___________ Levels of Thinking
Thinking can be of three levels ; shallow, deep
or enlightened.
Shallow Thinking
Thinking may be shallow, deep or enlightened. The shallow thinking is
the thinking of the common people. The deep thinking is that of the
scholars. As for the enlightened thinking, is most often the thinking
of the leaders, and the enlightened among the
scholars and the common people. The shallow
thinking is the transferring of the reality only to
the brain, without discussing anything else, and without trying to sense
what is related to the reality; then linking this sensation with the
information related to the reality, without attempting to search for
other information that is connected to it, then
coming out with a shallow judgment. This is what
prevails in the groups, and what prevails in those
of low thought, and what prevails in the uneducated people and in the
intelligent people who are not cultured.
The shallow thinking is the curse of the people and nations, for it
does not help them to revive, and even not to enjoy a pleasant
livelihood. Though it might help them to have an
agreeable life. The cause of the shallow thinking
is weak sensation or poor information, or the weak
linking ability present in the man's brain. It is not the natural thinking
of men, though it is the primitive thinking. Human
beings differ in the power of sensation and in
their level of weakness. They also differ in the
power and weakness of their linking ability and in the amount and type
of information they have, wherever this information was obtained
whether by learning or by reading or gained from the experiences of
life. Thus thinking is in accordance with the difference of these
matters. In origin, the majority of the people are
strong in their brain and linking ability, except
a few who were created weak, or they became weak later
on. In origin, the information of the majority of the people changes
daily, even if they were illiterate, except the abnormal people,
whose attention is drawn by nothing, nor do they
take any account of anything they learn or read of
information. Therefore, shallow thinking is not
natural, rather abnormal. However, the individuals being accustomed to
the shallow thinking, their content of its results, and the absence
of ambition amongst them for better than they
have, make the shallow thinking a habit, so they
continue with this mode of thinking and enjoy it,
and their taste becomes reshaped on that. As for the groups, due to
their deficiency in thinking because they are a group, the shallow
thinking prevails in them, even if they were a
group of creative thinkers. As a result, the
shallow thinking prevails in life. Had there not been some
individuals in the people or the nation, who are granted an
exceptional capacity for sensation and linkage
(relating), and then it is inconceivable to have
revival, or a material progress in life.
There is no cure to the shallow thinking in the groups. However, it is
possible to raise the level of the reality and the events, and to
provide the level of the reality and the events,
and to provide the groups with sublime thoughts,
and rich information; thus it becomes possible to raise
the level of their thinking. Yet it remains, anyhow, shallow thought,
but of a high level. In other words, the people
and the nation can act the in the way dictated by
the enlightened thinking, but their thinking remains,
anyhow, shallow. The groups of people would not be able to think
deeply or enlightened, whatever level they reached
of elevation and progress. This is because, as a
group, they are not able to go deep in study or to
have enlightened thought. So, to raise the level of their thinking, no
attempt should be made to treat the thinking of the group, rather the
attempt should be made to treat the reality and the events on which
the sensation of the group falls. It is also
possible to treat the thoughts and information
which are placed in it. Thus shallowness is raised up, but not
removed, and accordingly the level of its conduct is improved.
As for the individuals, it is possible to remove the shallowness,
reduce it or make it rare in them. This is firstly
by removing the habit that they have in thinking.
Teaching them or educating them and drawing their
attention to the triviality of their thinking and the shallowness of their
thoughts achieve this. Secondly, by increasing the trials, whether
those they do or see, and make them live in many
incidents and sense a reality that varies, renews
and changes. Thirdly, by making them live in life, and
proceed with it, and thus they abandon shallowness or shallowness
abandons them, and thus they become not shallow. When such
individuals increase in the ummah, then helping the ummah to revive
would become easier and more achievable. Though these individuals
live in the ummah, receive the existing
information and sense the existing reality and
events, and they cannot precede their time; and they are not
a type different than that of their ummah.
Deep Thinking
As for deep thinking it is trying to be deep in thinking, i.e. to be deep
in the sensation of the reality, and in the information that is
linked with this sensation to understand the
reality. The deep thinker will not be content with
the mere sensation and the initial information to link with
the sensation, as is the case in shallow thinking. He rather repeats
the sensation of the reality, and tries to
increase his sensation of it, whether through
experimentation or through the repetition of sensation. He also
repeats the search for other information beside the initial
information. He also repeats the linkage of the
information with the reality more than he did
before, whether through the repeated observation or through
repeating the linkage again: so he comes out from this type of
sensation and this type of linkage and this type
of information, with deep thoughts, whether they
are truths or not. Through the repetition of this
approach and becoming used to it, the deep thinking originates. So the
deep thinking is not content with the initial sensation, not content
with the initial information and the not content
with the initial linkage. It is the second stage
after the shallow thinking. This is the thinking of the
scholars and thinkers, though it is not necessary to be the thinking
of the educated people. Thus deep thinking is to
be deep in the sensation, information and linkage.
