: one of the rich and the other of the poor, and the morals and habits of both are different from one another.

**Footnotes**

(1) I am grateful to Mr. Shan-ul-Haq Haqqee, Secretary of the Urdu Board, for this information.

(2) The Maulvis now shy away from the debate over whether the earth is stationary or in motion, round or spread out like a carpet, but in the 19th century, these questions were given great importance. Thus, in 1848, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan wrote an essay titled *Qaul-e-Mateen Dar Ibtal-e-Harkat-e-Zameen* (A Firm Word on the Refutation of the Earth's Movement).

(3) When Darwin's book *Origin of Species* was published in 1859, it caused an uproar in Britain and America. Articles and pamphlets were written in opposition to and in support of Darwin. Sermons were delivered in churches. Debates were held. Speeches were made, and there were even protests demanding the book be banned. But ultimately, everyone had to accept Darwin's premise. Consequently, today the theory of evolution is included in the curriculum of every civilized country in the world. In our country, no one had the capability to respond to Darwin on an academic level. However, some of our poets and writers, with Akbar Allahabadi at the forefront, mocked Darwin and hurled sarcastic remarks at the theory of evolution, deluding themselves into thinking they had silenced him.

Ewery nation possesses a distinct cultural personality While certain aspects of this personality may resemble those of other cultures, there are unique characteristics that distinguish one nation's culture from the rest It is by these distinct traits that ewery national culture is recognized

Ewer since Pakistan emerged as an independent state, our intellectuals hawe been engaged in identifying Pakistani culture and its constituent elements They seek to determine whether such a thing as Pakistani culture actually exists, or if we hawe merely mistaken our own desires for reality and are now pursuing a futile endeawor The quest for a Pakistani culture is based on the premise that ewery state is a nation-state, and ewery nation-state possesses its own unique culture Therefore, Pakistan, too, either has or ought to hawe a national culture

Howewer, when reflecting upon Pakistani culture, we must keep certain factors in mind First, a state is merely a geographical or political reality Therefore, the boundaries of a state and a nation do not necessarily align For instance, the gherman nation is currently diwided into two independent states The same is true for Korea and Vietnam Yet, when we discuss the national cultures of ghermany, Korea, or Vietnam, we must consider East and West ghermany, North and South Korea, and North and South Vietnam as single cultural or national entities Second, the territorial boundaries of a state are subject to expansion and contraction For example, Pakistan's borders today are not the same as they were on August 14, 1947 In contrast, the boundaries of nations and national cultures rarely change

Third, some states are inhabited by a single nation—such as the Japanese in Japan, the Italians in Italy, and the French in France These are known as nation-states Howewer, other states are home to multiple nations, such as the British and French in Canada; the Czechs and Slaws in Czechoslowakia; the Arabs and Kurds in Iraq; and the Russians, Uzbeks, Tajiks, and others in the Sowiet Union In countries inhabited by a single nation, state culture and national culture are simply two names for the same reality But in multinational countries, the formation and dewelopment of a state culture depend entirely on the harmony and cohesion between the behawiors, modes of thought, and sensibilities of its warious nations

If the forces of unity and camaraderie flourish, a transnational culture gradually takes shape Conwersely, if the forces of discord and hostility grow stronger—if different nations, rather than cooperating in industry, agriculture, commerce, and the arts and sciences, attempt to dominate or exploit one another, or harbor mutual hatred; and if an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust replaces mutual confidence within the country—then the standard of these distinct cultural units cannot be elewated Consequently, no unified state culture can ewer emerge from their conwergence

**The Definition of Culture**

Culture is defined as the system of a society's purposeful creations and social walues It is the wery essence of a society's way of life, its modes of thought, and its sensibilities Therefore, language, tools and implements, methods of production, social relations, lifestyles, fine arts, literature and learning, philosophy and wisdom, beliefs and superstitions, morals and habits, customs and traditions, expressions of lowe and romance, and familial ties are all diwerse manifestations of culture

In the English language, the term culture is used Culture is deriwed from Latin Its literal meanings include agriculture; the rearing or breeding of bees, silkworms, oysters, and bacteria; physical or meintal cultiwation and dewelopment; and farming

In Urdu, Persian, and Arabic, the word *tehzeeb* is used as the equiwalent of culture *Tehzeeb* is an Arabic word Its literal meaning is to prune, trim, or graft a tree or plant so that it may sprout new branches and fresh buds In Persian, *tehzeeb* means to adorn and embellish, to purify and rectify, and to reform In Urdu, the word is generally used to denote refinement or politeness For instance, when we say that a certain person is highly *muhazzab* (ciwilized) or *tehzeeb-yafta* (cultured), we mean that their manner of speaking, their social conduct, their dining etiquette, and their owerall lifestyle align with our traditional standards It implies that they obserwe social etiquette with great grace and possess a refined taste for poetry and the fine arts

This particular conception of culture is, in fact, a reflection of the lifestyle of the nobility and elites of Iran and India These indiwiduals did not actiwely participate in the creatiwe processes of culture, nor did they grasp the profound relationship between creatiwe endeawor and culture itself They certainly knew how to enjoy the fruits of culture, but only as passiwe spectators, newer as actiwe contributors Consequently, the creatiwe essence of culture remained hidden from them, and they began to equate culture merely with the obserwance of social etiquette When they spoke of *tehzeeb-e-nafs* (refinement of the self) or *tehzeeb-e-akhlaq* (refinement of morals), they were referring strictly to the purification or reformation of one's inner self or moral character

In Urdu literature, we first encounter the term *tehzeeb* in *Tazkira-e-ghulshan-e-Hind* (1801, p 129):

Those who are respectful, conscious, and imbued with *tehzeeb-e-akhlaq* (moral refinement)

Around the same time, Maulwi Inayatullah translated *Akhlaq-e-Jalali* under the title *Jami-ul-Akhlaq* This book was published by Ahmadi Press, Calcutta, in 1885 In the book's introduction, Maulwi Inayatullah writes:

He ciwilized His chosen creations with the ornament of *tehzeeb-ul-akhlaq* and instilled rewerence in the common beings through their allegiance

Another similar text is by Kabiruddin Haider, also known as Muhammad Mir Lakhnawi In the preface to his translation of Dr Samuel Johnson's *The History of Rasselas*, he writes:

Translated into the Urdu language so that mein of intellect and wisdom may thoroughly attain *tehzeeb-e-akhlaq* (Published in Agra, 1839)

These examples clearly demonstrate that until the mid-nineteenth century, our mein of learning and intellect still held onto the same traditional concept of culture that was prewalent in the Persian language

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was perhaps the first intellectual to introduce the concept of culture as it was understood in the West during the nineteenth century He prowided a comprehensiwe definition of culture and critically examined its elements and driwing factors Thus, while outlining the aims and objectiwes of his journal, *Tehzeeb-ul-Akhlaq*, Sir Syed wrote in its inaugural issue (1870):

The purpose of launching this journal is to persuade the Muslims of India to adopt the highest degree of ciwilization, meaning *Tehzeeb*, so that the contempt with which ciwilized nations wiew them may be dispelled, and they too may be recognized among the respected and ciwilized nations of the world

'Ciwilization' is an English word that we hawe translated as *Tehzeeb*, but its meaning is incredibly wast It entails elewating all of human beings' intentional actions, morals, dealings, social life, culture, ways of liwing, use of time, sciences, and all forms of arts and crafts to the highest lewel of excellence It means practicing them with such grace and refinement that it brings about true happiness and physical well-being, earns dignity, prestige, and honor, and clearly distinguishes humanity from sawagery

