Social – Page 2 – My Bit for Change

The Stasis of the Muslim Mind

“Lost in the loneliness, we turn inwards- with a knife in our hands and a lump in our throats”, writes Muhammad Fadel describing the deep crisis in contemporary Muslim consciousness. The loss of the Khilafah has imbued Muslim sensibility with a deep and haunting nostalgia for a bygone glory. The direction of foreign policy taken by Western nations vis a vis the Muslim world has not helped assuage the raw sentiment, leaving Muslims to harbour the supposition that the ascendant West is locked in a crusade against the Muslim world in the throes of despondency imposed by a malevolent external enemy. The frustration this engenders often makes itself felt in spasmodic bouts of violence like the gasps of an etherized patient laid across on the table.

The experience of long-drawn colonial rule across Muslim lands intensified the nostalgic longing for a lost glory as well as the need to hold on ever more strongly and exclusively to religious fundamentals as a means of self-preservation and protection of religio-cultural identity. This exacerbated the disconnect between ‘deen’ and ‘dunya’ in Muslim consciousness in general and education in particular. Aurangzeb Haneef notes in his article, ‘Learning from the Past’, that one of the most important effects of European imperialism in Muslim society was that the pursuit of rational sciences (maqulat) was abandoned in favour of transmitted sciences (manqulat)in the spirit of preservation in an attempt to re-center and standardize the traditions of religious knowledge. Madrassas ceased to be the training grounds for the intellectual and cultural elite and increasingly came to be identified with religious education only, which was an aberration from the tradition.

The rising popularity of Salafism is a reactionary response out of a prevailing sense of defeatism, victimhood, vulnerability and insecurity over what is seen as the encroachment upon Muslim identity and culture by an ascendant Western civilization. The call for a puritanical ‘return to the sources’ down to the letter shunning the accretions of theology and jurisprudence over centuries is distressingly ahistorical, uncreative and mimetic. It refuses to recognize the need to creatively and rationally respond to the exigencies of the times. Ironically while it claims fidelity to authentic Muslim tradition, it actually betrays the essential dynamism of the same. This dynamism is the defining trait of Islamic jurisprudence which traditionally accorded space to diversity. Muslim jurists were remarkably tolerant of ‘ikhtilaf’(difference of opinion), and were adept at the ‘adab’ (etiquettes) of ikhtilaf. Towering jurists of the sunni school like Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik discouraged blind following (taqleed) of their opinions, encouraging critical thinking and research.

These Muslim groups demonstrate all or most of the traits of fundamentalism, that is:‘a sense of chosenness tied to the demonizing or damnation of all others who refuse to get behind the truth subscribed to by the subject himself.’ (Farid Esack) By refusing to defer to historical understandings of Islam in theology and law, these Muslim groups place themselves at the fringes of Islamic tradition they claim to be guardians and restorers of.

Due to a radical subjectivism that confers quasi-divine authority to a certain set of literalist opinions these innovation-resistant groups refuse to subject their opinions to rational inquiry. In so doing, they implicitly refuse to recognize intrinsic human diversity as well as the status of individuals as rational subjects imbued with the Divinely-bestowed gift of intellect and free will. “Unto every one of you have We appointed a [different] law and way of life. And if God had so willed, He could surely have made you all one single community: but [He willed it otherwise] in order to test you by means of what He has vouchsafed unto, you. Vie, then, with one another in doing good works! Unto God you all must return; and then He will make you truly understand all that on which you were wont to differ.” (5:48)

At a subconscious level, the deep realization of the untenability of opinions that refuse to defer to critical examination has resulted in an inward-looking stasis characterized by an uncompromising exclusivism and exceptionalism.

Muslim exceptionalism betrays the Quran’s universal embrace of humanity with its consistent appeal to mankind as the creation of God, a single family. ‘O men! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and a female, and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all knowing, all aware.” (49:13) The Quran attaches sanctity to all humankind when it narrates how God blew of His own spirit into the first created person. Muslim exclusivism refuses to recognize the fact that our well-being as a species on a finite planet is tied to the well-being of all others we share it with, and that in the face of this reality, all labels and artificial boundaries are secondary. It is only the extremely narrow-minded and short-sighted who would refuse to recognize the fact that our well being is inextricably tied to the well being of all others.

A further corollary of such exclusivism is the tendency to view ideas as mutually exclusive, with an either/or approach. The middle ground, the many grey areas of overlap are lost sight of. This generates a characteristic intellectual extremism that infects Muslims en masse. It is not understood that neither of the extremes is an acceptable alternative to the other, hence the world appears all black and white, like an arena for a clash of ideas. The ‘Us versus Them’ psyche translates into ‘Islam versus The West.’ This is dangerous as it understands both Islam and the West as monoliths and glosses over the many instances both historical and contemporary, of coexistence, intercultural exchange, common grounds and shared values. It denies the universality of commonly held values, viewing them as ‘Western’ or ‘Islamic.’ The actual confrontation as recognized by Islam, is between Haqq and Baatil (Truth versus Falsehood), and before deciding if anything that passes for Islam is the whole truth, we need to ask ‘whose Islam?’, given the fact that the Quran and sunnah are open to diverse readings and interpretations and the self-appointed spokespeople of Islam are as many as the possible interpretations. Nor is Falsehood equivalent to all that the West is about, given the fact that the military-industrial complex and the clique of influential policy-making elites are responsible for the highhandedness of foreign policy decisions and the injustices that have wreaked havoc and provoked backlash among Muslim populations.

