One meets four types of individuals according to the value they attach to reason and passion, or to the mind and the heart. If one is active on the social media, one encounters the first three types almost every day, with the fourth type appearing far less frequently.
The first type consists of those who make it a point to coldly analyse everything. The man of this type is a great proponent of logic and reasoning. He says (rightly) that one cannot allow one’s conduct to be dictated to by mere feelings. For feelings are things one cannot help and are often outright silly. There are adults who would not go anywhere near a lizard although they know perfectly well that it could not possibly harm them. So much for feelings and emotions! The rationalist objects equally to those emotions that tend to make men throw caution to the wind. He therefore dismisses poetry that glorifies passion – Guzar ja aql se aage ke ye noor…, Lekin kabhi kabhi ise tanhaa bhi chhor de, or Laraa de mamole ko shahbaaz se – as emotional claptrap with no basis in ground realities, and which is certain to do more harm than good.
The second type comprises those who take pride in following their hearts. They maintain that life is too complex to analyse, and that one should therefore do what feels right. The heart has its reasons that reason does not know, and all that sort of thing. ‘We cannot analyse the truth’, they say, ‘but we know the truth when we hear it.’ These people are great ones for passion. They say (not entirely unjustifiably) that those who are into books and reasoning often find themselves in a state of analysis-paralysis. Therefore, they rarely perform in the battlefield so to speak, where those with passion rule the roost. They make fun of studious folks by calling them nerds, bookworms and what not. Follow your heart, is their mantra.
The third type is by far the most interesting (and irritating). These guys keep switching between reason and passion, depending on their whim or whichever suits them better in any given situation. They might start with a perfectly rational reason for why they are pro-vaccine (say) but as the day of the vaccination approaches, they start having second thoughts, although no new evidence has come to light that could potentially change their position. Their doubts cause them to start voicing platitudes (‘Life and death are in God’s hands and if one is going to die, then one is going to die; and there is hardly anything anybody can do about it.’ – or words to that effect.)
Only yesterday, I had a long discussion on a religious matter with a very academic-sounding man. Although the matter was interesting, its details need not concern us here. In true Type-1 style, he started extremely rationally: presenting evidence, and slowly building up to his conclusion. I pointed out the flaws in his argument and suggested that he should make certain amendments in his reasoning to make it more consistent. He kept on presenting objections to my amendments, and I kept on answering them. This to-and-fro went on like a tennis rally for quite a while. Finally, he realized that ‘rationality’ was not going to take him anywhere. It was at that moment that he decided that he did not want to have anything to do with reason anymore. Switching abruptly to Type-2, he stated that religion was all about ishq and action; and that overthinking was therefore certain to make one an ineffective Muslim, if not worse. I am certain that, were he of a more literary disposition, he would have quoted Iqbal’s Be khatar kood para aatish e namrood mein ishq.
Both the rationalists as well as the passion enthusiasts are justified in valuing reason and passion respectively. But both are guilty of overemphasizing one faculty at the cost of the other. Reason and passion are not involved in a boxing match with one another. Reason reigns supreme when it comes to the pursuit of knowledge. But it is passion that gets things done. In a clash between two ideologies, it is the one backed by more passionate adherents, and not the ‘correct’ one, that dominates.
Up until now, we have been surveying the first three types. Now we have the pleasanter task of considering the fourth type, even though, unfortunately, it is much rarer than the first three. People of this type understand that the ‘mind or heart?’ (‘reason or passion?’) debate is a poorly framed one because the two are complementary, not competing, faculties. Depending upon the given context, both have a vital role to play. Religion (and everything else for that matter) is based on theory and practice. When it comes to the theory, impartial pursuit of the truth is called for. Here, feelings and passion are detrimental as they tend to obscure the truth. As one of its major themes, the Quran keeps exhorting men to ponder on its verses and on the workings of the universe. The Bible also says the same thing: ‘Come, let us reason together.’ [Isaiah 1:18] Reason is the faculty that distinguishes truth from falsehood. Emotions have no part to play here. Once the truth is known, however, and it is time to act on it, it is passion that drives men. For when it comes to practice, cold reason often makes men pragmatic and overly concerned for their own safety and comfort.
Both the rationalists as well as the passion enthusiasts are justified in valuing reason and passion respectively. But both are guilty of overemphasizing one faculty at the cost of the other. Reason and passion are not involved in a boxing match with one another. Reason reigns supreme when it comes to the pursuit of knowledge. But it is passion that gets things done. In a clash between two ideologies, it is the one backed by more passionate adherents, and not the ‘correct’ one, that dominates.
