zenpundit.com » 2009 » November

Archive for November, 2009

Guest Post: The Duel of Ali ibn Abu Talib with Amru ibn Abd Wudd

Monday, November 30th, 2009

Charles Cameron has been guest blogging here in a series on radical Islamism and terrorism. A former researcher with the Center for Millennial Studies at Boston University, his most recent essay, an analysis of the powerpoint presentation of Ft. Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan, appeared in the Small Wars Journal.

The Duel of Ali ibn Abu Talib with Amru ibn Abd Wudd:an old story of Muslim chivalry, told in refutation of today’s jihadists.

By Charles Cameron

Joseph Campbell was a comparative mythographer whose most celebrated book, *The Hero with a Thousand Faces*, famously provided George Lucas with the narrative stages found in the hero stories of the world’s cultures, and thus with the series of events that would forge a hero and Jedi warrior out of the raw material of young Luke Skywalker. In other books, he more than once tells the story of the samurai — a warrior with a precursor to the Jedi code — who was spat upon in battle:

His overlord had been killed, and his vow was, of course, absolute loyalty to this lord. And it was his duty now to kill the killer. Well, after considerable difficulties, he finally backs this fellow into a corner, and he is about to slay him with his *katana*, his sword, which is the symbol of his honor. And the chap in the corner is angry and terrified, and he spits on the samurai, who sheathes his sword and walks away. Now why did he do that? He did that because this action made him angry, and it would have been a personal act to have killed that man in anger, and that would have destroyed the whole event

It’s a powerful little nugget of a story, and in Campbell’s explanation of what was going on, we may even find a hint of where Lucas may have picked up the idea of the Force. Campbell writes:

This is a mythological attitude. You are acting not in terms of your individual, personal life but with the sense of yourself as the priest,so to say, of a cosmic power which is operating through you, which we all are in circumstances, and the problem is to balance yourself against that and have a personality at the same time

The thing is, Campbell may have been misremembering the source of his story. It’s true that such tales sometimes crop up in more than once culture, sometimes traveling the caravan routes from one place to another, or emerging perhaps, as Carl Jung suggests, from some dream logic deep in the heart of our humanity — but I have only seen thisstory told, and told repeatedly, within Islamic culture. It is in fact the story of the Duel of Ali ibn Abu Talib with Amru ibn Abd Wudd.
In the month of Shawwal 7 AH / 627 CE, the Muslims fought in the Battle of the Trench against a confederation of tribes at war with them. During the battle, Ali ibn Abu Talib encountered one of the chiefs of Quraysh, Amru ibn Abd Wudd, renowned for his bravery and strength, as well as his reputation as a formidable wrester within Arabia; he was said to be the equivalent of a thousand horseman. When he managed to traverse the Trench with a party of men, he challenged the Muslims to a duel of swords. Ali asked Prophet Muhammad to permit him to accept the challenge, but Prophet Muhammad refused his offer, simply stating that he was the formidable Amru. With no one accepting Amru’s taunts to duel, Ali’s insisted for permission to duel for the third time. This time, the Prophet accepted, and gave him the famed sword, Dhul-Fiqar, and supplicated for his success. Ali asked Amru to accept Islam, but he refused and preferred to fight Ali.
Towering over his opponent, the more experienced and stronger Amru hammered blows on Ali’s shield and clashed with his sword. Ali then dropped his sword and shield to the ground; he leapt to grab Amru’s throat, and kicked him off balance. Amru crashed to the ground, with Ali now towering over him: “Know, O Amru, that victory and defeat depend upon the will of Allah. Accept Islam! Thus not only will your life be spared, but you will also enjoy the blessings of Allah in this life and the next.” At this suggestion, Amru spat into Ali’s face, fully expecting death. Ali rose calmly from Amru’s chest, wiped his face, and stood a few paces away, gazing solemnly at his adversary. “Know, O Amru, I only kill in the way of Allah and not for any private motive. Since you spat in my face, my killing you now may be from a desire for personal vengeance. So I spare your life. Rise and return to your people!”
For Amru, to live now would be to live as the vanquished after having tasted victory on the battlefield all his life. He lunged at Ali as he walked away. With enough time to lift his sword and shield, Ali prepared for the fresh assault. Amru’s devastating blow shattered Ali’s shield, inflicting a shallow cut to Ali’s temple. As the second blow rose, Ali swept Dhul-fiqar and decapitated Amru. The Muslims praised Allah. After killing of Amru ibn Abd Wudd, Imam Ali had the gap in the trench which Amru had breached blocked, and took his post at that point with the intention of confronting anyone who might try to cross the trench. They too, would encounter Amru’s fate should they have tried.
When Imam Ali returned from the battlefield, the Messenger of Allah received him and said: “The fighting of Ali ibn Abu Talib with Amru ibn Abd Wudd is greater in measure than the actions of my people until the Day of Resurrection.” Ali ensured that the precious chain of armour, adorned with hung-gold rings, which Amru had worn during their duel, was returned to Amru’s sister of the Bani Amir, so that it would not be thought that Ali had killed him in greed of this precious chain coat.
I have drawn this telling of the tale from the Islamic think tank Ihsanic Intelligence’s remarkable work, “The Hijacked Caravan: Refuting Suicide Bombings as Martyrdom Operations in Contemporary Jihad Strategy“, which describes it as illustrating the importance of a chivalric code within Islam — the section in question begins, “The concept of chivalry [futuwwa] is at the forefront of Jihad” — with “the model of Imam Ali as constituting the prime example of chivalry”.