Muslims often invoke the ideal of Islam comparing it to the reality of Western society which often betrays its own values such as freedom and liberty, to show the degeneracy of the latter as compared to the Divine system they have been denied- unmindful of the many ways Muslim societies consistently betray the values of Islam.

The myth of ‘Islam versus the West’ also denies the collective heritage of Islamic and European civilizations and the instrumental role Islam had in making the Enlightenment possible. “Arab science altered medieval Christendom beyond recognition. For the first time in centuries, Europe’s eyes opened to the world around it- Arab science and philosophy helped rescue the Christian world from ignorance and made possible the very idea of the ‘West.’” (Jonathan Lyons, ‘House of Wisdom’) Aime Cesaire beautifully and powerfully reminds us of this collective human heritage and that attempts to claim a monopoly over the achievements of human civilization are a form of intellectual dishonesty, whether done by scholars in the West or the Muslim world. ”But the work of man is only just beginning, and it remains to conquer all the violence entrenched in the recesses of our passion, for no race possesses the monopoly of beauty, of intelligence, of force. And there is a place for all at the rendezvous of victory.” – Aimé Césaire

In the same vein, there are other binaries like ‘Islam versus Democracy.’ In the recent Pakistan elections numerous religious groups propagated that casting a vote was an act of ‘kufr,’ because democracy is based on the sovereignty of the masses over the sovereignty of God. While the system of electoral politics in Western societies has elements that are incompatible with Islam, the values of democracy are universal and are part and parcel of Islamic governance. Following the majority opinion a standardized practice in Muslim tradition (‘Ijma’ has many forms, the last of which sanctions general voting by the public to settle questions that bear upon the interests of the general masses and can be put to a public vote). Moreover, respecting popular sentiment and being accountable to the public are fundamental Islamic political values. The procedural rules of electoral politics can and should be reformed to conform to Islamic standards and shari’ rulings made exclusively the job of a panel of qualified ulema, beyond the purview of general voting- and it no more is ‘an affront to God’s sovereignty.’

Numberless Islamic scholars have talked of the compatibility between democratic principles and Islamic politics. Sameen Sadaf notes the irony in ‘The Dynamism of Islam”: The alternative, they say, is ‘Khilafat’ (which in many ways is democratic in its ethos). However, since there is no comprehensive system and candidature for khilafat at the time, one can suppose that all we can do is wait for a savior while the forces of actual ‘Kufr’ take over and ruin us.” Pro-Sharia activists seem to assume that mainstreaming the Islamic way of life through dialogue and dawah can be discounted without any loss and they can march straight to an Islamic Khilafah state that will somehow miraculously tame the Muslim masses into believing slaves of God.

The binary thinking pattern and exclusivism has made Muslim consciousness be preoccupied with narrow, parochial concerns considered ‘Islamic.’ It is forgotten that being slaves of Allah means being good human beings first and that as Muslims everything in the universe is our business. Zaid Hassan writes of the need to ‘reclaim our relationship to the whole’ in his wonderful article, ‘Notes towards an Incomplete Manifesto for Liberating the Muslim Mind.’ The growing distance between ‘deen’ and ‘dunya’ in Muslim consciousness has made Muslims unconcerned about aspects that belong to the secular domain as profane and unworthy. Hence there is an intellectual degeneracy, and a clear absence of contemporary Muslim discourse in science, philosophy and the humanities, a near-absence of Muslim contribution to research. In the recent elections, Islamic parties in Pakistan exclusively talked of the need for a return to rule by Islam, invoking Shariah, the Islamic identity and ethos of Pakistan. Talking of issues that resonate with the masses like poverty or the energy crisis was considered redundant given their ‘Islamic’ credentials. The growing unpopularity of these parties and their less-than-expected performance comes as no surprise.

This ghettoization of Muslim thought threatens to make us dwindle into a cult at the margins of civilization. Religious discourse that fails to take account of the modern mind and appeal to the youth with their voracity for rational argument cannot be shoved down people’s throats. It is condemned to survive as no more than a fringe-cult.

Still more lamentable is the fact that Muslims are failing to realize the need to introspect in these critical times. Any manifestation of the deep crisis in Muslim consciousness is dismissed as ‘unrepresentative of Islam’ at best, and ‘propaganda against Islam’ at worst. Self-criticism is noble, highly needful and the essential trait of the faithful. Muslims have abandoned it altogether, and any voice helping us to examine ourselves critically or calling for a reform is disdainfully rejected with suspicion and sneering self-righteousness. The belief that terrorists or criminals or misogynists ‘use’ the name of Islam to justify their deeds is comforting but unhelpful because it does not recognize the fact that many interpretations of the Quran and sunnah actually give some grounds to sanction such acts and that therefore there is great responsibility on Muslim thinkers to expose and oppose the textual basis of such arguments.