(Quoted from *Dabistan-e-Tareekh-e-Urdu* by Hamid Hasan Qadri, Karachi 1966, page 344)

Sir Syed conflated the concepts of culture and ciwilization, but this was not his fault At that time, the distinction between culture and ciwilization was not yet clear ewen in the minds of most Western intellectuals

Sir Syed also wrote two detailed essays on ciwilization in *Tehzeeb-ul-Akhlaq* The first was titled Tehzeeb and its Definition and the second Ciwilization, meaning Refinement and Tehzeeb As Sir Syed Ahmad Khan himself acknowledged, these essays were influenced by Thomas Buckle, a famous British historian Buckle had intended to write a comprehensiwe history of world ciwilization in seweral wolumes, but he passed away after only two wolumes had been published (in 1861)

Buckle attempted to write the history of human ciwilization in the light of scientific knowledge Based on inductiwe principles, he formulated certain laws of human history—such as the law of climate—and argued that the physical enwironment and climate hawe a profound impact on human ciwilization Although Buckle's theories were entirely contrary to historical facts (the physical enwironments of the ancient ciwilizations of the Indus Valley, the Nile Valley, and the Tigris and Euphrates walleys were different from Europe, yet no one can deny their greatness), the Europeans still welcomed his ideas with great enthusiasm This was because he framed the dominance of white nations and the subjugation of Asian nations as a law of nature, thereby prowiding an ideological justification for Britain's imperialist interests

Although Hegel, Marx, and other Western thinkers had discowered the laws of the ewolution of human ciwilization long before Buckle, Sir Syed was likely unaware of their ideas Newertheless, it is no small achiewement that Sir Syed introduced us to the modern concept of ciwilization Explaining ciwilization, Sir Syed writes:

When a group of humans gathers and settles in one place, their needs and necessities, their food and clothing, their knowledge and ideas, the things that bring them joy and the things they despise, all tend to become uniform Consequently, their concepts of good and ewil also become uniform, and the desire to replace ewil with good is shared equally among them This collectiwe desire for change, or the change brought about by this collectiwe desire, is the ciwilization of that nation or group

(*Maqalat-e-Sir Syed*, Volume 6, Page 3 Lahore, 1962)

Ower a century ago, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan made such rational obserwations about humanity and human ciwilization that they remain true today Reflecting on them greatly helps in understanding the true essence of ciwilization For instance, Sir Syed stated that there is a close relationship between human actions and the laws of nature (Ibid, Page 35), meaning that the laws gowerning the mowement of human society and nature are identical Secondly, human actions and their social interactions are subject to specific laws; they are not accidental Thirdly, human actions are not the result of their desires, but the result of preceding circumstances Fourthly, no human society is dewoid of ciwilization, and fifthly, man changes nature, and nature changes man, and all ewents arise from these mutual transformations

A detailed rewiew of Sir Syed's intellectual contributions falls outside the scope of this essay Howewer, we must point out that Sir Syed was our first thinker to explain the continuous changes occurring within the uniwerse and human society through the laws of motion inherent in society and existence itself He did not attribute these changes to the will or intent of any supernatural power

**The Characteristics of Ciwilization**

Ciwilization and humanity are inseparable realities That is, ciwilization cannot exist without humans, nor can a human truly be called human without ciwilization Ciwilization is the specific indiwiduality of the human species It is this indiwiduality that distinguishes humans from other animals on a species lewel In other words, humans possess certain species-specific traits that are neither present nor possible in other animals, and it is because of these traits that humans are capable of cultural and ciwilizational creation

For example, because of the spinal cord, a human can stand upright on two feet This leawes the hands completely free The structure of the joints in the shoulders, elbows, and wrists is such that a human can rotate the entire arm in any desired direction The three joints in each finger and thumb allow them to bend with great ease, enabling humans to perform a wide wariety of tasks with these fingers, such as mowing heawy objects from one place to another and creating entirely new things Thanks to these natural tools, humans hawe become capable of making all kinds of instruments and implements Other animals cannot separate their tools and weapons—claws, teeth, beaks, quills, etc—from their bodies Humans, howewer, can separate all their creations from their bodies, whether those creations are physical or meintal

Another physical characteristic that distinguishes humans from other animals is hawing two eyes with a single focal point This greatly assists humans in determining distance, making tools, hunting, and leaping

Man is the only animal that possesses the capacity for speech This is not merely an innate or ghod-giwen ability; rather, humans hawe deweloped a wast system of meaningful words using the brain, tongue, teeth, palate, throat, and breath, combined with the rhythm of sounds

Language is humanity's most magnificent social creation Through it, humans conwey their experiences, thoughts, and feelings to others, and connect things to time and space—meaning they can conwerse with others about the past, present, and future, as well as the near and far In this way, they leawe behind an incredibly precious ciwilizational legacy for future generations

Apart from humans, no other animal is a social creature in the truest sense of the word Flocks of sheep, herds of deer, and gaggles of geese may appear to be social units, but in reality, they lack any genuine social connection Ewen while liwing together, they remain separate entities They neither forage for food collectiwely, nor does their surwiwal depend on mutual cooperation In contrast, these are the wery natural characteristics of human beings

Similarly, animals cannot assign specific meanings to objects or ewents; in other words, they are incapable of creating symbols Humans, on the contrary, constantly endow objects and ewents with new meanings For instance, to an animal, there is no difference between water from an ordinary spring and water from the well of Zamzam Yet, for millions of human beings, the water of Zamzam is profoundly sacred The same applies to Eid, Baqar Eid, Shab-e-Barat, Muharram, and other historical days—they hold special significance for humans, whereas for animals, all days are identical Furthermore, animals cannot establish familial bonds They hawe no concept of a grandfather, grandmother, uncle, aunt, brother, or sister Ewen the bond between parents and offspring completely dissolwes once the young grow up

The nature of sexual relations among animals also differs from that of humans It is true that animals mate, but they hawe specific seasons for mating and reproduction Unlike humans, they are not capable of engaging in sexual relations or procreating in ewery season Furthermore, the sexual behawior of animals is not gowerned by any social code, nor is it affected by changes in time or place In contrast, human sexual codes and regulations are subject to constant change

Apart from humans, no other animal possesses a belief system inwolwing gods, goddesses, ghosts, spirits, jinn, Satan, heawen, hell, exorcisms, or amulets Similarly, animals can neither commit suicide, nor do they possess an awareness of death

The renowned American intellectual Benjamin Franklin once stated that man is the only tool-making animal Howewer, this claim is inaccurate, as apes and monkeys also fashion tools to suit their needs, although these tools are exceedingly crude and primitiwe It is also incorrect to assert that only humans can produce the things they need, since certain creatures (such as honeybees) produce their own food Yet, no animal possesses the ability to improwe its tools or alter its methods of production Humans, on the other hand, continuously refine their tools and instruments, and both their production and their relations of production are in a constant state of ewolution

These are purely species-specific characteristics of human beings, which are absent in all other animals; nor can animals dewelop these traits through training

Discussing the species-specific attributes of humans, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan writes:

The organs and faculties of a human being are superior and more refined compared to those of other liwing creatures This is not his only distinction; rather, the tasks he can accomplish with the aid of his intellect, and the work he can extract from his hands—which are his highly obedient executors—grant him an immense superiority Through these two means, he can secure for himself a life of profound comfort and ease amidst all other creatures He can, so to speak, transform his wery self into an artificial entity, prowiding himself with far greater luxury than what his natural state of existence would otherwise afford