As regards the enlightened thought, it is the deep thinking in
addition to thinking about what surrounds the
reality and what relates to it, so as to come out
with the true results. In other words, the deep thinking is to
be deep in thinking itself, while the enlightened thinking is to add
to the thinking in depth and the thinking in what
surrounds it and relates to it, for the sake of an
aimed objective, that is to reach to the true
results. Therefore every enlightened thought is deep thinking. It is not
possible for the enlightened thinking to result from the shallow
thinking.
Enlightened Thinking
However, every deep thinking is not an enlightened thinking. For
example, the scientist with the atom; when he researches into the
splitting of the atom; and the scientist in chemistry when he
researches the formation of things; and the jurist
when he researches the deduction of rules and
laying out the laws. These scientists and their like, when they
discuss such matters, they do that depth, which without they would
have not been able to come out with those
magnificent results. However, they did not think
with enlightenment, neither was their thinking considered
an enlightened thinking. Therefore, you
should not be surprised when you find a scientist that
researches into the atom, praying to a piece of wood, i.e. the cross.
Though the least enlightenment shows that this piece of wood neither
benefits nor harms, and it is not something that could be worshipped.
Don't be surprised also to find the skilled legist believing in the
presence of priests; and he submits himself to
somebody like him in order to forgive him of his
sins. This is because the scientist and the legist and
their like, think deeply but not with enlightenment. Had they thought
with enlightenment, they would not have prayed to a piece of wood,
neither would they have believed in the existence of priests, or
sought forgiveness from people like them. It is
true that the one who thinks deeply is deep in
what he thought of and not in other than it. So he
might be deep when thinking about splitting the atom or putting a law,
but he is stupid in other matters when he thinks about them. However,
the thinker, being accustomed to deep thinking goes deep in most of
what he thinks of, particularly the matters which relate to the great
complex, or the outlook in life. However, the absence of
enlightenment in his thinking makes him accustomed
to deep thinking and to shallow thinking and even
the stupid thinking. Therefore, deep thinking is not
alone enough to revive man and to raise his intellectual level. It is
rather necessary to have enlightenment in thought
so as elevation in thought occurs and so that man
revives.
Though enlightenment is not necessary to reach to correct results in
thought such as the empirical science, laws, medicine and the like,
it is necessary to raise the level of thought and
to make thinking result in thinkers. Therefore,
the ummah will not revive by the presence of jurists
and legists, of the presence of doctors and engineers, and their
like. She only revives if she has enlightenment in
thinking, i.e. if she has enlightened thinkers.
Enlightenment in thinking does not require the presence of education.
In other words, it is not necessary that the enlightened thinkers be
educated. The Bedouin for example, who said: The camel dropping
indicates of (the presence of the) camel, and the mark (footprint)
indicates of (the existence of) the travel, he is an enlightened
thinker. The speaker who said: Precaution cannot
protect from the qadar (destiny), and the patience
(sabr) is one of the causes of success, he is an
enlightened thinker, but the poet who said:
The Khaleefa has died, O Ins and Jinn
As if I broke the fast in Ramadan,
he is not an enlightened thinker, though he is an educated faqeeh (jurist).
Also the wise man (Hakeem) who said: The head of wisdom is the
fear of Allah; he is not an enlightened
thinker, because the head of wisdom is the
realisation of the existence of Allah and not the fear of Allah.
Thus, the enlightened thinking does not need knowledge, or wisdom. It
rather needs to think deeply, and to look around a thing and what
relates to it for the sake of arriving at correct
results. Therefore, the enlightened thinker could
be illiterate or educated or even a scholar. The enlightened
thinker would not produce an enlightened thought, unless he had
enlightenment while thinking. Thus the politician is an enlightened
thinker. However, each of them needs to have enlightenment when
thinking in everything so that thinking can be enlightened.
Therefore, he would not be surprised if we saw
great leaders and great politicians pray to a
piece of wood, and seek forgiveness from people who are less
enlightened than them. This is because their thinking has no depth or
enlightenment; it is rather following habits or imitation, or a sort
of deception and hypocrisy. All of this is neither
depth nor enlightenment. This is because the
enlightened thinker, has nothing to do with deception
or hypocrisy, neither is he dominated by customs and traditions.
The thinker, whether he is shallow, deep or enlightened, must be
serious in his thinking. It is true that with the shallow thinker,
his shallow thinking does not help him in being
serious. However, by avoiding amusement and his
habits he can be serious. Seriousness does not need
depth, though depth encourages it. Neither does it need
enlightenment, though enlightenment requires it.