The stasis of the Muslim mind is a daunting project before us. Muslim society is terribly fragmented and polarized between the extremes of the secular and the religious. So much of Muslim scholarship today is pitiably out of touch with the vicissitudes of contemporary society, rationally indefensible, in a language far removed from and inaccessible to the mass man and incognizant of the psychology of modernity and post-modernity. ‘Maqulat’ must be brought at par with the ‘Manqulat’ as central to a holistic Muslim education, precisely because that is how it had always been and was supposed to be before things went awry. The need today is for Muslim scholars to negotiate between entrenched extreme positions, address issues of the here and now in a language that appeals to the common man, and to appeal to modern sensibility in a manner that is faithful to the ethos of Islamic tradition. Such voices need to collate, organize and rise to a crescendo that can drown out the clamour of extremisms. It is a grand project and an urgent one, but cannot be begun until we first realize the need for such effort today and cease to live in denial of the terrible crisis that threatens to rob our faith of its very soul and reduce it to perpetual irrelevance.

A Colonized Ridiculousness

How many times do we actually sit down and ask ourselves how ridiculous we sound? And how ridiculous we should sound? And how we are indoctrinating this ridiculousness to our coming generation?

Now let me be the odd one, the strange one, the party pooper, the nonsensical one, and let me tell you that there is something very ridiculous at the sight of seeing a mother struggling phonetically with her child to explain to him that he must use words of a language foreign to him and remain a constant rebel to his comfort and nature by staying as far away from those inferior, those desi, those Urduish words that his mind uses to make sense of the world. But alas, it is that mother who is being scorned by the child’s so-called educator that it is in fact her job to make sure that the child is surrounded by as much words loaded with declamations of inferiority, of psychological bullying, of an age-old legacy telling the child that he is still a colonized subject- that it is that legacy of his oriental heritage, all of Indian and Arabic literature, which is intrinsically inferior to any good shelf of a British library.

And yes there is a contradiction at work here. You may ask why is it that I use the same language I speak of so badly to speak of it so badly. Well, I see no problem here. There is no problem in using any language. The language is not the problem. You can and should use the English language. And the same can be said for Saraiki, French, Urdu, German, Pashto or Arabic. The only condition is that they are just languages- means of communicating what we have in our minds with other people-and nothing more. They are to serve the same purpose and are little different in this sense. They should not be a sign of superiority, of intellect, of status, of class, and of all such non-sense we have come up over the years. After all, how is a thought expressed in one language, any better than a thought- a mere concept- expressed in any other language.

Then why is it that poor and helpless human beings are told in our sad state of a country that they have to learn a language before they can actually learn something concrete- like to say knowledge itself. As weird and shocking to our English-is-a-global-language enthusiasts as it may sound, these humans- these lower-class nobodies, these forgotten proletariats of our forgetful socialists, these mechanics and drivers and maasis and cooks- already know a language. Why should they learn another language to start learning something if they already know a language? Why can’t they be taught in the language they speak and think in?

But doesn’t everyone know why? Will these people, who we throw so much pity on, not become a threat to ourselves? And will we not have to compete with ‘them’. We know we can afford a quality education in a language foreign to our whole continent. But these wretched of the earth cannot. We can secure for our children the privilege of remaining in our beloved elite class, while ‘their’ whole generations would grow up serving ours- never to escape this vicious cycle we have so ingeniously created.

Our ridiculousness then is only a cover for preserving our class interests. We make fun of people who cannot speak the language properly even when the content of his or her proposition may actually be beyond the capacity of our own intellect. We consider those who cannot speak fluently to be lower and inferior human beings. When we want to tell someone that we are something- such insecure people we are- we immediately code-switch to the English language.

We refuse to see the ridiculousness behind all this madness. Far from it we don’t even realize how much damage we are doing to ourselves. It is unhealthy and sickly what we are doing. To be someone you are not is only an insult to who you are. But who are you and who am I.

Why be ashamed of our own cultural and religious heritage, of centuries of civilization, of literature, of creativity and of art. Why be a lower quality of somebody else by voluntarily accepting his superiority and by giving in our own sense of being? Why this ridiculousness?

Children – Flowers of Paradise

It was my first week of school as a 2^nd grade teacher, and the day was about to end. Students were packing up their bags. Suddenly, I remembered that I had to distribute notice flyers which were given to me by the administration. I said to the class in my firm bossy voice, “ok, calm down! No one is leaving the room until I say so. I have to distribute these.”

As I finished distributing these flyers, another teacher knocked at my door saying she needed my help with something in her room. Her desk drawer was stuck and by the time I helped her pull the drawer out, the bell had rung. I hurried back to my classroom imagining the worst as I had left 18 seven years olds on their own for 5 whole minutes. And as expected, all hell had broken loose. Chairs were turned upside down, children were throwing pieces of chalk at each other and some were even standing on the tables. But the funny part was that not a single child had left the room even though the afternoon bell had rung. Why, you ask? Because I had told them: ‘No one is going to leave the room until I say so’ and I had not said so.