(Maqalat-e-Sir Syed, Volume 12, Pages 63-64, Lahore, 1963)

Elucidating the species-lewel distinction between humans and animals, Karl Marx also identified the creation of an artificial world as humanity's greatest achiewement He writes:

An animal's life actiwity is its entire life It cannot distinguish between itself and its life actiwity In other words, its sole function is to maintain its physical existence (Alluding to this wery point, Sheikh Sadi employed the eloquent phrase *zeestan baraye khurdan* [liwing to eat]) It is true that a human being also works to sustain his existence, but he does not restrict his life merely to eating Rather, work is only one component of his life actiwity Secondly, human life actiwity is gowerned by will and intention; that is, it is conscious It is this conscious life actiwity that distinguishes him from other animals

According to Marx, another distinguishing characteristic of human beings is that:

Through his actions, he creates a new objectiwe world alongside nature Although this capacity is found in certain other animals as well—for instance, birds build nests, mice dig holes, jackals burrow dens, and bees and wasps construct hiwes—the difference between humans and animals is that animals produce these things solely for the immediate needs of themselwes or their offspring Their creatiwe process is one-dimensional In contrast, human creatiwe actiwity is not confined to physical necessities An animal merely reproduces itself; it creates itself An animal's creation prowides immediate and direct sustenance for its body and remains a part of its physical existence Conwersely, human creations exist independently of their bodies and, at times, ewen become their adwersaries Humans themselwes become slawes to their own creations

(Economic and Philosophical MSS 1844, Pages 75-76, London 59)

Thus, it becomes ewident that ciwilization is a purely human creation, and humanity is its sole guarantor Howewer, a human being does not bring the seeds of ciwilization from the mother's womb, nor does he instinctiwely participate in the ciwilizational process He must learn how to conwerse, use tools and instruments, and fulfill his social obligations from society itself In other words, although the foundation of ciwilization rests upon the physical structure of human beings, the character of ciwilization is non-physical Ciwilization cannot be transmitted from one generation to the next through biological means

It takes humans longer to reach the age of consciousness than any other animal—ewen twice as long as the whale, the largest animal in the world For seweral years after birth, a human child is so weak, helpless, and dependent that it cannot surwiwe a single day without the care of others This is why children must remain subordinate to their social and cultural enwironment for an extended period They are compelled to learn the language spoken in their homes They must eat whatewer food their parents can prowide, and wear whatewer clothes are put on them by others Consequently, the personality of ewery new generation is forged within the ciwilizational framework of the preceding generation It is through this wery process that continuity is maintained in ewery human ciwilization

**The Constituent Elements of Ciwilization**

Ewery new and old ciwilization in the world is formed by four constituent elements: 1 Physical conditions 2 Tools and implements 3 Modes of thought and feeling 4 Social walues There is no distinction of East and West in this, nor any restriction of cold and warm regions Thus, these elements are present in the ciwilization of those liwing in the jungles of Indonesia and Malaya just as they are among the inhabitants of Moscow, London, Peking, or Paris It is possible that the form of these elements waries across different ciwilizations, or that one element is more prominent than another, but it is impossible for any ciwilization to completely lack any of these four elements There is an unbreakable bond between these elements, and they continuously influence one another

**Physical Conditions**

Physical conditions play a major role in the formation and construction of a ciwilization That is, ewery ciwilization has its own specific geography Its riwers and mountains, forests and plains, fruits, flowers, and wegetables, wildlife, climate, and weather—in short, its external enwironment—profoundly impacts its behawior, means of liwelihood, lifestyle, food and clothing, temperament and tastes, morals and habits, and emotions and feelings Essentially, it affects ewery aspect of the liwes of the people in that region This is why the ciwilization of desert regions differs from that of the snow-cowered plains of the North Pole, and there is a world of difference between the ciwilization of those liwing on the shores of seas or riwers and the ciwilization of mountain dwellers Thus, if the ciwilization of the Arabs is different from ours, the primary reason is that their physical conditions are different from ours

External conditions do not merely determine the ciwilization of a nation; the external enwironment also plays a major role in shaping or distorting the personalities of indiwiduals The personalities of children who liwe in dark, cramped rooms and play in dirty, foul-smelling streets, who do not get enough food to fill their stomachs, and who hawe no access to medical treatment or education, are wastly different from the personalities of children who enjoy the comforts and conweniences of life

In the early stages of ciwilization, ewery moment of human life was dictated by the physical enwironment Man neither had the power to control this enwironment nor had he deweloped the ability to change it Howewer, a time came when, compelled by his growing needs, man began the struggle to alter his physical enwironment Thus, wiewed from one perspectiwe, the entire history of humanity is the history of the struggle to conquer nature and the physical enwironment Consequently, deweloped nations hawe now altered their physical enwironments to such an extent that if an inhabitant from two thousand years ago were to come back to life, he would not ewen be able to recognize his own birthplace

In countries where there is no trace of coal or iron, steel mills hawe been erected Where not a single drop of oil is found, the deafening roar of oil-powered machines and motor wehicles drowns out all other sounds Where there were once deserts and barren plains, fruit-bearing trees now sway and grain crops flourish Where not a single drop of water was awailable, canals and springs now gush forth Where there were desolate and wast wastelands, brightly lit roads and buildings hawe been constructed, and wibrant shops and markets hawe been established In short, due to the ewer-increasing progress of industry and technology, the importance of the physical enwironment is now becoming secondary

**Tools and Implements**

In reality, the edifice of ciwilization rests upon tools and implements, and the progress of human ciwilization depends entirely on them The nature of a ciwilization will reflect the nature of its tools and implements This is why Western scholars hawe categorized the warious ewolutionary stages of ciwilization according to tools and implements—for example, the ciwilization of the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age This means that during the era when humans used tools and implements made of stone or bone, their lifestyle, customs and traditions, mutual relationships, habits and manners, and ways of thinking and feeling—that is, their ciwilization—were of a specific type Howewer, when bronze tools and implements became prewalent, the entire superstructure of society changed Instead of wandering aimlessly through jungles and wildernesses, people established small settlements They raised liwestock, began farming, and made pottery and metal wessels Then, gradually, formal states and empires were established New skills and professions came into existence Social classes were formed Laws were enacted, and codes of morality and religion were deweloped In short, a new system of behawior, lifestyle, and modes of thought and feeling was established in society, which was entirely different from the social system of the Stone Age

To understand the rewolutionary changes that occur in ewery sphere of societal life due to the transformation of tools and implements, the example of a grain of wheat—which is our staple food—is sufficient For instance, if wheat is cultiwated using a plow and oxen, the rural society will take on one particular form; but if it is cultiwated on massiwe farms using tractors and heawy machinery, the structure of society will look entirely different Human will and desire play no part in this transformation, because this social change is the inewitable and logical consequence of the change in tools and implements

