Beyond Belief: Islamic Excursions Among the Converted Peoples

Rating:
Summary: Eqbal Ahmad, Interviewed by David Barsamian
Review: An amazing, important book for those who wish to deapen their knowledge as to the countries dealt with.

Rating:
Summary: Observant, truthful, but a bit incoherent.
Review: Beyond Belief is the well-written but somewhat rambling story of the author's revisit to four non-Arab Muslim countries (Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, and Malaysia). Naipaul says in the preface, "This is not a book of opinion." In my view, that's too bad, because it needs some central idea to give the interesting stories it tells cohesiveness and heart. Even when Naipaul does give opinions, while he expresses them with iconoclasm and a bit of eloquence, they lack as ideas.

Probably the most important theme of the book is how Muslims of other cultures look up to Arab culture and down on their own. Naipaul describes the attitude he meets that makes invaders into heroes and encourages cultural self-loathing as a "dreadful mangling of history." The consequences are, perhaps, worst in "feudal" Pakistan. The pictures he paints should make any Western liberal rethink the doctrine that all religions must, by definition, be created equal; your heart cries for the women, in particular, locked indoors for a lifetime.

But instead of exploring the relationship between Mohammed and modern Islam, Naipaul cops out by generalizing (in a half-hearted way) about "revealed religion," Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. But in essence, I think Islam shares more affinity with Marxism and other revolutionary religions. Naipaul seems to pick up on some of those similiarities, but doesn't follow the clues to their source. (In Mohammed and Marx.)

Beyond Belief is about the need for roots -- connections with ancestors, traditions, and land. However, Naipaul sometimes seems to forget that people also have a need for truth -- for universals that transcends the particular.

Naipaul's assumed contrast between the "converted" and those whose religion is an organic growth from local traditions, while partly true, is largely a false dichotomy. He forgets that Islam was almost as iconoclastic in regard to Arab culture as it is towards other cultures. The alternative is for universal truth to find roots in local traditions. (That is the topic of my research. Jesus, by contrast to Mohammed, said he came to "fulfill," not "abolish," Jewish culture. In the space of a single generation, Christianity went from being Jewish to being a Mediterranean religion. Lately I have been researching how Indian and Chinese intellectuals have begun to describe the Gospel as the fulfillment of thousands of years of Asian culture in a way that reinvigorates, rather than suppresses, those traditions. In Japan, by contrast, with its embrace of cold modernity, I find a sterile conformity like that Naipaul decries in Muslim countries.) The question this book should raise is how the particular can be saved, and enhanced, within the universal -- of finding universals that encourages fitting expression of all that is most human.

Not only his religious, but also his political thought needs deeper study. He describes the "religious state" in which "religion was not a matter of private conscience" as one full of "simple roguery." Perhaps because his subject is Islam, and his background Hindu, he seems to have in mind two simple alternatives -- a false dichotomy between a religion that is entirely private (sanyassi) and one that takes over the state. (As Mohammed did.) He does not consider the possibility of politics informed and enriched by a faith that is nevertheless kept distinct from the state.

As my first taste of Naipaul, I enjoyed the book. I found the stories invigorating, timely, and disturbing. But I don't agree with whatever literary theory of is responsible for the book's lack of coherence and systematic thought. Naipaul picks up pieces of truth here and there, and examines them with scrupulous honesty, but seems afraid to synthesize a system (at least here) or offer solutions, for fear of rigidity or forced conformity. Perhaps that is what the title of the book means, that he thinks ideas too dangerous to deal in? I put the book down hoping next time Naipaul will go beyond unbelief and tell us what he thinks, but looking forward to reading him again, in any case.

(...)

Rating:
Summary: Slower, Yet Deeper Naipaul
Review: Beyond Belief takes more time to tell the personal or family tale of each subject than Among the Believers, his earlier book on Islam. It does a revealing job of describing the current cultural or political conditions in Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia and even India. Naipaul provides more sense of continuity and sense of cultural development than in past books.

However, there are points where one might feel lost in the details of Muslim societies, particularly in the sections on Indonesia. The sections on Iran and Pakistan are much more crisply written. Happily, there's a reprise on Indonesian Muslim topics at the end of the book that is much clearer than the first third of the book.

As usual for Naipaul, this book is well-researched and has wonderful historical detail. He's less judgemental than in earlier books, but forms clear opinions nonetheless.