These children were supposed to be the naughtiest and the snobbiest kids of the school. And yet, they remained in the room just because their teacher had told them to. This made me reflect. My own obedience towards Allah S.W.T was not even a fraction of obedience just displayed by my class. This class was supposed to be the most disobedient and hyperactive class of the school but I had a whole new perspective now. I was judging them in a whole new paradigm. It was all in the eyes of the beholder. This was the first lesson I learnt as I set my foot into the “profession of the prophets.”

Children, according to a Hadith, are flowers of Jannah.

But in schools, and at home, they are treated like anything but flowers. A scholar once said,

“These children do not need loving parents. They need trained parents.”

When getting married, zero attention is given to this matter although upbringing of a new human being is the most important and difficult task to be faced by the newlyweds. Awareness to get trained to raise children as an asset for the Muslim Ummah in this world and as asset for the parents in the hereafter should be our foremost concern.

Although many institutions have taken up this task in our country to train parents and teachers and assist them in the carrying out of this enormous responsibility, a lot more still needs to be done. In all the parenting workshops and seminars I have attended, the percentage of male participants is never more than 10%. It’s as if we have concluded that parent means the mother. Fathers are ATM booths—only needed for money.

The religion which we follow and the Prophet (SAW) for whom we vow to die give us a very different idea of parenting. And who better to train us than the best teacher of the world.

When I look into Muhammad (SAW)’s life and his interactions with the child, I sit in complete awe. A man with a responsibility which has no match to any responsibility in the world and yet I see him racing along with the children, laughing and clapping. His Seerah tells us that the children waited for him outside the Masjid and when he (S.A.W) came out, he used to stretch both his hands and the children would come running to him, falling on him from all sides. And mind you, these children were not his relatives. They were mere acquaintances he would see every day on the streets. For a self analysis, I stood with my arms stretched in a family gathering and asked the group of kids which included my two sons along with their cousins to come running to me. I told them it was a game. I hung my head in shame as even my own sons shied away. It told me a lot about my parenting.

I looked deep into the Seerah of Rasulallah SAW and saw him commencing the Jummah Khutbah with a child on his lap. I saw him kissing and hugging the children of Medina at random. I saw him playing games on the streets of Medina with the children he barely knew. They loved him and he loved them. According to him, “Children are flowers of jannah.” Which brings me back to my first lesson – it’s all in the perspective. We see them as flowers so we treat them as flowers. We see them as valued assets, so we treat them as valued assets.

We have to come to this realization that the responsibility for which we will be held most accountable for is the little creations around us. We are leaving an impact on each and every one of them consciously or unconsciously. We need to educate ourselves to be able to educate little ones. No number of degrees would make us qualified for this job if we ignore the Sunnah of the greatest teacher in the world. And the most important lesson that he SAW gave us is of love and love only.

Parents and to-be parents need to realize that dealing with children is an art; a skill, which needs to be developed and groomed like any other skill. Once this realization hits home, it will be an easier task to make way for the education.

He Needs Me Like I Needed Him

It was my nephew’s Annual Result Day at school. While parents lined up awaiting results, children were busy playing around. Suddenly, a very beautiful child while running to her sister, tripped over something and fell. Her dress went all muddy and she started crying with tears. In a flicker of second, while I was just thinking to step forward to comfort her, her father appeared out of nowhere, picked and hugged her while she was crying. He kissed her on her forehead and consoled her, “kuch nahi hua baita!” He didn’t care for his white starched ‘shalwaar kameez‘ which went dirty in no time. In next few seconds, the little angel was smiling again and running around.

I stood there smiling as I recalled this beautiful verse from the Holy Qur’an.

‘Lord be merciful to them as they have brought me up in my childhood’. 17:24

Bringing up children is not just taking care when the child is young. It’s about being there all the time for your child. It’s about giving all attention to your child despite your commitments. It’s about listening to your child’s stories when they comes back from school no matter how silly they sound. Parenting is all about sacrificing. But our parents do get weak and the cycle of attention and care does reverse when they grow old and when we are able to stand on our feet tall and confident.

I thought in the next second, how would my father have felt when on a weekend, I heard him coughing badly and with his back bent and asked, “what’s wrong? You never go to doctor in time and and take care of yourself?” – and he remained silent. Suddenly I realize, I have not been home for quite a few weeks due to my “job, commitments, meetings, dinners, hangouts, shopping” etc. How would I know how my father has been all this time? I tried to imagine what would have happened to me if he weren’t there to support me during my years of weakness and childhood due to his commitments; what if he had left me ‘unattended’ just a single day when I “sagheer” (young)?

He needs me more than he needs a doctor. Ageing is a natural phenomenon and it brings some inevitable things that he can’t help. He needs someone to listen to his heart. He still wishes to guide me by telling me his experiences but I am too busy to learn, what a shame!

We must realise that we have a very important commitment at home. There is a very important meeting waiting for us, we have VIPs (parents) at home counting on us, and moreover we have a golden opportunity to make our future here and the hereafter. Ask those who have lost parents or one of them. Ask those who never got any chance to ‘serve’ their parents. Love them, atleast, a bit of that what they gave to you as you can’t ever pay back their love and care.

Reminds me of Hadith here,

“ Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying: Let him be humbled into dust; let him be humbled into dust. It was said: Allah’s Messenger, who is he? He said: He who sees either of his parents during their old age or he sees both of them, but he does not enter Paradise” (Sahih Muslim)

Tug Of War – Lord Of The Rings

Ah, why

Should life all labor be?