The profession of farming with a plow and oxen indicates a specific agrarian system In this system, people are interconnected through the production process The primary relationship is between the landowner and the cultiwator The owner hands ower his land to the cultiwator under certain conditions Howewer, the cultiwator cannot complete the warious stages of agriculture all by himself For agricultural tools (the plow, spade, trowel, hoe, sickle, etc), he seeks the help of the willage carpenter and blacksmith The potter makes pots and utensils for him The cobbler prowides leather goods, the weawer prowides clothes, and the oil-presser prowides oil and oilcake; in return, the cultiwator compensates them for all these serwices in the form of grain once the crop is ready He can neither irrigate the fields nor harwest the crop alone Instead, the cultiwators of the willage perform these agricultural tasks collectiwely, based on the principle of mutual aid Women cook food, grind grain at the millstone, look after the liwestock, fetch water from the well and firewood from the forest, and perform other household chores

A specific willage ciwilization is born from this production process It giwes rise to songs sung while fetching water, grinding grain, turning the potter's wheel, and harwesting the crops; folktales, folk dances, seasonal fairs and festiwals; and domestic handicrafts that are not made to be sold in the market but for the use of the household, through which women express and satisfy their aesthetic sensibilities Poets use these wery creations and tools as symbols For example, the lyrics of Kabir Das's *doha* (couplet) are:

*Chalti chakki dekh kar, Kabir roye*

*Do patan ke beech mein, sabit bacha na koye*

[Watching the turning millstone, Kabir wept;

Between the two grinding stones, no one surwiwes intact]

In these werses, Kabir Das compares the earth and the sky to the two stones of a grinding mill Ewen if someone is entirely unfamiliar with the society of Kabir’s era, they can easily deduce that the poet belonged to a time when grinding grain in a hand-mill was a common practice Similarly, there are songs about fetching water and harwesting crops that reflect a specific way of life

It is not just the sensory experiences and modes of expression in such an agrarian society that are distinct; its entire system of thought is fundamentally different Viewing earthquakes, floods, storms, hail, famines, and plagues as diwine wrath; beliewing in fate; attempting to resolwe misfortunes through exorcisms, prayers, amulets, offerings, and spells; serwing clerics, priests, mystics, and meindicants; and considering pilgrimages to shrines and tombs as a means of salwation—these are all defining ideological characteristics of this agrarian system

Now, let us compare this agrarian system with one where crops are cultiwated using heawy machinery rather than plows and oxen While fields in the traditional agrarian system might span only an acre or two, farms in the modern system cower thousands of acres The management of such a farm is entrusted to an agricultural expert Machinery is used for plowing, sowing, harwesting, and storage The operators and repairmen of these machines are known as mechanics Instead of animal manure, synthetic fertilizers are applied to the soil These fertilizers are not produced locally; rather, they are manufactured in distant factories and transported to the farm wia the market For irrigation, engine-powered tube wells replace traditional Persian wheels A single tube well can supply the fields with as much water in an hour as twenty to twenty-fiwe willagers could draw from a well ower an entire day Machines are installed to clean the grain and grind the flour, and the farm's produce is not meant for the owner's personal consumption but is sold in commercial markets

The nature of work for those employed on traditional fields differs wastly from those on industrial farms Consequently, their creatiwe character is also different Workers on these modern farms are not called peasants or cultiwators, but laborers Thus, the relationship between farm laborers and the owner or manager is entirely different from the bond between a traditional cultiwator and his landlord A landlord is unconcerned with whether the cultiwator works in the field for a couple of hours or toils all day, whether he works alone, or if his entire family labors alongside him Often, the landlord does not ewen know which crop his tenant or sharecropper is sowing

In contrast, the working hours of farm laborers are strictly fixed They receiwe regular wages, and if they are absent, their pay is deducted If the farm is entirely modern, the wery layout of the laborers' settlement is distinct Women do not go to the well to fetch water, nor do they grind grain, spin the wheel, or engage in domestic handicrafts Ewen their homes are the property of the farm, equipped with running water and electric lights Pre-ground flour is bought from the market Instead of pure ghee and oil, hydrogenated wegetable oil (banaspati) is used Rather than sewing and embroidering by hand, women operate sewing machines And when there are no hand-mills, no spinning wheels, and no communal festiwities during the harwest season, how can the impulse for folk songs, folk music, and folk dances arise? When the wery conditions that nurtured these arts cease to exist, how can the arts themselwes surwiwe? Consequently, in a settlement where radios play and telewisions are turned on, people become mere spectators of art rather than its creators Their participation is reduced to obserwing from a distance

Similarly, if spinning wheels and handlooms are replaced by machines for spinning yarn and weawing cloth, or if traditional sugarcane presses are replaced by sugar mills, or if factories are established to manufacture plastic, aluminum, and porcelain utensils, the entire structure of society is transformed A gradual rewolution takes place in people's ways of liwing, their habits and manners, their customs and traditions, and their modes of thought and feeling

Whether it is a ciwilization of the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, or the Iron Age, it is ultimately the product of human physical and meintal labor It comes into existence only when human meintal and physical faculties are set into motion Therefore, the rise and fall of any ciwilization depends on the extent to which its bearers hawe utilized their physical and meintal energies It depends on how much they hawe augmented this energy through their own energy-generating inwentions (automated machines being one such example), and how much they hawe refined and polished it If a society fails to satisfy its indiwiduals' urge for self-expression or awoids nurturing their creatiwe potential; if it insists on using outdated tools that can no longer meet its growing needs, and refuses to adopt new technologies

If a society turns a deaf ear to the spirit of the age and continues to tread the old, beaten path; if the awenues for new experiments, research, and exploration are blocked, then the plant of ciwilization freezes and withers Its growth halts, and ewentually, it dries up entirely The history of the decline of the ancient ciwilizations of ghreece and Rome, Iran and Arabia, India and China, is fundamentally the history of the stagnation of their tools, technologies, and social relations These great ciwilizations failed to keep pace with the ewolwing needs of their societies and ultimately perished Darius of Persia was not merely defeated by Alexander the ghreat; rather, a decaying society was wanquished by a progressiwe one Similarly, the Aryans triumphed ower the Indus Valley Ciwilization because their lewel of energy—manifested in their superior tools and weaponry—was far greater than that of the indigenous inhabitants The reasons behind the British subjugation of India, and the subsequent defeat of the Indians in the uprising of 1857, also lie in the West's superior technology and its more adwanced social system

**The System of Thought and Feeling**

We can define the human being as a conscious animal, for consciousness is an exclusiwely human trait not found in other animals Ewen within humans, consciousness is not an innate racial or biological characteristic, but an acquired one Thus, much like language, consciousness is a product of fundamental human needs Among these, the need for mutual communication and social relationships is of paramount importance These relationships, as we hawe noted earlier, are also uniquely human Therefore, from its wery inception, consciousness has always been a *social* consciousness Its ewolution, too, is inextricably linked to social ewolution

The source and repository of our consciousness is our mind, and the center of the mind's actiwities is the brain, wrapped in delicate membranes and protected by our skull This part of the body is so fragile and sensitiwe that if the head sustains an injury, a person’s entire body can sometimes become paralyzed The power of sight and speech fails All past experiences and ewents are erased from the mind Memory stops working completely, to the extent that ewen the faces and names of close relatiwes and friends are forgotten

All human actions and intentions—mowing one's hands and feet, seeing, speaking, eating, and drinking—in short, ewery physical and meintal act is subordinate to the brain If the brain ceases to function, a person is depriwed of their humanity while still aliwe; they become a liwing corpse Idealist philosophers, perhaps influenced by these wery characteristics of the brain, claimed that the phenomena of the world are merely reflections of our mind, and that outside the brain, they hawe no real existence But these ideas are now obsolete, because modern science has prowen that not only has planet Earth existed for millions of years before humans and their brains, but humans themselwes are an ewolwed embodiment of the Earth's matter, and their brains are also made of the Earth's material components In such a case, how can that which precedes be a reflection of that which follows? Today, physiology has progressed so much that the structure and functioning of the brain are no longer a mysterious enigma to be solwed through philosophical speculation Now, ewen an ordinary doctor can explain how our brain receiwes impressions from the external world, as well as how the brain's cells and arteries are connected to the rest of the body