As the authors of “The Hijacked Caravan” note, this tale can be found in the *Mathnawi*, the great epic of the thirteenth century Sufi poet Rumi— himself born in the environs of Balkh, Afghanistan (it would have been Khorasan back then) — currently (somewhat paradoxically) America’s best-selling poet:

In a battle against the unbelievers Ali got the upper hand against a certain champion. He quickly raised his sword and was hurrying to kill him. But the man spat in Ali’s face, who was the pride of every prophet and every saint; He spat upon a face before which the beautiful face of the full moon bows low at the place of prostration. At that moment, Ali threw aside his sword and slowed down in his fight against him. That brave warrior … said, “You raised your sharp sword against me: for what reason did you throw it aside and quit fighting me? Ali said, Since a motive other than God entered my heart in the holy war, I deemed it right to sheathe the sword.

Mathnawi I: 3721 adapted

Ali comments on the struggle (jihad) in which he is engaged at the crucial moment, “The sword of my restraint has struck the neck of my anger” — identifying it as the “greater jihad” against one’s own evil
tendencies, which here (as in the well-known hadith) clearly supersedes the “lesser jihad” of the physical fight against the enemies of Islam.
I have, however, also found this story in one other place where a Muslim is presenting a public case against the contemporary jihadist world-view.
The novelist and screenwriter Kamran Pasha was particularly delighted to join the writing team on the Showtime series, *Sleeper Cell*, because it would give him an opportunity to represent how mainstream Muslims scholars think about those verses in the Qur’an that are commonly used to support the actions of Al-Qaida — and about their version of Islam in general.
Kamran wrote the episode, “The Scholar”, and based the Islamic moderate scholar Sheikh Zayd Abdal Malik on the real-life figure of the Yemeni judge, al-Hitar, who challenges captured jihadists to a theological duel with the words “If you can convince us that your ideas are justified bythe Koran, then we will join you in your struggle — but if we succeed in convincing you of our ideas, then you must agree to renounce violence.”

At the beginning of the episode, Abdal Malik is spat upon by an imprisoned extremist. He calmly removes his glasses, wipes his face, replaces his glasses, picks up his copy of the Qur’an, kisses it reverently and begins his task of persuasion… Towards the end of the same episode, now on a lecture tour of America, he quotes the hadith about the greater and the lesser jihad:

The holy Prophet — sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam — said that war against the unbelievers is the lesser jihad. The greatest jihad is to battle your own soul, to fight the evil within yourself.

He is then asked, “So, who is a true holy warrior, then?” and replies,”The Prophet’s cousin Ali” – at which point he tells the story of the duel.
Kamran Pasha’s own wish in re-telling this story can be deduced from another comment placed in the mouth of his chivalric and heroic Islamic scholar, shortly before he is assassinated: “I will issue a fatwa against the murdering devils who have hijacked our beloved Islam.”
This episode is in some sense Pasha’s own unofficial fatwa, and the story of the duel of Ali ibn Abu Talib with Amru ibn Abd Wudd holds a central place in his argument, as it does in The Hijacked Caravan.

Kamran Pasha blogs. His post on Major Hasan and the Fort Hood shooting includes the comments of a friend of his, a recent Muslim convert also stationed at Fort Hood, who had prayed alongside Hasan at the mosque that morning. It is a post that repays reading. Kamran has received death threats for his stance against jihadist ideology, which he pillories in his novel Mother of the Believers while describing the Khawarij, extremists in the early days of Islam — one of whom assassinated Ali ibn Abu Talib.