Let us alone. Time driveth onward fast,

And in a little while our lips are dumb.

Let us alone. What is it that will last?

All things are taken from us, and become

Portions and parcels of the dreadful past.

Let us alone. What pleasure can we have

To war with evil?

The Lotos-Eaters, Alfred Tennyson

I find “A Game of Thrones” to be such an interesting phrase. A good friend (a hard-core loyalist) really insisted that I read the book as it would really make me renew or rather, review my reverential love for “Lord of the Rings.” I dismissed the claim before even touching the former, saying that just the author’s name (R.R. Martin) is a pathetic rip-off of R.R. Tolkien. Both, however, have other similarities I’ve been told. The biggest similarity – as I understand through my extremely biased point of view – is that they both tell a story that we find ourselves plotted in: the story of power. We read this story every day. We see ourselves, and other characters like us caught in a relentless tug of war. We yearn to have ourselves heard. And we feel so good when we are heard. We feel proud. We feel empowered.

Sauron had the same problem. He wanted to feel empowered. So did Shaytan. The former came up with a brilliant idea to fool everyone, all races, to feel empowered. With their own token rings to cherish, they felt secure. But Sauron was deceptively clever. “One ring to rule them all.” And they became pawns. The latter wanted to feel empowered too. And he made such a compelling case. “I am better than him.” And although his statement was perfectly logical, he failed the test. Because he was too sure, too secure about his worth. And to this day he tries and sometimes tries very hard to feel empowered. And every time we become his pawns, this sense of empowerment is given to him. And like the nine ring-wraiths, who were once men, we fall into the trap.

All of us think that we are better than someone else. Smarter, prettier, richer. In one way or the other, we feel that because we are better than someone else out there, we have more power. And because we truly believe that we have that power, we translate that into control, and that makes us feel that we are right, above all and everyone else. I am better than you. Therefore, you are nothing. This was Shaytan’s logic. This was Sauron’s rationale. And this is the game-plan that runs our show, all our affairs: from belittling our helping hands (whom we call ‘naukars’), to bossing our children around, to killing people because they believe different to what we do, to calling others terrorists or infidels, to making fun of people who mispronounce McDonald’s, to raping women, to mauling boys to death. We all follow that game-plan. Because we all want to feel empowered. We feel smug. In control. So sure. But it’s pathetic really. Why feel so good about yourself when you know that the match is unfair? A man with a gun in his hand is no match for a child with tears of fear in his eyes. The rules are lopsided. And the rules are always with the rulers. The rest must simply obey. Or no dice.

But here’s where this power-play gets painfully intriguing. “Security,” Hecate, the Queen crone in Macbeth says to her prentices, “is mortals’ chiefest enemy.” So the more power we begin to wield, the more desperate and greedy we get for it, the more we feel the compelling need to have ourselves asserted, affirmed and that furthers our pride which we mistake as faith in ourselves. But what is really happening behind the walls of this fanciful fortress is that we are becoming more and more insecure. Hence the need to have ourselves asserted. And proven right. The fortress is nothing but a house of cards. Why is democracy the way to go? Because those on the top assert it to be so. Why is that man with a beard a terrorist? Because those on the top claim it to be so.

And the rest must follow. And we do because it’s the easier thing to do. Why should we go through the toil and trouble of challenging status quo? It wasn’t my father that was shot? It wasn’t my sister who was raped? Why should I care? I am still alive, and I have my iPhone 5, and I’ll make it to my friend’s wedding after-party on time despite being late for my blow-dry appointment. It is but convenient to not be bothered. The problem is not with the Saurons that we are surrounded by. Nor with Shaytan who plays the Pied Piper. We want others to feel empowered at our expense. We let them feel empowered. We prefer to remain silent and let things be because we cannot be bothered, enough.

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” – Friedrich Nietzsche.

It all boils down to this. Many proponents of Friedrich Nietzsche attribute these memorable words from “The Madman” to the idea of the utter rejection of God and – taking that to its logical and dangerous conclusion – to negate any agent of authority premising order. And it has all come down to ‘invention’. Power has now been relocated.

We are too comfortably dumb and preferably numb about the world around us. And we have made it this way as Nietzsche is rightfully claiming. Outsourcing responsibility and sensitivity is the new fad. We don’t want to be disturbed. We continue to take orders because we feel securely empowered in our own limited loci of control. We want to, and continue to feel good about ourselves and that gives us a false, almost petty sense of power. And the tragically ironic part of this whole story is that we are indifferent. We are letting the plot of this power-play sway us from one narrative to the other. We all are playing this tug of war. We all trying to prove that we are better than the rest.

Sauron and Shaytan are perhaps merely characters on yellowed paper for most people nowadays. And who cares about boring stories anyway as they lack spice. Stories are just stories. And all that happens around us: the boy who is bullied in school just because he is short, the girl who just turned 35 and is still not married just because she’s not “gori” enough, the nameless child who died in a drone attack, the fruit vendor who was hanged some time back, the maid who got abused because she put less salt in the haandi…are simply stories for us, interesting to talk about over our evening tea. But as the conversation ends these stories are stacked away. And as rats, or pawns – whatever we may prefer to be – we enjoy our own private games of thrones in which we are kings and queens. The rest – like us – are simply ruled upon. And the pull of power reigns us all.