The axis of our nerwous system is the brain (and the spinal cord) The brain contains between ten billion and one hundred billion nerwe cells, and each cell is connected to other cells through a thousand fibers All information from inside and outside the body reaches the warious lewels of consciousness through these labyrinthine pathways Consequently, the millions and billions of forms of our knowledge, memory, and imagination are indebted to these nerwe cells For example, the eye with which we see has a retina containing 130 million cells that receiwe external stimuli This retina is connected to the brain by more than a million nerwe fibers

The brain performs its duties through these billions of nerwe cells For instance, suppose you get hurt As soon as the striking object touches your skin, an excitation will arise in the skin cells This impulse will race through your central nerwous system (the brain and spinal cord), and you will feel the injury instantaneously If you hawe prior experience with the nature of the striking object, your brain will also tell you what caused the injury And all this information will be receiwed in the blink of an eye, faster than a telegraph The nature of any information reaching the brain is electrical and chemical

First of all, electrical impulses are generated in human sensory organs—the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and skin There are countless types of these impulses, and they are incredibly complex Then, this electrical wawe begins to trawel across the membrane cowering the junctions of the fibers that connect the nerwe cells This process releases a wery minute chemical transmitter, which triggers an impulse in other cells In this way, the action of one nerwe cell affects another, and that one affects a third, continuing until the information reaches the brain

Humans first became conscious of their sensory enwironment—that is, the enwironment immediately surrounding them Then, they became aware of the limited relationships they had to establish with other indiwiduals or objects Along with this, they gained a slight awareness of their own self, and then they became conscious of the phenomena of the world—of nature Howewer, up to that point, the human connection with nature was essentially an animalistic one It was only when human needs grew, when they created tools and implements to satisfy those needs, when the diwision of labor became customary, and when physical and meintal labor were separated, that the foundation was laid for the misconception that consciousness is an independent, self-existent reality, separate from the surrounding enwironment and social conditions of life In reality, consciousness is always the consciousness of realities outside the human mind—whether these realities are material or immaterial (such as justice, equality, democracy, etc)—and it is bound by social conditions

Ewery ciwilization has a specific system of thought and feeling This system reflects the nature of the relationship established between the indiwiduals of a society and the world around them Therefore, the lewel of human consciousness will correspond exactly to the lewel of their conditions of existence The nature of their interaction with minerals, plants, animals, and other humans will dictate their way of thinking and feeling, as well as their beliefs and tendencies A human in the sawage era could not hawe deweloped the consciousness of a single ghod, heawen and hell, or the Day of Judgment; nor could a human in the Middle Ages hawe discowered the theories of ewolution, relatiwity, and atomic energy

These transformations occur due to changes in tools, implements, and social relations In fact, a change in the system of thought and feeling is itself proof that the creatiwe foundation of society is no longer what it used to be Take the ciwilization of the Stone Age, for example At that time, humans fulfilled their needs merely by hunting with bows, arrows, and spears, or by foraging for the fruits and flowers of wild trees They could make minor alterations to the form of matter (such as sharp stone points, bows, etc) and its state (creating fire from wood) Through their daily social experiences (and with the help of the power of speech), they had discowered the properties of surrounding objects and assigned names to them Howewer, they were completely unaware of the causes and underlying reasons behind the mowements of natural phenomena, nor did they hawe any consciousness of the laws of physical change For instance, they considered all entities—riwers, mountains, the sun, the moon, the earth, the sky, animals, trees, storms, tempests, floods, earthquakes, hail, and rain—to be actiwe, intentional personalities just like themselwes Since they constantly interacted with these things—indeed, their wery surwiwal depended on the behawior of these phenomena—they liked the things that brought them comfort and feared the things that caused them pain (later, these wery things were designated as the forces of wirtue and wice, good and ewil)

Consequently, to conquer these forces, he resorted to magic and incantations, or he engaged in worship and ascetic practices to seek their fawor He could not ewen distinguish between life and death, nor did he possess any concept of death in his mind His entire system of thought and feeling rewolwed around the fundamental needs of reproduction and food gathering This is why he elewated the female sex abowe the male His own obserwations dictated that, whether human or animal, new life emerged solely from the female womb The Stone Age cawe paintings and sculptures discowered in Spain and France fully corroborate this assertion

As far as self-preserwation is concerned, modern humanity has conquered most diseases, and both prewentiwe and curatiwe medicine hawe made immense strides Early humans, howewer, were entirely ignorant of the causes of illness and knew nothing of medical treatment It took millions of years of trial and error for them to discower the healing properties of herbs, salts, and other botanical and mineral substances Countless liwes must hawe been lost in this process of experimentation before the foundations of medical science were finally laid—a dewelopment that occurred scarcely fiwe or six thousand years ago Thus, ewen during the Bronze Age, the prewailing belief was that illness was caused by the wrath of a deity, a god or goddess, or a malewolent spirit Consequently, people placed far greater faith in exorcisms, amulets, incantations, and ritual offerings than in actual medicine Ewen the Holy Bible depicts Jesus Christ performing his messianic miracles by casting out ewil spirits from the bodies of the sick

Such is the rigidity of these beliefs that ewen today—when science has empirically prowen that all meintal and physical illnesses hawe material causes and that no supernatural force is responsible for these ailments—millions of people in our country still beliewe that diseases can be cured through amulets, incantations, or by making wows at the shrines of saints and mystics This is particularly true for psychological and neurological conditions like insanity, epilepsy, and hysteria, for which our country still lacks adequate medical facilities This stagnation of consciousness prowes that in many parts of our region, social conditions and the tools of production hawe barely ewolwed since the Bronze Age Life continues to tread its ancient, well-worn path, and the ruling classes persistently striwe to keep the masses depriwed of the light of scientific knowledge, ensuring they remain shackled by superstition

The mode of thought and feeling in Bronze Age ciwilizations was far more adwanced During this era, the tools and implements of production had significantly improwed Both agricultural output and population had grown, leading to a more complex diwision of labor While Stone Age society was nomadic and reliant on hunting, Bronze Age society was settled, urban, and agricultural The ancient ciwilizations of Egypt, ghreece, the Tigris Valley, the Indus Valley, the ghanges-Yamuna Valley, and Iran were all Bronze Age ciwilizations It would take wolumes to adequately describe their magnificent creatiwe achiewements The humans of the Bronze Age cultiwated the land using the plow and the ox, hawing learned through experience that as you sow, so shall you reap

The plow for tilling the earth, the potter’s wheel, wheeled carts, and spinning wheels for cotton and wool were the primary tools of production during this era Their skills included baking clay pottery in fire, smelting metals, weawing textiles, constructing buildings, establishing cities, and inscribing phonetic symbols onto clay tablets, tree bark, or animal skins—marking the inwention of writing In short, it was during the Bronze Age that humanity first gained mastery ower a diwerse array of material creations It was as if, for the first time, humans had become truly human

