In 1995, Naipaul traveled through the four non-Arab Islamic countries (Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, and Malaysia) to explore how life has changed since the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini. His portraits are riviting and beautiful, though one must keep in mind Naipauls very conservative politics back home in India.

Beautifully written and totally absorbing. Written 20 years ago but if anything, it resonates even more today

Long and interesting. Naipaul chooses to extricate himself from the narrative, which I respect but it does make the book seem like a series of unrelated interviews with random people. Wonderful writing though

it was great to read this one after reading among the believers. it revisits the non-arab countries that he had previously visited. reading the tales of the people he encounters understanding their struggles helps the non muslim readers identify with individuals who come from those regions.

sangat menarik mengikuti sejarah perjalanan islam di negara -negara yang dikunjungi VS . Naipuli , pengarang yang pernah mendapat Nobel.

Very good book. Provides perspective that I never had.

Stories are very interesting. How culture and religion shape the world view of people living in different countries is just amazing.

Excellent read. Quite lengthy at times and too detailed in places but over all good read.

Antes da leitura a distância entre a realidade brasileira e a iraniana, por exemplo, era abismal; agora, vejo-os muito mais perto.

A literatura de viagem em sua tradição nos últimos séculos focou muito na paisagem, seus aspectos biológicos e etnográficos. O próprio Naipaul na introdução confessa que em seus primeiros livros muito há de descrição da paisagem - mas não neste. Aqui, o autor pinta a "realidade" dos indonésios, iranianos, paquistaneses e malaios. A situação nestes países é o objetivo do livro e é contada a partir de retratos particulares.

Muito ressoou em mim e me privo de contar(infelizmente escrevo com pressa) mas o que mais me volta à mente é uma qualidade da maioria dos entrevistados. São eles quase todos read only. Penso naqueles "arquivos word" ou do pacote "office" quando a edição é vedada e aparece na tela "somente leitura". Muitas das perguntas, intenções e insights que Naipaul sugere aos entrevistados não chegam aos destinatários pois os mesmos ouvintes não se abrem durante a conversa. São apenas reprodutores de suas ideologias, ideias, histórias e agendas.

Um dos poucos que fogem a essa regra é Paydar, ex-mujahidin(comunista islâmico), que ao ver o fracasso da revolução no Irã foi preso. Na prisão pensamentos começam a vir à tona:

Paydar: "Agora era a hora de pensar sozinho, e pensar em assuntos que, até certo ponto eram proibidos para mim."
Naipaul: "Você os proibiu para si mesmo."
Paydar: "Eu mesmo me proibi. (...)Agora eu pensava especialmente em minha mãe e no que ela fizera sem ter consciência dessas ideologias. Para mim ela era o símbolo do verdadeiro ser humano. Era adorada por todos. Qualquer um que a conhecesse, a adorava. Era uma coisa muito estranha. Quando a minha mãe morreu no hospital, todas as enfermeiras e o médico choraram. A razão era que ela se interessava por todo mundo ali. (..) O tempo todo estava ocupada com eles, ajudando todos, embora estivesse doente."

A sociedade nesses lugares já era fraca e com a modernidade está esfacelada; ideias, religiões(o Irã já é uma teocracia absoluta, mind you) e planos de governo são o que mantém a ilusão da unidade. Na minha visão o caso deles não está muito distante do nosso. O algoritmo, os partidos e o "idem velle idem nolle" nas redes sociais espalha mais que ajunta. Talvez o Irã precise mais de pessoas como a mãe do Paydar que de mártires para manter sua coesão social. O Brasil idem. Sendo cristão, vejo invadir a mentalidade de homogeneidade ideológica da internet para as igrejas com um mal pressentimento.

Naipaul paints a portrait of societies grappling with the aftermath of revolutionary fervor. In Iran, the initial zeal of the Islamic Revolution seems to have faded, leaving a sense of unfulfilled promises. This disillusionment extends beyond the political sphere. The book explores the tension between the desire to reject Western influence and the undeniable allure of its economic and technological advancements. This creates a state of unease, a yearning for a path forward that remains elusive.

Beyond Belief also compels us to consider the cost of conversion. Naipaul suggests that embracing Islam may have come at the expense of a connection to the pre-Islamic past. This disconnection creates a sense of confusion and a struggle for identity, particularly amongst the "converted peoples." Local customs and beliefs continue to influence Islamic practice, highlighting the persistence of tradition despite the arrival of a new religion.

Naipaul's work is not without criticism. Some argue that he views these societies through an orientalist lens, focusing on their shortcomings while overlooking their strengths. Additionally, the book's focus on conversations with elites and intellectuals might provide a limited perspective, failing to capture the experiences of the general population.

Despite these limitations, Beyond Belief remains a valuable contribution to our understanding of Islam in societies shaped by conversion. It offers a nuanced look at the complexities of faith, identity, and development in these regions, prompting us to consider the ongoing negotiations between tradition, revolution, and the search for a path forward.