Ali ibn Abu Talib, who forgave his killer. Ali ibn Abu Talib – whose blood flows in his direct descendant Kamran Pasha’s veins

“You are formally charged with War Game Crimes and with Playing Games against Humanity…”

Friday, November 27th, 2009

There’s an academic-Left kook element of no small size among international law NGO activists. These folks see themselves as a secular, international relations, Ulema, able to issue press release “fatwas” that are supposedly binding but in reality, have no legal basis in anything except their own imaginations.

Naturally, such an unserious intellectual position eventually leads them into bizarre and frivolous wastes of time.

Can Video Games Turn You Into a War Criminal?

….According to a new study by two Swiss human rights groups, TRIAL and Pro Juventute, many combat-heavy games actively encourage players to kill injured soldiers, attack civilians and destroy churches and mosques. As satisfying as these actions might be for players, they flagrantly violate real-life criminal and humanitarian law.

The organizations reached this guilty verdict with the help of three attorneys, who watched gamers blast their way through 19 titles, including recent hits like “Call of Duty 4,” “Army of Two” and “Metal Gear Solid 4.” Each time a player flouted the Geneva Convention or another international treaty, the legal team took note.

Their final report reads like Radovan Karadzic’s rap sheet. “Call of Duty 4,” a first-person shooter set in Russia and the Middle East, is accused of allowing gamers to “attack civilian buildings with no limits in order to get rid of all the enemies present in the town who are on roof tops … Under [International Humanitarian Law], the fact that combatants/fighters are present in a town does not make the entire town a military objective.”

Cluelessness is a closed system.

Guest Book Review: The Genius of the Beast

Thursday, November 26th, 2009

The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism by Howard Bloom

Reviewed by J. Scott Shipman

Mr. Bloom may have a modern-day classic in his third book, The Genius of the Beast, A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism. Bloom delivers a tour-de-force with obvious and not-so-obvious evidence supporting the power of capitalism to deliver a better quality of life, a better world, and he does so with passion and vigor. 

The Beast is a very quotable book and Bloom’s voice has a messianic quality. From the beginning he admits that his book is “designed to give you pleasure.” In my estimation he succeeds on multiple levels, but I must admit as a newcomer to Bloom’s writing, I was scratching my head during the first portion when he used phrases like “transcendence engine,” “secular genesis machine,” and “evolutionary search engine” which to my way of thinking smacked of new-age hype but I pressed-on and am glad I did. Bloom’s successful use of these “metaphors” (which will probably find their way into our language) helped him to explain the crisis facing Western Culture and his common sense solutions. He writes:

“Our civilization is under attack. But many of us don’t want to defend it. Why? There’s a void in our sense of meaning. We’ve been told that the “the Western system” is one in which the rich stoke artificial needs to suck money, blood, and spirit from the rest of us. We’ve been told that the barons of industry work overtime to turn us from sensitive humans into consumers–mindless buyers listlessly watching TV while growing obese on the artificial flavors, chemical preservatives, and the cheap sugars of junk food. And some of that it is true.

But the problem does not lie in the turbines of the Western way of life–it does not lie in industrialism, capitalism, pluralism, free speech, and democracy. The problem lies in the lens through which we see.”

The Beast is delivered in 78 bite-sized chapters (with 82 pages of notes) in prose accessible to the average reader. However, the large number of small chapters doesn’t scrimp on content; Bloom sets the stage with a review the phenomena of economic booms and crashes through the lens of manic-depressive economies of the past and present. He offers evidence that even without a World Wide Web and the modern notion of globalization, our current situation is not unique and economies have suffered worse crashes than our recent 2007/08 meltdown. 

Bloom contends  “emotional flows” have powered our past and will power our future, but until now, we have not had the tools or the awareness to “bring them into view.” The Beast, in Bloom’s words, “attempts to show you how and why.”

Like the great John Boyd, Bloom, a scientist-turned-rock band promoter, is a consilient thinker—he weaves the theory of evolution, neurology, entomology, bacteriology, public policy, economics, and crowd-psychology (just to name a few) into an uplifting view of capitalism and how we interact within our culture, and the importance of staying on the edge of exploration. Importantly, he lays bare the truth about Marxism, demonstrating that Marx was what he complained of: a capitalist peddling a murderous utopian view of the world that led to at least 80M deaths in the twentieth century. Contrary to what many modern critics of capitalism would have us believe, Bloom asserts that where “Religions and ideologies promise to raise the poor and the oppressed. But only The Western system {capitalism} delivers on that promise century after century.” And he backs up his assertion with facts.