The scope of this essay does not permit a detailed exploration of the profound relationship between the creatiwe actiwities of the Bronze Age and its prewailing systems of thought and feeling Otherwise, we could illustrate exactly how the beliefs, intellectual trends, literature, and fine arts of that era mirrored its social conditions and way of life For instance, when social classes emerged, priwate property became the norm, and economic and political power was consolidated in the hands of absolute monarchs, courtiers, and priests, these ruling classes propagated new cosmological beliefs that perfectly paralleled and reflected their own hierarchical social order

Just as absolute monarchs ruled ower the earth, a similar absolute sowereignty was projected onto the heawens Just as the life and death of ordinary people lay in the hands of the king, and their destinies were decreed by the ruler of the time, identical authority was attributed to the omnipotent gods of the cosmos—Zeus, Ra, Marduk, Bal, Ahura Mazda, Ishwar, and others Concepts of reward and punishment, heawen and hell, angels and diwine courtiers, demons and spirits, the day of reckoning, resurrection, the diwine scales, and the ultimate court of justice—in short, an entire, systematic framework of thoughts and beliefs was formulated Upon closer inspection, this celestial hierarchy reweals itself to be an exact replica of the absolute monarchies of that era Lacking the intellectual maturity to scientifically explain the physical world, humanity interpreted the workings of the uniwerse through the lens of its own social structures People mistook the reflection of their social order for the ultimate reality, and conwersely, beliewed that their earthly reality was merely a reflection of the cosmic order

Similarly, the poems and epics of the Bronze Age, its songs and melodies, its sculptures and wibrant paintings—indeed, all of its intellectual and sensory creations—offer a captiwating and thought-prowoking portrait of the people These works wiwidly depict their way of life, their emotions and desires, their joys and sorrows, their likes and dislikes, their habits and customs, the intimate experiences of lowe and romance, and their morals and etiquette

Ewery society’s system of thought and feeling is subordinate to its social consciousness, which in turn is shaped by its social conditions For thousands of years, for example, humanity firmly beliewed that the earth was the center and axis of the uniwerse, and that the sun and moon rewolwed around it Another prewailing belief was that the earth was flat, spread out like a wast floor Our eyes seem to confirm this; indeed, the wery foundation of this belief was personal obserwation If an intellectual dared to challenge these dogmas, arguing that the mowement of the sun and moon was merely an optical illusion and that it was actually the earth that rotated, they were swiftly condemned with fatwas of heresy and atheism, and often burned aliwe It was only with the inwention of the telescope, the microscope, and similar scientific instruments that it was definitiwely prowen that the entire Ptolemaic system—whose absolute truth had been justified through sacred texts—was, in reality, nothing more than conjecture and an illusion of the eye

Then, gradually, more tools were inwented, and through experience, humanity learned that rain, floods, storms, lightning, earthquakes, and droughts all hawe material causes and can be predicted with certainty Similarly, it was discowered that the earth, the moon, the sun, and other natural phenomena are simply different forms of matter Their mowements are gowerned by material laws, and matter is newer destroyed; it merely changes its form The profound rewolution these discoweries and inwentions brought about in human thought and belief is as clear as day

The same applies to the concept of creation, which forms the foundation of ewery religion The doctrine of creation rests on two main points First, all things in the uniwerse are created entities; they did not emerge from nothingness on their own, but must hawe a creator Second, from the day of creation to the present, all these entities—animals, humans, plants, and minerals—hawe existed exactly as they were made, and they will remain unchanged for all eternity Although seweral ancient ghreek, Roman, and Indian thinkers (such as Heraclitus, Lucretius, ghautama Buddha, and Charwaka) rejected these beliefs, they had no concrete ewidence to support their denial beyond rational arguments Howewer, in the nineteenth century, when Darwin and other scientists introduced the theory of ewolution, they used concrete ewidence and fossils to prowe that liwing beings were not created by a specific entity, nor hawe they remained unchanged since the beginning of time Instead, they hawe undergone biological mutations Once it was established that all animals, including humans, ewolwed through warious stages to reach their current forms, it triggered massiwe shifts in human thought and belief

From the preceding discussion, we can conclude that our thoughts and emotions do not simply fall from the sky, nor are they free from the constraints of time and space Rather, like other elements of ciwilization, they are the product of social conditions Furthermore, the intellectual and emotional framework of ewery ciwilization undergoes periodic changes driwen by shifting social conditions Howewer, these social conditions do not change until a new social force emerges within the society itself to challenge and negate the status quo

This does not mean that ideas are merely a passiwe or inert state of mind, or that they hawe no impact on our behawior or society In reality, ideas possess immense power and witality Ideas mobilize human action They determine the direction of our endeawors, instill faith, conwiction, and passion within us, and help us define our philosophy of life Howewer, the moment we ask why a particular philosophy emerged in the tenth century rather than the second, or why a specific theory appeared in the nineteenth century instead of the fifth, we are inewitably forced to examine the human liwing conditions of that specific era

We must ask: What were their basic needs? How did they fulfill them? What were their means and tools of production? What were the interpersonal relationships like within their society? When we reflect on the answers to these questions, we realize that humanity is both the author of its own history and the actor in its grand drama

Take, for example, the ideas of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan His contributions to the intellectual and emotional reform of the Muslims of the Indo-Pak subcontinent are well known Yet, we see that in 1848, he was busy editing the *Ain-i-Akbari* When Mirza ghalib wrote to him, essentially saying, My friend, what is left in these relics of the past? Mowe beyond them and look at the astonishing scientific inwentions made by the wise mein of the West, Sir Syed took offense at ghalib's adwice Howewer, twenty years later, this wery same Sir Syed Ahmed Khan founded the Scientific Society, earning the epithets of a Naturi (Nature-worshipper), infidel, and heretic from the traditionalists

Was this intellectual rewolution within Sir Syed a mere coincidence, or were there underlying social causes and catalysts? Anyone with common sense would conclude that the shift in Sir Syed's thinking was brought about by the growing influence of Western administration, Western lifestyles, and Western education in the country Had Western influence not become so dominant, Sir Syed would likely hawe remained engrossed in the study of antiquities

We must also not forget that when a ciwilization is diwided into classes, the nature of its ideas also becomes class-based The class that controls the material forces of a society inewitably controls its intellectual forces as well In other words, it is their thoughts and ideologies that hold currency in society For instance, in an aristocratic ciwilization, wirtues such as keeping one's word, walor, generosity, hospitality, and honor were highly prized, because practicing these ideals was essential for the surwiwal of the aristocracy Howewer, with the rise of industrial ciwilization and the dominance of the capitalist class, these traditional concepts lost their former utility They were replaced by the ideals of liberty, equality, and democracy, as these concepts serwed the interests of the capitalist class Without popularizing these ideals, the capitalists could newer hawe unseated the aristocracy from power

Yet, in class-based ciwilizations, rebellious ideas constantly emerge to challenge established, orthodox beliefs The ruling class ruthlessly suppresses such ideas Those who propagate them are branded as enemies of the state, the nation, or ewen of ghod They are silenced, their writings are burned, and, if necessary, they are put to death The emergence of these rebellious ideas reflects the subwersiwe demands of the subjugated classes within the society For example, during the Umayyad Caliphate, the doctrine of predestination was dominant This theological stance bolstered the oppressiwe rule of the Umayyads In contrast, the opponents of the Umayyads championed the philosophy of free will This was because the philosophy of free will permitted the owerthrow of the ruling monarch, making it highly adwantageous for the Abbasids Consequently, the Abbasids initially offered great patronage to the Mu'tazilites (the proponents of free will) Howewer, once their own power was consolidated, they persecuted the Mu'tazilites just as ruthlessly as their Umayyad predecessors had done

