The Departure of Yusuf: A Modern Reflection
Within the chronicles of fidelity and treachery the migration of the Prophet Yūsuf, ʿalayhi al-salām, occupies a singular station. The grief of separation from home and kindred had to be borne because his brothers, compelled by envy, consigned him to the loneliness of a well. He himself did not wish to leave, yet destiny sent him upon a long journey.
The story of the Yūsuf of our age—Brother Yūsuf—is, however, somewhat different in this respect. Here there was no fraternal jealousy, no one pointed to a well, and no passing caravan carried him far from his goal; rather, he himself packed his belongings and left that little world of friends inhabiting a WhatsApp gathering. Thus, while one Yūsuf was expelled by his brothers, this second Yūsuf chose of his own accord to withdraw from the household!
Some discerning folk ascribe this resemblance to the mysterious influence of the name, while others attribute it to the peculiar quality of being “nīm bahtar”. Concerning the soundness of either explanation we offer no opinion, lest even our silence be regarded as the cause of some new displeasure!
O Yūsuf of the age of decline! What, after all, was the motive of this self-imposed hijrah? Was some conspiracy afoot to overturn the throne within the group? Had a motion of no-confidence been tabled against you? Had someone launched a night raid upon your scholarly and literary kingdom? No, sir! There were but a few messages, some difference of opinion, several comments, and that intellectual gem-scattering without which WhatsApp groups would lose half their sparkle. Yet you pressed a single button and departed as though in some royal court an affront had been inflicted upon your honour, prompting you, in protest, to renounce crown and throne alike!
Your mode of protest is itself remarkable. Someone disagreed with your statement, so you abandoned the entire gathering. It is as though, finding too much salt in the food, a man locks the kitchen, or, when an opponent makes a wrong move in chess, one folds away the whole board and flees the field. To exit the assembly rather than answer disagreement with disagreement is a special kind of political acumen, and to withhold due praise for it would be unjust!
Where is there a gathering devoid of disagreement? A circle of friends is not a glass palace that every window must be shut because of a single unwelcome phrase. At times a remark pricks like a thorn, at times a comment burns the tongue like pepper, and at times upon hearing someone’s display of erudition even reason itself must seek forgiveness for a few moments. Yet this is precisely the charm of such meetings! If everyone were to sing the same melody, what difference would remain between a gathering and a cage full of parrots?
Mawlānā Rūm, raḥimahu Allāh, spoke beautifully on separation and parting:
You complain of the bitterness of separation—
Say whatever you wish, but, for God’s sake, do not do this!
To take offence is the right of the delicate, and having a fine sensibility is their wont; disagreement, moreover, is a democratic liberty. But what is this—press a button and vanish as though a Ṣūfī had forsaken the world and all it contains! The only difference is that the Ṣūfī seeks seclusion in quest of maʿrifah, whereas you, dejected by a few messages, preferred the solitude of WhatsApp. In effect, you have invented a modern, digital, and rather easy form of spiritual retreat!
Perhaps you imagine that your departure has cast the group into silence, that every member is shedding tears of remorse and is re-examining past messages. Yet the law of the WhatsApp world is strange indeed: to someone’s arrival a few congratulations are offered, and to his departure a handful of sorrowful emojis; thereafter life proceeds as normal. Your absence has, however, supplied a new topic of conversation, so that by leaving the group you have nonetheless retained your place within its discourse. This is presence in absence!
O Yūsuf of delicate temperament! It may not be fitting to weigh a long companionship upon the scales of a few messages. Friendship embraces disagreement, breeds complaints, and sometimes one finds another’s words unpleasant. But to transform every difference into a matter of ego and to withdraw from the gathering at every discomfort perhaps indicates an over-sensitive nature. In any case, each person is sovereign over his own disposition, his own dissatisfaction and his own solitude. If you deemed migration the path of expediency, that is your prerogative; we too respect this democratic right of yours, though we have yet to comprehend its underlying philosophy!
Faṭimah, gently now—less of this coquetry;
If you are resolved to cut the cord, then do so with grace.
If some trait of mine has displeased you,
Then slip my garments from yours and be gone.
Were you deceived, that my love for you is fatal,
And that whatever you command this heart must do?
In conclusion, let it be observed that in history the first Yūsuf was separated from his home by his brothers, whereas our second Yūsuf has earned the distinction of leaving the house by himself. The names may resemble one another, yet between their causes and circumstances lies a gulf as wide as heaven and earth!
Some people depart from the gathering, yet manage to make even their absence the subject of the gathering. O quick-to-take-offence Yūsuf, you too have achieved precisely that!