Love in The Time of Narcissism

Arguably, love is the highest sentiment the human spirit is capable of. In essence, it is selfless, generous, liberating, sublime. It purges one of all that holds one down to the mundane and earthy. Kahlil Gibran famously writes:

“Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself.
Love possesses not nor would it be possessed;
For love is sufficient unto love.
And think not you can direct the course of love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.”

The contemporary world is characterized by the ascendancy of materialism that has banished the spiritual and hence objectified, commercialized and marketized some of the most sublime values. The sacred sentiment of love has not been spared from being grotesquely tainted by it- so that we have it ‘expressed’ in expensive, stark-red balloons, roses, chocolates on sale all over shops in Pakistan. The local florist explained to an appalled me that the reason why the flowers were so shockingly costly was on account of something called ‘Vanteen Day.’

The hyped up, almost frenzied festivities on Valentine’s Day depict this cult of hedonistic Narcissism that has gripped us in its monstrous clutches. This makes our deepest and most sacred, private sentiment be expressed with a loud, bawdy exhibitionism that denigrates its sublimity and reduces it to a hollow shell painted in gaudy hues. This overzealous celebration of carnal passion symbolizes the perversion of the sacred that is an inevitable result of materialism.

We are taught to express and exhibit passion to satiate our own selfish lusts- spend enough to ‘prove’ our love, fall in love with ‘love’ romanticized by the popular media; to breathlessly pursue romantic love, chase it, possess it, flaunt it and gloat over it lecherously.
In a recent video released by a Pakistani band known for its mock-satiric music, the chorus goes, ‘Sub Paisey ki game hai’ (It is all a game of money). The circus on Valentine’s Day is driven by imperatives of the capitalistic marketplace ordering us to ‘shop till you drop’ to ‘prove’ you love ‘enough.’ This ‘commodification’ of love exploits a basic human emotion in order to make big business. In the process, love is reduced to chocolate bars, rosebuds, balloons- or diamond rings and designer dresses- according to income bracket, social class and of course, taste.

In a class discussion when I mentioned to my students how Valentines Day goes against the spirit and ethos of Islam, a student candidly retorted, ‘But it does not harm anyone’. Certainly it does not, at a fleeting look. However, deep within, when we partake of it, we concede that love is a ‘thing’ to be flaunted and bought with money, not made out of real, lived experience of sharing, giving, forbearing, forgiving, growing, treading life’s jagged paths together with a hand to hold, a shoulder to lean on. We negate the fact that love is made and found and relished everyday through little things you cannot buy with money; garnered painstakingly through smiles and tears and wounds and fears. In the process of celebrating this ‘harmless’ festivity, we actually condone the cruel, horrible things that go on outside the gates of girls’ colleges in the city, and inside young lonely hearts. I remember how in my college days girls used to talk of the surprise gifts from ‘secret’ or ‘known’ admirers and the less ‘fortunate’ ones shrank into themselves with shame and a haunting sense of loneliness and inferiority- often in physical terms. I found it heinous. The balloons and red-shirted urchins rampaging the streets and marketplaces tell me it is far worse for young people today.

Mark Vernon writes in his remarkable article, ‘Is Romantic Love a Bad Thing?’:

“I suspect that the desire for a peak experience of love has eclipsed the fact that love is primarily about others. The romantic myth would have us fall in love with love, paradoxically not with another. This twisted love whispers that it does not much matter who you fall for, only that you fall in love.

There is a spiritual dimension to this romantic addiction too. The philosopher Simon May has proposed that while many have given up on God in the West, we still long for the unconditional love that God used to offer.

But godless, we seek instead unconditional love from our fellow humans. We make them gods, and of course they fail us. And then love turns to hate. It’s a desire that, because of the excess, destroys love.”

“Ibrahim A.S- seeking spiritual fulfilment and coming to rest in the embrace of the Divine- had declared, “I love not that which fades away.” (The Noble Quran).

Selfless love that heals and gives and forgives arises out of this complete self-surrender encountering and recognizing the Perfect, Absolute Truth. This is why the festivals of Islam include compulsory charity and sharing of joy with the less privileged.

Modesty, said the Prophet (PBUH) is the distinguishing trait of Islam. Modesty implies revulsion towards exhibitionism and obscenity; it implies protection of the private, it implies dignity, humility, quietude, sincerity, purity. It is the crowning glory of a believer. The uproarious celebration of Valentine’s Day betrays the essence of modesty. It is a mindless aping of a culture entrenched in the Overblown but Minimal Self.

EPILOGUE:
The age demanded an image
Of its accelerated grimace,
Something for the modern stage,
The “age demanded” chiefly a mould in plaster,
Made with no loss of time,
‘All things are a flowing’,
Sage Heracleitus says;
But a tawdry cheapness
Shall outlast our days.
Decreed in the market place.
(Ezra Pound: Hugh Selwyn Mauberley)

Qazi Hussain Ahmad – The Sign of Unity of The Ummah

Don’t know how to start … Qazi Hussain Ahmad, former Ameerr of Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) left us in deep sorrow and grief and I don’t even have words to express it. He is still living in our hearts and minds.