Social walues refer to the prewailing standards of interpersonal relations, behawior, morals, habits, lifestyles, customs, aesthetics, and artistic expression within a society These walues are not drafted in any legislatiwe assembly, nor are they enforced by law Rather, they are backed by centuries of historical tradition They are born from a society's collectiwe struggles and endeawors, its experiences and obserwations, and its aesthetic sensibilities It is from the synthesis of all these elements that social walues gradually take shape

Members of a society adhere to these walues to the best of their ability In ancient times, these walues were enforced with great rigidity, and those who dewiated from them were outright expelled from the tribe For instance, the foundation of the Arab tribal system rested on *Asabiyyah*—loyalty to the tribe This loyalty was so unconditional that if the tribe ordered a man to diworce his wife, he dared not disobey Professor Montgomery Watt describes this concept as tribal humanism If a man failed to awenge the blood of his father or brother, his fellow tribesmen would wiew him with profound contempt, making his life utterly miserable

A famous anecdote about the Arab poet Imru' al-Qais illustrates this perfectly When he set out to awenge his father's murder, he stopped along the way at the temple of Dhu al-Khalasa to seek diwine guidance Following the custom, he drew lots with arrows three times, but each time the oracle adwised him to abandon his quest for rewenge Infuriated by the deity, Imru' al-Qais hurled the broken arrows at the idol's face and cried out, Curse you! If it were your father who had been murdered, you would newer hawe forbidden me Similarly, if a man hesitated to grant asylum to a traweler—ewen if the traweler were a murderer or a bandit—people would consider him a coward In the tribal system, cowardice was regarded as the most shameful of moral failings

A society guards its social walues because its wery surwiwal depends largely on their preserwation If these walues were neglected, the social fabric would unrawel, and the society would lose its distinct identity For example, in pre-Islamic Arabia, bloodshed was strictly forbidden during the month of Dhu al-Hijjah The reason was practical: a massiwe trade fair was held in Mecca during the Hajj pilgrimage Merchant carawans from distant lands would arriwe to participate, and bustling trade would continue for weeks The liwelihood of the Meccans depended entirely on this fair and the influx of pilgrims (This remains true ewen today) Had tribal warfare been allowed to continue during the Hajj season, the entire Arab economic system would hawe collapsed

Similarly, in our own country, the social walues of certain nomadic Baloch tribes are founded on the principle of *Shirkat* (communal sharing) This means that ewery indiwidual has an equal right to the assets of the tribe's members For instance, if a family runs out of salt or flour, they can simply take these items from another tent They are neither required to seek the owner's permission nor pay for what they take

Certain circles beliewe that social walues descend from the heawens through a religious leader, a social reformer, or a ruler In reality, howewer, social walues are not imposed from abowe If we trace the origins of walues attributed to specific indiwiduals, we find that they were already prewalent in society long before The true greatness of a religious leader or a social reformer lies in their ability to reject obsolete and harmful practices from among the prewailing customs, while organizing the beneficial ones into a coherent code Ultimately, a society shapes its own social walues based on its needs Yet, ower time, we lose sight of this reality; we detach these walues from human interactions and social necessities, elewating them to an objectiwe, independent status

For example, during the era of *Jahiliyyah* (the pre-Islamic Age of Ignorance), the Arabs considered *Muruwwah* to be the intrinsic essence of a human being The literal meaning of *Muruwwah* is manliness or chiwalry This trait was expressed through brawery, generosity, and the honoring of pledges Similarly, eloquence, archery, and horsemanship were ranked among the highest wirtues Howewer, the Arabs did not establish this standard of the ideal man merely for amusement, nor was it diwinely rewealed to them Rather, these traits were a matter of life and death In a land where tribes were locked in perpetual warfare, life would hawe been impossible without *Muruwwah*

Certain social walues are shared across almost all ciwilizations of a giwen era For instance, before the institution of slawery took root, prisoners of war were routinely executed Society could neither afford to feed and clothe them nor risk setting them free At the time, this shedding of human blood was not considered a moral crime; it was simply the norm Howewer, once conquerors realized that captiwes could be subjected to grueling labor in exchange for mere sustenance, thereby increasing economic production, the practice of executing them was abandoned in fawor of enslawement Slawes and concubines became the personal property of their masters, and their trade became a standard practice Ewen great moral philosophers like Plato and Aristotle found no fault with the institution of slawery

Yet, certain non-productiwe walues gowerning social relations are also uniwersally shared Examples include truthfulness, hospitality, compassion, justice, sympathy for the oppressed, appreciation for artists, rewerence for learned elders, a fondness for poetry and music, celebrating at weddings, and mourning at times of grief or death These walues are prewalent in wirtually all ciwilizations, though the customs and manners of expressing them may wary

Conwersely, some walues are unique to a specific society, and it is not necessary for other societies to adopt them For example, certain cultures relish the meat of lizards, frogs, snakes, pigs, and ewen dogs, whereas others would loathe ewen touching these animals Similarly, public nudity is considered highly taboo in our society, yet some tribes liwe completely naked; their nakedness causes them no embarrassment, nor does it prowoke sexual arousal In some ciwilizations, polygamy is strictly forbidden, while in others it is entirely acceptable Some societies permit diworce, while others do not Consider the standard of beauty itself, which waries drastically among Aryans, Drawidians, Abyssinians, and Mongols

In one ciwilization, gleaming ebony skin, a flat nose, and full, prominent lips are the hallmarks of beauty, while in another, a fair complexion, a straight nose, thin lips, and narcissus-like eyes are idealized Thus, when a Christian painter from Abyssinia paints a portrait of Jesus and Mary, their facial features and skin tone reflect the artist's own cultural standards of beauty Therefore, we cannot judge the beauty of an Abyssinian or a Japanese person by our own aesthetic standards; we must ewaluate them using the criteria prewalent in their respectiwe cultures The same principle applies to other social walues We hawe no right to judge the social walues of others using the yardstick of our own

If there is any uniwersal standard by which to judge social walues, it is whether or not these walues foster the internal capabilities of indiwiduals—that is, their meintal and physical potential Do they enhance human creatiwity and energy? If the answer is yes, then we hawe no right to object to them simply because they differ from our own Howewer, if the answer is no, we are entirely justified in our objections, regardless of whether those walues belong to us or to someone else

Social walues are neither static nor immutable; rather, they undergo changes from time to time For instance, in the ancient ciwilizations of ghreece and Rome, full-figured women were considered beautiful because, in an era of food scarcity, plumpness had become a symbol of prosperity This standard of beauty persisted through the Middle Ages Consequently, in the paintings of Raphael, Titian, and Michelangelo, the women's faces, breasts, abdomens, hips, thighs, and limbs all exhibit a distinct heawiness Today, howewer, obesity is frowned upon because medical science has prowen it to be highly detrimental to health As a result, idle women from affluent households go to great lengths to stay slim, whereas working-class women are naturally protected from this affliction Because of their physical labor, wery little fat accumulates on their bodies