Rating:
Summary: Worth a read
Review: I will break the mold and give this book 2.5 stars! I read Beyond Belief two years ago, and recently, I read two of Naipaul's other books, Among the Believers and India: A Wounded Civilization. When I read Beyond Belief, I was very impressed with it. It seemed an original way to observe everyday people and, through them, learn about and analyze their culture. The book is not an easy read, as none of Naipaul's books are. But it has a captivating narrative.
However, more recently, I picked up the other two books that I mentioned before. Reading those two books, it seemed that Naipaul writes in a continuum, moving from one country, culture, religion to another. The fact that they are separated by time, distance, tradition etc do not make any difference to his analysis and lead him to the same conclusions, as if his mind was already made up. I found this trait in all three of his books I have read.
I will say a little more about his book India: A Wounded Civilization. I was born in India and spent the first twenty years of my ife there. To be fair, Naipaul has a very sharp mind. He picks up things too subtle for most people. Many of the questions he raises are sharp and deserve to be thought on. In many instances in the book, I felt that his observations were so penetrating that I felt naked. However, Naipaul has one fatal flaw. He is obsessed with the negative. In all the three books that I have read of him, I could not find a single positive thing he said about the five countries he wrote about. In more than seven hundred pages, not a single positive thing about people who constitute about one third of humanity. Sure these countries have problems, all kinds of problems, and too many of them. However, it is very hard to believe that there is nothing about any of these peoples that is inspiring and good. I can site many things. But Naipaul was completely blind to any positive traits. And so his credibility as an objective observer is betrayed.

I give his book 2.5 stars because what he sees, he sees it really well, but he only sees half of it! So take what you can from the book, but remember, it is not the full story.

Comments welcome at [e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: Worth a read
Review: I will break the mold and give this book 2.5 stars! I read Beyond Belief two years ago, and recently, I read two of Naipaul's other books, Among the Believers and India: A Wounded Civilization. When I read Beyond Belief, I was very impressed with it. It seemed an original way to observe everyday people and, through them, learn about and analyze their culture. The book is not an easy read, as none of Naipaul's books are. But it has a captivating narrative.
However, more recently, I picked up the other two books that I mentioned before. Reading those two books, it seemed that Naipaul writes in a continuum, moving from one country, culture, religion to another. The fact that they are separated by time, distance, tradition etc do not make any difference to his analysis and lead him to the same conclusions, as if his mind was already made up. I found this trait in all three of his books I have read.
I will say a little more about his book India: A Wounded Civilization. I was born in India and spent the first twenty years of my ife there. To be fair, Naipaul has a very sharp mind. He picks up things too subtle for most people. Many of the questions he raises are sharp and deserve to be thought on. In many instances in the book, I felt that his observations were so penetrating that I felt naked. However, Naipaul has one fatal flaw. He is obsessed with the negative. In all the three books that I have read of him, I could not find a single positive thing he said about the five countries he wrote about. In more than seven hundred pages, not a single positive thing about people who constitute about one third of humanity. Sure these countries have problems, all kinds of problems, and too many of them. However, it is very hard to believe that there is nothing about any of these peoples that is inspiring and good. I can site many things. But Naipaul was completely blind to any positive traits. And so his credibility as an objective observer is betrayed.

I give his book 2.5 stars because what he sees, he sees it really well, but he only sees half of it! So take what you can from the book, but remember, it is not the full story.

Comments welcome at [e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: A very clear example of Islam in the 90's
Review: I'm impressed that Naipaul came up with this book after 17 years of his sequel his "Amoung the Believers". Sad to say that his book is banned in Malaysia like any other books that seems to be a challange to Islam. Even worse is that muslims everywhere are quick to say that he's bias or prejudiced towards muslims eventhough the real fact is that he's investigating the impact of the islamic religion in different cultural background.

As a Chinese-Malaysian, I totally agree of the facts that he discovered about Malaysia. Islam has been tearing apart Hindu, Buddhist, Christian families by promoting their faith discrimination on the converted people. Furthermore I would like to add that even after 17 years no progress or development had been acheived by those particular muslims in his interviews. Sad to say that those books by the apologists of Islam is making their way in the bookstore while any books that proves to be a challange are kept hidden. Take for example Ibn Warraq's "Why I am Not a Muslim", "Origin of the Quran" and Anwar Hekmat's "Women and the Koran".