Like many others, my adulthood was spent in chanting slogans ‘hum baitey kis k __Qazi k’ associating ourselves spiritually with Qazi Hussain Ahmad. Yeah Qazi Hussain was a spiritual leader as he evoked spirits of millions. He was a dynamic leader and his leadership gave us hope and courage to stand for the truth, no matter if we were standing alone.

Many of us can recall sitting in the company of Qazi Sahab and having simplest meals while sitting on floor. Many more will remember running with the vehicle of Qazi sahab chanting slogans ‘raasha raasha __Qazi raasha’; pushto words which became known to everyone due to Qazi sahab. He was a cardiac patient but his energy was phenomenal. He travelled across the country from Khyber to Karachi and we can easily say that he is the only leader who has most widely traveled across the country for unity of the nation, without sufficient security. He is the only leader who visited FATA on regular basis to address congregations but media rarely covered it. His followers and lovers are spread all across the country and there would be no town from Karachi to Khuzdar to Kashmir where you will not find someone loving Qazi Hussain Ahmad.

Qazi Hussain Ahmad was an internationally renowned personality and people across the globe knew him for his courage, enthusiasm, zeal and zest. He received a lot of respect from Islamic movements across the globe as they considered him their leader and often he was involved in consultative processes. The role of Qazi Hussain Ahmad in afghan jihad is unforgettable and whenever history will be written for Russian defeat in Afghanistan, it will not be considered complete without mentioning the efforts of Qazi Hussain Ahmad.

I have listened to many speeches of Qazi Hussain Ahmad and every time got a new spirit. He had the immense quality of motivating youth in extremely disastrous and dire circumstances. He led the way for them and was an inspiration. Beaten up by our own police, he faced teargas and baton-charge while leading JI workers in Rawalpindi but didn’t opt for any bullet proof cabin or car. The remarkable courage of Qazi sahib was booming force behind street power of JI. Many still wonder why JI workers are such a force on streets even if they are small in number; the reason is obvious, JI leaders including Qazi Hussain Ahmad are never in bullet-proof bunkers.

He remained Amir JI for good 22 years and then voluntarily left the post because of his ill-health. His struggle wasn’t for his sons or family or personal benefits, but for the sake of Allah and the cause of Islam. It was dire motivation of Islamic revolution which kept him going till the end of his life.

Qazi Hussain Ahmad had a charisma. He used to tolerate difference of opinion in such a manner that despite heavy differences, people across the board used to love him. Tough questions were asked and often people were rude, but polite answers used to satisfy them always. His efforts for unity of Muslim Ummah are substantial and he was quite successful in bringing different sects together. He has shown us a path of unity in Pakistan which we need to follow.

I remember first speech of Qazi Hussain Ahmad when he was elected as member of Parliament in 2002. In few minutes, he beautifully summed up the basic ideology of Islam, though I fear most of our Parliamentarians failed to understand. Stories are long and memories are not going to fade, so I would finish this piece with verse of Iqbal. Qazi sahab, you may have left us, but you will always live in our hearts.

ہزاروں سال نرگس اپنی بے نوری پہ روتی ہے
بڑی مشکل سے ہوتا ہے چمن میں دیدہ ور پیدا

Foundations of Secular Educational System

Know thy enemy.

“Allah is the Protecting Friend of those who believe. He bringeth them out of darkness into light. As for those who disbelieve, their patrons are false deities. They bring them out of light into darkness. Such are rightful owners of the Fire. They will abide therein. 2:257

Are we conscious of what we take from the modern-secular thought and its educational system, and what we reject? In fact, are we rejecting anything harmful? Are we deciding hard what is useful for us and what is unacceptable from Islamic point of view? Do we fully know what we’re up against? Not so much.

Our universities and intelligentsia model itself on the contents of western educational system, and are heavily influenced by it. What then are the major components of western, modern educational system which contrast with Islamic worldview? What are its philosophical and practical bases? This is the first article which encompasses the influences on modern education and its origins. In further articles, we’ll try to come up with some rationale on which to build the structure of modern education which keeps human nature intact with its ethics and preserves the teachings and injunctions of Allah Almighty. We invite you to participate in that and broaden our mutual understanding from Islamic point of view.

Setting the Context: Roots of Modern Education

The loss of God is death, is desolation, hunger, separation. All the tragedy of man is in one word, ‘godlessness’ – (Metropolitan Anthony of Sourzah)

Contemporary education, or modern literacy, has harmed, as well as benefited human race. To understand the long lasting effects of modern education we have to go back in history towards its inception. From there we believe we can conceive the idea of what contemporary endeavor of modern education is. For now it is enough to say that it has given us war, bloodshed, imperialism, disbelief in unseen higher order realities, exploitation, slavery to created things, nationalism and list goes on. It has divested the superior human values from us and has turned human society into an individualistic and hedonistic one; where men are involved in performing feats of personal gratification in which there is no room for love and care due to their shear selflessness. Selfishness is at the heart of economics, for instance. It has so far given two major wars or world wars in the human history. This cannot be said the age of enlightenment, rather a dark age to many. It is a delusion of evolution without any direction. No doubt that science and education of people have given us some wondrous inventions and have laid the foundations of various subjects, but these were supposed to make human life easier and were to make them civilized. Ironically, repercussions have been disastrous.