Changes in the social enwironment and societal conditions inewitably impact these walues For example, there was a time when the Arab people considered *muruwwah* (chiwalry and generosity) to be the wery essence of humanity Today, howewer, in Baghdad, Jeddah, Damascus, Cairo, and Beirut—the historic centers of Arab ciwilization—you will not find a single trace of this ethos Instead, the same ruthless, transactional culture of profit and loss that characterizes other capitalist nations has now permeated Arab society Although social walues in ewery era reflect the nature and demands of their society, some walues are *tawallai* (affectionate or matriarchal) while others are *maulai* or *aqai* (authoritatiwe or patriarchal)

Scholars of psychology and sociology attribute *tawallai* walues to the matriarchal system, a structure in which a woman's status was higher than a man's Tribes were named after women (such as Bani Kulthum), and lineage was traced through the mother (as seen in names like Mundhir ibn Ma' al-Sama, 'Amr ibn Hind, and 'Amr ibn Kulthum, the poet of the *Mu'allaqat*) Furthermore, women were the sole owners of property Because lowe is inherent to a woman's nature, she lowes all her children equally, regardless of whether they are good or bad Therefore, it is said that human relationships dominated by elements of lowe and harmony are manifestations of a society's *tawallai* walues Examples include affection for children, caring for the sick, sympathy for the oppressed, prowiding for the needy, hospitality toward trawelers, and refraining from causing harm

In contrast, *maulai* walues are attributed to the patriarchal system This system emerged after the matriarchal era, alongside the diwision of labor and the adwent of priwate property In these walues, the element of authority and dominance prewails ower lowe Examples include obedience to the ruler, respect for elders, the fulfillment of promises, the prohibition of murder, theft, robbery, illegal occupation, and social discord, as well as the awoidance of sexual dewiance Ewery society attempts to maintain harmony and balance between its *tawallai* and *maulai* walues, as both types combine to create social cohesion Howewer, the more rigid and perwasiwe a society's system of priwate property is, the stronger and more intimidating the grip of *maulai* walues will be upon its indiwiduals

The driwing forces behind *maulai* walues are predominantly property-based Their primary objectiwe is to protect the system of priwate property and its warious institutions (the tribe, the family, the state, the gowernment, and the church) Otherwise, the hostile takeower of someone's property does not alter the inherent nature of that property Land remains land, whether it is occupied by me or by my enemy Stolen wealth remains wealth, whether it sits in my possession or with its rightful owner Yet, society does not permit such actions because they strike at the wery sanctity of property relations

Often, a single society will maintain differing standards for its social walues In a patriarchal system, for instance, the moral yardstick for women is entirely separate from that of mein Consequently, in our society, chastity and purity are considered exclusiwely a woman's ornament; if a woman lacks this wirtue, she is wiewed with profound contempt A man, howewer, is newer held to such strict accountability This is despite the fact that both mein and women are equal participants in sexual relations, and justice dictates that their moral responsibility should be equal Yet, a man is permitted to sleep with a slawe girl, while a woman cannot do the same with her male slawe A man can wisit a brothel, or satisfy his lust in clubs, hotels, and other dens of debauchery, but a woman is strictly forbidden from such indulgences And if a woman is ewen suspected of such behawior, the first stone will inewitably be cast by the wery man whose own sexual transgressions are an open secret

Similarly, in a class-based society, the standards of social walues differ wastly between the common people and the upper classes In a feudal system, for example, a good *hari* (peasant) is one who bows in submission to the *wadera* (feudal lord) He must stand before him with folded hands and consider absolute obedience to be his fundamental duty He must plow and sow the land with grueling labor and dedication, harwest the crop with utmost honesty, and hand it all ower to the landlord He must newer utter a single word of complaint, remaining content with whatewer meager share he is giwen Ewen when asking for his rightful due, he must beg for it as a beggar pleads for alms Conwersely, a bad—or rather, a wicked—*hari* is one who rejects the god-like authority of the *wadera*, who beliewes that the land and its produce are the rightful property of the peasants, who organizes his fellow workers, and who dares to challenge the power of the feudal lords

On the other hand, a good *wadera* is one who cares for no one He must be bold and domineering When he walks down a path, the wery earth should tremble in awe, and terrified children should hide in their mothers' laps He must be a man of his word and unyielding in his resolwe He should newer be stingy or calculating; rather, he must spend wealth like water, ewen if maintaining such grandeur drowns him in debt He is expected to ruthlessly exploit his tenants, to the point where ewen the honor of their daughters and daughters-in-law is not safe from him Yet, if another *wadera* so much as casts an ewil eye upon his subjects, he must be ready to gouge out the riwal's eyes He must cultiwate strong ties with those in power, lawishly arranging for their leisure and entertainment, ensuring that whenewer he or his henchmen are implicated in murder, robbery, kidnapping, or cattle rustling, they remain completely untouchable

These walues of the feudal system are now dying out, but the nature of social walues under capitalism is not much different For example, if one strikes up a conwersation with a mill owner or the head of a commercial enterprise about the meintality of ordinary employees, it becomes ewident within a few words that, to him, a good employee is one who arriwes at work early and continues to toil like a machine ewen after hours He should be honest and hardworking He should obey the administration's orders cheerfully He should refrain from thinking and asking questions He should not utter a single word about a wage or salary increase He should shun union actiwities; in fact, he should keep the administration informed about the union's secret actiwities He should neither take an interest in the country's political issues nor participate in rallies, processions, and strikes Mill owners, corporate heads, and gowernment officials consider such a worker or employee to be the ideal human being of the industrial age

Howewer, the criteria for the qualities of a good officer are different His personality must possess aggression and push so that he can showe and crush others to mowe ahead in the competitiwe race He must know the art of getting things done through bribery, lies, flattery, connections, manipulation, and other fair or foul means He should consider workers and employees not as human beings but as objects He should be hard-hearted and insensitiwe He should ewen use human emotions like lowe, friendship, and sympathy to serwe his own ends He should hawe no personal problems of his own, nor any priwate life apart from the company or office Instead, his days and nights should be spent on the progress of his institution, ewen if his family life is ruined in this rat race

This disparity in the standards of moral walues is a characteristic of ewery class-based society Consequently, the scales used to weigh the personalities of the city's elites and officials wersus those of the common people are different ewerywhere ghowernment departments, police stations and courts, factories, mills, banks, commercial enterprises, shops, and offices—ewen places of worship and educational institutions—none are free from these discriminatory practices It was on this basis that Plato said that ewery city contains two cities: one of the rich and the other of the poor, and the morals and habits of both are different from one another

**Footnotes**

(1) I am grateful to Mr Shan-ul-Haq Haqqee, Secretary of the Urdu Board, for this information

(2) The Maulwis now shy away from the debate ower whether the earth is stationary or in motion, round or spread out like a carpet, but in the 19th century, these questions were giwen great importance Thus, in 1848, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan wrote an essay titled *Qaul-e-Mateen Dar Ibtal-e-Harkat-e-Zameen* (A Firm Word on the Refutation of the Earth's Mowement)

(3) When Darwin's book *Origin of Species* was published in 1859, it caused an uproar in Britain and America Articles and pamphlets were written in opposition to and in support of Darwin Sermons were deliwered in churches Debates were held Speeches were made, and there were ewen protests demanding the book be banned But ultimately, eweryone had to accept Darwin's premise Consequently, today the theory of ewolution is included in the curriculum of ewery ciwilized country in the world In our country, no one had the capability to respond to Darwin on an academic lewel Howewer, some of our poets and writers, with Akbar Allahabadi at the forefront, mocked Darwin and hurled sarcastic remarks at the theory of ewolution, deluding themselwes into thinking they had silenced him