Bloom’s clear-eyed enthusiasm for Western culture does not spare the reader the excesses and tragedies of capitalism; he leaves no stone unturned in his critical assessments or in his heart-felt endorsements. He provides not only reasons for hope, but proven tools and methods to get things done and for the right reasons. Bloom used competitive and cooperative examples in nature (birds, bees, and fish) to explain our environment and culture and made for excellent examples of what works and does not work in nature. Bloom takes Plato to task for “what he didn’t tell us,” how capitalism created the alphabet, why “flash isn’t frivolous,” the importance of vanity, and how as a scientist in the business world he used two rules of science he learned as a kid that were invaluable to his success:

“(1) The truth at any price including the price of your life, and (2) look at things right under your nose as if you’ve never seen them before, then proceed from there.” 

For some, Bloom’s descriptions of his success may smack of immodesty, but given the passion flowing from each page, it is difficult to fault him for saying essentially, “Hey, this isn’t just theory! I’ve tried it and it works and you can do it, too!”

Blooms “transcendence engine” revs into high-gear as he walks the reader from Marco Polo, to Prince Henry The Navigator, to Christopher Columbus, and how “the world is fed using Mesoamerican agrotechnology;” and how none of this would have been possible without dreamers dreaming and then acting, and searching…exploring.

The insanity of reliance on pure reason is laid bare; he states plainly “reason without intuition is cripple.” Leaders and would-be leaders could take a lesson from Bloom’s guidance to use our “instrument of empathy” (which is something literally “right under our nose”) to find emotions within that are attuned to the people you want to serve. He encourages the deliberate act of “learning” more about our customers in order to “learn to care about them more deeply.” He used a lovely analogy in the form of Edna St. Vincent Millay’s masterpiece “Renascence” to illustrate the depth of truly knowing those we serve: “It said that to see the infinite in every grain of sand, you have to feel all the pains, the pleasures, the extremes, and the day-to-day emotions of every conceivable sort of person sharing this planet with you, of every living human being.” In our narcissistic age, this appeal may have an odd ring, but history and Bloom offer examples of how “learning” about customers works, and Bloom doesn’t mean the institutional research as much as the personal benefits of having first-hand knowledge and empathy for those we serve. (His observations on focus groups were spot-on as well.) 

Bloom wraps up with a genuinely passionate entreaty that may sound odd without more background, but inspiring and thought-provoking just the same:

“Help others grow selfish on behalf of others, too. Ask what your fixations and your private passions can contribute to the lives of others. Get fervent about it. Crusade! If it’s a better art-directed envelope for the mail room, one that will light up the people who find it in their mail box, if it’s a service that will give your customers the honest sense that you care for their security, no matter what it is, do it! Forget the horse-pucky about lean and mean. Meanness is punished in the long run by the capitalist system. It’s socked by a dive in long range profits and in long-range value, long-range capitalization. It’s rocked by the hatred of meanness makers generate. Profit, value, and longevity come from caring, not from ruthless savagery. You are here—at your job forty or sixty hours a week—not to plunder but to please. You are here to give eight hours of meaning to those you work for, to those who work for you, and most of all to your public, to your audience, to the tens of millions or hundreds of millions who you would like to reach and bring into your fold.”

Those are big numbers, but he’s right—even in our small world; we’re ambassadors for something bigger—-so the “crusade!” comment seems appropriate.

Get this book and read it. Bloom’s assessments are thoughtful and inspiring. Thank you, Howard Bloom, you have bridged generations and thoughts and tied together facts that otherwise would have gone unnoticed.

About the Reviewer:

Based in the suburbs of Washington, DC, Scott is the father of three, the husband of one, former submarine sailor and arms control inspector, and the founder of a boutique consulting firm specializing in strategic thought leadership.  As an admirer of the late Colonel John Boyd, Scott’s passion centers around a presentation titled  “To Be, or To DO: A Challenge To Action With Integrity.” Scott is pleased, but not surprised that Boyd has so many devotees and is glad to have found Zen and Co. 

Update: DNI

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

Two bloggers have stepped forward to lend a hand in preserving and carrying on DNI’s legacy. In each instance, both efforts are “under construction”.

John Robb has set up a page for William Lind to continue his column and to house 4GW docs, also a page to house materials from strategist Col. John Boyd, whose ideas were at the core of DNI.