This is because seriousness is the presence of the
purpose, and the struggle to achieve this purpose,
besides the good conception of the reality that is thought of. So thinking
about danger is not actually thinking about it, rather it is thinking
to avoid it. Thinking about eating is not thinking
about it, rather it is thinking about obtaining
it. Thinking about playing is not thinking about
playing; rather it is for the sake of playing. Thinking about a picnic is
not discussion of the picnic; it is rather for the
sake of enjoying the picnic. Thinking about
walking aimlessly is not thinking about this walking, it is
rather for the sake of driving away boredom. Thinking about enacting
a law is not thinking about the law itself, it is
rather for the sake of enacting the law itself.
Thus, thinking, whatever type it is, is thinking
about the matter itself or thinking about acting on that thing. Thinking
about the thing must be for the sake of knowing it, while thinking about
acting on this thing is for the sake of acting on it. In both case,
amusement should not be involved in any one of them. The habit of
thinking about the thing or about the action with the thing, should
also not dominate the thinking. So if amusement
and habits were removed from thinking, then the
serious thinking will exist. This is because it
would be easy, if not inevitable, for the purpose to exist, and also the
struggle for achieving that purpose to exist. It would then also be
easy, if not inevitable, for the conception of the
reality of what is aimed at, to exist, i.e. the
reality of what is thought of. Accordingly, seriousness is possible to exist
in shallow thinking, as it must be serious,
whether it produced the results in reality or failed to do
so. So the seriousness is necessary in the thinking. Without it,
thinking will be amusement or play or monotonous,
in that it that proceeds in the same manner
because of the habit and the imitation. The monotonous
thinking gets pleasure in the life in which the thinker lives and the
life in which the people live, and thus removes
from the mind the concept of change and thinking
about change.
Thinking about change is necessary for life, because stagnation of life
and submission to the destiny is one of the greatest evils that make
the people and nation extinct and disappear with
the incidents and days. That is why thinking about
change is one of the most important types of
thinking. Thinking about change is not regarded pleasant by the
languid people, neither is it accepted by the lazy people, because
the price of change is high, and because those who
are dominated by habits perceive the thinking
about change as harmful for them and changing them
from one state to another. That is why the declined people and the
lazy people fight against it, and the so-called conservatives and
those who dominate the people and their livelihood
oppose it. Therefore, thinking about change is
dangerous for the one who thinks about it, and
amongst all the types of thinking, it is the most fiercely attacked.
Thinking about change, whether it is the changing of the souls of the
individuals or their situation, or the changing of the societies or
the changing of the situations of the people and
nations or any other thing that requires change,
it must start with the basis upon which man lives,
and with the societies that are not established on a basis or established
on a wrong basis, or with the situations that proceed aimlessly. This
basis upon which life is established is that which elevates or
declines it, which brings happiness or hardship to
him and it is what originates the outlook towards
life. According to this outlook man proceeds in the
battlefield of life.
Firstly, this basis is examined. If it is a rational creed that complies
with man's innate nature (fitrah),
then this basis does not need changing. Nobody
would ever have it occur to him, or have it come to his mind,
the idea of changing this basis, because it is the basis upon which
life is established. Change only occurs when the
things are not correct and matters are not right,
and the error is apparent to the mind or
conspicuous to the feelings of the life energy of man. If the mind was
decisively certain about the truthfulness of the thing and the
correctness of the matter and the feelings (mashaa'ir)
of the life energy (at-Taqah al- Hayawiyyah)
were satisfied and pleased, then the idea of change would
not exist at all, and there will be no need for thinking about
change. However, if the basis upon which man
lives, the society is established and in
accordance to which the situations proceed, does not exist in
origin, or it exists in a wrong way, then it would be useless to
undertake thinking about changing anything else
before changing the basis, i.e. before changing
the creed which the people embrace. Therefore,
Muslims, who enjoyed the rational creed that agrees with man's innate
nature, should have made the change in the people who have no creeds,
or have erroneous creeds, that are rejected by the mind and do not
agree with man's innate nature. That is why it was
obligatory upon them to carry the Islamic da'wah
to all non-Muslim people, even if this lead to
fighting, and to being involved in battles with the kuffar, i.e. with those
who do not have the rational creed that agrees with man's innate
nature(fitrah).So changing should start with the
basis. Once the basis has been changed and
replaced by the basis whose truthfulness and validity has
been definitely established, then thinking about changing the
societies and situations follows. Changing the
societies and situations is achieved by changing
the criteria, concepts and convictions. For when the true and
correct basis exists it becomes the principle criterion for all other
criteria, and the principal concept of all the
concepts and the principal conviction of all the
convictions. So once this basis existed, it becomes possible
then to change the criterion, concepts and convictions, and
subsequently to change the societies and
situations. This is because by changing the basis,
all the values change, whether the values of the things or the values
of the thoughts, and hence the fundamentals of life change. Thus man
should think about change or he should be made to think of change.
Everybody who has a rational creed that agrees with man's nature has
the potential to think about change, that is
latently inside him, or by changing; such as when
he actually carries out thinking about change
during his immersion in the battlefield of life.
_________________________________
Further Reading
Thinking(tafkeer)
Changing Life's Perspective and Thinking
Islamic Personality |