V.S. Naipaul's Beyond Belief transcends the typical travelogue, offering a nuanced exploration of Islam's influence on societies shaped by conversion. Stepping beyond the Arab world, Naipaul delves into Southeast Asia and Iran, unveiling the complexities of faith intertwined with pre-existing cultures and traditions.

The book shines a light on the unique challenges faced by these nations. Here, Islam isn't an inherited identity, but a chosen one. Naipaul explores the resulting tensions, as individuals grapple with reconciling their rich cultural heritage with the demands of their adopted faith. We see a constant negotiation between maintaining a pure Islamic identity and acknowledging the undeniable influence of local customs.

Naipaul's sharp observations unveil a range of themes that resonate throughout the narrative. The struggle for identity takes center stage, as people navigate the legacy of their pre-Islamic past within the framework of their new religion. This struggle becomes even more complex when viewed through the lens of modernity. Beyond Belief poses intriguing questions about whether Islam serves as an obstacle or a source of strength in the face of rapid modernization.

A sense of disillusionment often hangs in the air. Naipaul portrays a disillusionment with the current state of these societies, a frustration with stagnation and a yearning for a more meaningful existence. This disillusionment is particularly poignant in the face of political turmoil and the challenges of forging a path forward.

Naipaul's signature prose is as sharp as ever, painting vivid portraits of the places he visits and the people he encounters. His keen observations provide a window into these societies, allowing readers to experience them firsthand. However, his work is not without controversy. Critics argue that Naipaul's Eurocentric perspective leads him to highlight the negative aspects of these societies, overlooking their dynamism and diversity. They point out his tendency to downplay the vast spectrum of beliefs and practices within Islam itself.

Despite the criticism, Beyond Belief remains a significant contribution to our understanding of Islam in Southeast Asia and Iran. It sparks important conversations about the multifaceted relationship between a religion and the societies it shapes. While recognizing Naipaul's perspective, readers can engage with critical analyses to gain a more balanced understanding. Beyond Belief serves as a valuable starting point, prompting readers to delve deeper and explore the rich tapestry of Islam's global impact.

I loath Sir Vidia's vanity, his patronizing, condescending and sometimes downright offending attitude. On the other hand, I admire his superb writing skills, his choice of words. His critical eyes miss little. And in this book, he does have some very valid points to make.

A 1996-followup to Naipaul's earlier travelogue thru Indonesia, Malaysia, Iran and Pakistan in 1981. This one is a little better and both have documented the times very well. All 4 nations r very different in their own ways and make for interesting reading.
It was interesting to note that while Pakistan was facing a horrible separatist revolt in Baluchistan and Karachi had turned into a war-zone in the 90s, it was exporting terror to Kashmir and militancy was at its peak in Kashmir then.
Wrt Indonesia (the nation of Indians ?) , it struck that they had local culture and customs all in the process of being white-washed by Islam ; the process which seemed to have been completed in Iran a while ago with the Iranian revolution. Indonesia struggles to trace its history, thankfully in India we had a handful of British enthusiasts who along with the Brahmins (some credit there) helped restore a good part of our history and culture.

In 1979 bezocht Naipaul Indonesië, Iran, Pakistan en Maleisië. 15 jaar later heeft hij dezelfde reis nog eens gemaakt om te kijken wat er ondertussen veranderd is, ten goede of ten slechte.

Hij probeerde zoveel mogelijk dezelfde mensen te spreken, maar dat was niet altijd mogelijk omdat ze of overleden waren, niet meer te vinden of zo'n hoge maatschappelijke positie hadden dat ze niet meer voor gewone gesprekken open stonden.
Daarnaast probeerde hij ook terug te overnachten in de plaatsen waar hij toen overnachtte om het verschil in cultuur te voelen en dan vooral de invloed van islam.
Alhoewel ik het eerste boek niet gelezen heb, heb ik toch de indruk dat de invloed van de islam groter geworden is, maar dat het leven van de mensen er niet beter op geworden is.

In Indonesië en Maleisië bestond er vooral een anti-islam gevoel, maar door de opkomst van de islam is dat gevoel naar de achtergrond geduwd, mag het niet meer benoemd worden omdat de regels van de islam gelden. In Iran heerst dan weer veel angst en kijkt men uit naar verkiezingen in de hoop dat het land iets vrijer wordt.

Wat doorheen dit boek wel duidelijk wordt is dat polygamie voor veel ellende zorgt in de families en dat vrouwenrechten helemaal niets voorstellen want die zijn er gewoon niet.
In Pakistan komen daar dan nog eens de verminkingen van vrouwen bij.

Naipaul beschrijft ook veel van het verleden van zijn gesprekspartners, hun familie, grootouders, hoe die geleefd hebben en meestal van simpele komaf, moeite moeten doen om te overleven. Komt daar dan ook nog eens de verschillende overheersingen door andere culturen bij. Mensen waren erg zoekend.