Ed Beakley of Project White Horse is developing a Boyd Compendium that will eventually be greatly expanded to include much of interest at DNI.

Dr. Richards announced he will be keeping DNI up until he can find another person or organization to take over site management.

Three Questions With Steve Pressfield

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

I’ve enjoyed a sporadic conversation with Steve Pressfield , author of Gates of Fire and Killing Rommel, ever since he started his Tribes site. While most of our discussions had to do with COIN, tribalism, ancient history and Afghanistan, Steve is also generous with his time and advice with those who aspire to become better writers. Pressfield distilled his philosophy of writing, learned from the school of hard knocks, into a short handbook, The War of Art which I heartily recommend. Steve also features a “Writing Wednesdays” as a weekly tutorial in the writer’s craft and the acquisition of a professional mindset.

In the spirit of “Writing Wednesday”, Steve invited me to pose three questions to him based on my impressions of The War of Art. Here are my questions and Steve’s answers:

ZP: You write in The War of Art about “the muse”and Socrates‘ “heaven-sent madness”. It sounds very much like the “flow” described by creativity theorist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Does the intensity of that experience ever lead the artist astray ?

SP: In my experience, Mark, the writing process bounces back and forth between two poles.  One is the let-‘er-rip mode, which could be called “flow,” or “Dionysian.”  That’s the one when the Muse possesses a writer and he just goes with it.  But yes, as you suggest, it can lead you astray.  It’s the like the great ideas you have at three in the morning after two too many tequilas.  This mode has to be balanced by a saner-head mode, which sometimes to me almost feels like a different person–an editor, a reviser.  That’s really when you put yourself in imagination in the place of the reader and ask yourself, as you’re reading the stuff that this “other guy” wrote: “Does this make any sense?  Is this any good?  Have I got it in the right place, in the right form?  Should I cut it, expand it, modify it, dump it entirely.”  Then you become cold-blooded and professional.  You get ruthless with your own work.  This is the time, I think, when “formula” wisdom can help, when you can ask yourself questions like, “What is my inciting incident?” or “What is my Act Two mid-point.”  Not when you’re in the flow, or you’ll censor yourself and second-guess yourself.  But now, when you’re rationally evaluating what you produced when you were in flow.

This back-and-forthing, I imagine, would be true in any artistic or entrepreneurial venture.  It’s great to let it rip and really get down some wild, skatting jazz riffs.  But then we have to come back and ask ourselves, “Is this working for the audience?  Is this working for the work itself?”

ZP: Amateurs reach a tipping point where they “Turn pro”. Is turning professional more from innate character or from the lessons of experience?

SP: Some people are born “pro.”  I have two friends, identical twins, who are both tremendous producers of excellent work and they’ve never suffered a minute of Resistance in their lives.  The lucky bastards.  For the rest of us though (at least this is my experience), only after many painful hard knocks … really when it becomes simply too excruciating to continue living as an amateur (and thereby suffering the agonies of never completing anything, always screwing up, forever feeling inadequate in our own eyes and just plain not respecting ourselves) do we finally, out of sheer emotional self-preservation, say to ourselves, “This crap has gotta stop!  We gotta get our act together!”

ZP: Artists run straight into hierarchies, filled with gatekeepers, between ourselves and a goal. Go through or go around?

SP: There’s an axiom in Hollywood that if you write a truly great script, it will not go unrecognized.  I think this is true.  What I mean by that is that gatekeepers can be our friends.  They can open gates as well as close them.  In fact, I vote for jettisoning the term “gatekeeper.”  It’s negative and self-defeating–and it’s an insult, I think, to the editors, agents, publishers and development executives whose agenda is not to exclude us, the artists.  In fact they’d like nothing more than to discover fresh talent, a hot new manuscript, a great pitch or biz proposal.  In my own experience, I got shot down again and again when my stuff wasn’t ready and wasn’t good.  But once I had done the work and elevated my material to the professional level, I found open doors and helping hands.

All that is not to say that “going around” can’t be a good idea too.  Look at Seth Godin, who’s the poster boy for damning the torpedoes and taking his stuff straight to the marketplace with incredible success.  In my own career though–now that you’ve made me think about it, Mark–I realize I’ve always gone the traditional route.  And the “gatekeepers” I’ve met have become, almost within exception, great friends and allies–and I’ve wound up helping them, in other ways, almost as much as they’ve helped me.

Thanks Steve!

Switch to our mobile site