Ali Ahmed Said Esbar was 14 years old when the president of the newly established Republic of Syria, Shukri Al-Qawatli, visited his village of Al-Qassabin in 1944. The young lad, already a precocious poet, was asked to recite one of his poems for the president. Al-Qawatli was so impressed he asked the boy what he could do for him. Esbar, whose family was too poor to pay for school, and who until that time had been educated largely at a Quranic school, asked that he be given a government scholarship to attend a school. The request was granted.
And so began an extraordinary career that would take the young poet to Damascus where he earned a BA in Philosophy, and then onto the Catholic University of Al-Qiddees Yusuf in Beirut where he earned a PhD in Arabic Literature. During all this time he continued to write verse. When traditional publishers did not treat the young poet seriously, he adopted the pen name Adonis – an ancient Mesopotamian god. That caught their attention. They started to read his work. And when they did, they realized his genius.
Today Adonis is recognized across the Arab World as one of the greatest poets of the modern era. He is arguably a pioneer in the modernization of Arabic poetry, which until he came along had remained largely unchanged for 1400 years. In addition to his prodigious work in poetry he has edited literary magazines, produced anthologies, and authored books on early Arabic poetry. He is also a painter whose work has been displayed in Europe and the Middle East. During the past few years his name has featured prominently as a nominee for the Nobel Prize in Literature.
Perhaps his most famous work in prose is what originated as his PhD dissertation. That work, starting in 1973 developed over several years into a four volume book entitled Al-Thabit Wa Al-Mutahawwil (The Static and the Dynamic). The book, now in its eighth edition, caused and continues to cause much discussion and controversy. In the book, which has the subtitle “A study in creativity and conformity among the Arabs”, Adonis explores why the ‘mold’ of Arabic poetry, since the advent of Islam 14 centuries ago has remained largely ‘static’. By the mold he means more the structure of the poem rather than the meaning conveyed.
This mold, in Arabic, A’mud Al-Shi’r (pillar of poetry), was inherited by Islam from the pre Islamic period – the Jahiliya, as it was known. The Qasida (poem) of the Jahiliya had rhyme and meter in all its verses. Each verse was composed of two hemistichs, with the final consonant of the second hemistich remaining the same throughout the Qasida.
Since Arabic poetry is already aligned with religion any attempt, by extension, to modernize it carries the sacrilegious suggestion of modernizing religion. So in some sense poetry becomes fixed in time.
The period Adonis chooses for his study is the first three centuries of the Hijri calendar. This was a period that established the foundations of religion and literature. It saw a disorderly and querulous group of Arab tribes in a forgotten corner of the planet rise to conquer much of the known world. It saw advances in culture, civics, the arts, sciences, and learning in general. So why, Adonis asks, did poetry stay more or less the same?
The answer it seems hinges on the link between poetry and religion, or to be more precise between Arabic and religion. The Quran descended in Arabic. And since the Quran was ‘special’ it was argued that so must Arabic also be special. And since the quintessential Arabic, pre Islam, was the poetry of the Jahiliya, hence it must also be sacred. And just as the Quran cannot be changed so it was that Arabic poetry, or at least its structure, must not change.
Things become more complicated over the course of the first three centuries as politics aligns itself with religion. This is encouraged by the ruling elite who link opposition to them as a departure from the faith warranting punishment or death. And since Arabic poetry is already aligned with religion any attempt, by extension, to modernize it carries the sacrilegious suggestion of modernizing religion. So in some sense poetry becomes fixed in time.
Adonis makes an interesting parallel between the forces that fixed poetry and those that fixed religion. There were, in the religious sphere, two forces at work. Adonis characterizes them as Naql (transmission) and A’qal (intelligence). Naql was to accept, without question, the sayings and guidance of the Prophet (SAW) and his companions as transmitted person to person over time. A’qal, on the other hand, was to insist that all such transmission and indeed the revelation itself be subject to human intelligence. What made sense should be accepted, and what did not should be rejected or reinterpreted as the case may be.
There were scholars and movements on both sides of the divide. But in the end those subscribing to Naql prevailed. Largely because they had the support of the political establishment which was threatened by any interpretations that ran contrary to that on which they had based the legitimacy of their rule. Those who argued for A’qal to prevail were branded infidels and either eliminated or sidelined.
Sadly, since the victors write the history books, not much has come down to us in the shape of the writings or arguments of those who argued for A’qal. One can get glimpses of their thinking in the books of others who cite some of their work which suggests that they did justice to the word A’qal. It is a loss not just to us but to all civilization that the ideas of men who were close to the origins of religion, and calling for the use of intelligence were suppressed and ultimately obliterated.
And just as there were two forces at work in religion there was also a parallel and complementary set of forces at work in poetry which Adonis characterizes as Ittibaa’ (following, conforming) and Ibdaa’ (creating, creativity).
Here again a battle raged between the proponents of both. Men like the author and critic Al-Jahiz, whose work spanned the second and third centuries, stood firmly for Ittibaa’. On the other side, the great modernist poets of the the same period – Abu Tammam, Abu Nuwas and Bashar ibn Burd – brought breathtaking creativity – Ibdaa’ – to their poetry. Yet, even they did not dare to depart from the A’mud Al-Shi’r. And it would not be until the early 20th century when Arab poets finally broke the bonds of the A’mud and let their creativity flow. Adonis himself is one of the leaders of this movement.
That the parallel battles of Naql vs. A’qal and Ittibaa’ vs. Ibdaa’ resulted in the victory of the former in both cases, Adonis seems to suggest, may ultimately be what led to Muslims falling behind the West. The ingredients to lead were there but they were, as it were, suppressed. And it is this battle, between the forces of status quo – the Static, and the forces of change – the Dynamic, that Adonis captures in his book.
Nadeem M Qureshi has served on the Board of Pakistan Petroleum Limited, and has degrees from M.I.T and the Harvard Business School