Rating:
Summary: Beyond Belief by V.S. Naipaul
Review: In my point of view, this book is a Classic.
First because its prose, its writing quality. Naipaul is a great writer, a master who can describe richly what he sees, what he thinks and what he experiences - as few writers could. He moves quickly from a single detail of daily life to a big panorama of history. He can be subtle, and he is also sharp. Several times he is ironical, and most of all his writing is fluid and simple, unregarding the complexity of his themes.      
A second thing is the very particular situation of this book.  I had never read a book in which the same author travels to countries he had been 20 years before. Besides, for us of the West, it's an entry into the islamic world. Through his words, we have a very clear look over Iran, Pakistan, Malasia and Indonesia social and political experiences. And what results those systems brought.          
Another great thing about this book is how Naipaul is a keen observer of culture. The past, present and the future are linked. Waves of subtle transformations and assimilations sometimes occur very very slowly. Sometimes abrupt facts take place. The people who talk to Naipaul are real, and they tell him their "own truth" through many different ways: their lives, behaviors, way of speaking, gestures. Every little sign counts, and fortunately Naipaul is there.
Those who want to complete Naipaul's journey should also read "Among the Believers", 1979. Great narratives by a master, these books bring a lot of reflections about culture, religion, politics, and our values. Everyone should read! I'm glad I did.

Rating:
Summary: Preconceptions
Review: Naipaul presents descriptions that attempts to blend literature with factual reporting. The problem is that the outcome is neither objective nor factual and is a mishmash of anecdotal claptrap and long-winded descriptions. The outcome is interesting to the extent that it offers some insight on Muslim cultures, yet it lacks the thoroughness of essays that a historian or a political scientist would be capable of producing.

Rating:
Summary: Great stories, and let's leave it at that
Review: Right up front Naipaul says "this book is about people. It's not a book of opinion. It's a book of stories." These are stories about people in four Islamic countries (Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan and Malaysia) that simply say: to live a life BEYOND BELIEF in the Third World means maintaining one's hopes and dreams against the daily grind of disillusionment and poverty. This disheartening experience is central to Naipaul's writing. There is always the theme of a "universal civilization" with center and periphery and the idea of the pursuit of happiness is at its center. In both his fiction and travel writing he simply believes that this is an "immense human idea" and it colors all he sees and writes about. Another theme closely linked to this is Naipaul's search for how we fill the psychological and spiritual center. Take the example of the young Iranian student who he describes as someone who "couldn't step outside himself to consider his life and motives." The same spiritual quest can be seen in the lifestories of a Malaysian playwright and a Javanese poet. The playwright's story also involves the man's father and his unfinished house. Again we are dealing with Naipauls' interests. It is no coincidence that the persons Naipaul is drawn to are writers like himself or men who worked out the center and periphery struggle of father and son. Nor is a house insignificant in the context of what it means to possess a piece of ones own sacred ground.

This book is supposedly hostile to Islam and Salman Rushdie once accused Naipaul of being a Hindu nationalist. Vituperation was stepped up a notch when Edward Said called Naipaul "an intellectual catastrophe of the first order" and said he was a "ghost". But why stop there. Naipaul has written many books with African, West Indian, Latin American, and Indian settings and some unhappy readers have called him a neocolonialist, imperialist, "brown sahib" or "hater of negroes". The truth is Islamic criticism of this book is no different than any other overly sensitive reaction. It is equally as misplaced and more importantly, misses the point of Naipaul's writing entirely.

Naipaul writes about the human condition and the struggle that is life. If we see too much of our own disillusionment and disappointment in what we read that is no fault of the writer. And lest you think he writes from an arms length away and cares nothing for his subjects, or is himself incapable of emotion, nothing could be further than the truth about his work. In talking about the same Javanese poet Naipaul says he now has "a clear knowledge - almost as to something about myself - of the pain Linus lived with, family pain, pain as a writer, pain for all the things of Java and his village which he saw being washed away." Hostile to Islam? I don't think so. Just great stories from an incomparable writer, that's all.

Rating:
Summary: INteresting and rational view of islam from a non believer
Review: This book rocks !!! And does it rock the propagation of Islam and its intentions amongst non Arab nations. Being a 5th generation Indian, the section on Pakistan interested me, and the concept of the nation forged upon a poetic dream.
I wont be surprised if this publication has been banned in certain Islamic nations because it really goes for the upper cut.