Understanding the context (or the times) is imperative here. We have our differences with Hinduism, but we ought to call to ‘a common word’. Similarities can be startling, like the following predictions of The Vishnu Purana, “a Hindu text dating back nearly two millennia,” which describe the Dark Age or Kali Yuga:

“Riches and piety will diminish daily, until the world will be completely corrupted. In those days it will be wealth that confers distinction, passion will be the sole reason for union between the sexes, lies will be the only method of success in business, and women will be the objects merely of sensual gratification. The earth will be valued only for its mineral treasures, dishonesty will be the universal means of subsistence, a simple ablution will be regarded as sufficient purification…The observances of castes, laws, and institutions will no longer be in force in the Dark Age, and the ceremonies prescribed by the Vedas will be neglected. Women will obey only their whims and will be infatuated with pleasure…men of all kinds will presumptuously regard themselves as equals of Brahmins…The Vaishyas will abandon agriculture and commerce and will earn their living by servitude or by the exercise of mechanical professions…The dominant caste will be that of the Shudras…” (The last point may raise eyebrows. Interestingly, Prophet also indicated that lowly people will be happy people in final days, like these modern singers and movie stars, as per Hamza Yusuf.)

Let us delve into the influences and foundations that modern curricula’s globally have in common, in East and West.

Industrialization & Progressivism

The modern age of industrialization initiated by the Great Britain was founded on the sentiments of increasing productivity. On these grounds it can be said that it was related to greed present in human nature. It cannot also be simply linked to increase in population, but more or less it can be related to greed or avarice, and subjugation of extremely poor people who were used as ‘grist in the mill’ of industrialism. (Also because at that time Malthus’ theory argued that “poverty is caused by excessive breeding of the poor,” a factually wrong and disproven dogma still held by anti-poor elites. Hence poor had to be left at the mercy of wolves or corporate elites.) With this radical change there came a rush of inventions and products that changed the face of human society forever.

Previously wars were fought between groups for land, ownership and money. This has not changed yet, only the form has changed (in these supposedly extremely ‘civilized’ times). Groups now are nations & corporations led by war mongering political establishments and Opera going executives. They wage wars on other groups (weaker the better) for their own sake of safety, protection and survival. Their excuse: “we’re here to civilize savages and bring the Light of Democracy.” (Ironically, Donald Rumsfeld categorically said that ‘an Islamic state is not an option for Iraq’ even if people want it!)

Today, the businesses are running on Machiavellian thought, Adam Smith’s principle of pursuit of self-interest and totalitarianism without any bounds and without any absolute set of ethics. Very recently around 20 banks in UK and Europe joined hands to loot and fool the world by fixing certain trading rates (or Libor) that affect all financial transactions, for instance.

All that boils down into the domination of a system based on money and power. Globally, this is translating into the rise of the American Corporate Imperialism, as exposed in Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Capitalism whose decline has just been started in Wall Street outlines a system in which the whole of economy stands on the greed of humans for power and outward beauty. Economics, when stripped off from ethics, results in the bigotry of unequal distribution of wealth and immorality. One of us vividly remembers his economics professor forbidding use of any moral arguments against narcotic drugs; so he had to argue “rationally” in favor of legalizing drugs according to economic analysis!

Industrialism and capitalism is the soul for today’s educational system. (Remember what’s the bottom-line? Dollars & prestige.) The degrees which are now offered are only to sustain this system and to make it robust. The curricula have failed to give people any higher aim of living. Those who aspire for greater good are themselves restrained to a small local level, and have up till now failed to achieve any milestone in bringing a halt to the devastation borne by a vast majority of people around the globe. But quality will prevail over quantity, Allah willing.

Capitalistic ideas must be taken critically and attacked from various angles. We tend to naively believe that this is the end-result of human effort in economic sphere. Surely anyone familiar with economic research at the forefront knows that dogmas of neo-classical economics or capitalism are being challenged bottom-up.

Philosophical Purge

While nineteenth century materialism closed the mind of man to what is above him, twentieth century psychology opened it to what is below him

(René Guénon)

The ‘eclipse of human soul and intellect’ by secular thought has brought disastrous consequences not just at pure intellectual level, but at societal and practical level as well. The change agents have been ‘false prophets of modernity’ (i.e., modern philosophers and theorists). At intellectual level, they’ve lost the traditional, religious view of nature and knowledge, and created false alternatives – the cause of mass misguidance. Not only that, these handful of men have produced this ‘Dark Age’, a material civilization, in which both human actions and intellectual efforts are profane and cut off from Divine guidance. At practical level, though they have discovered in their way great deal of facts about human mind and body, but still paved way to moral degradation, materialism and suffocation of public morality. (We hope to give historical and evidential bases to these ‘bold claims’ of major religious thinkers in future, Allah willing.)

At political level, we have seen destruction by and self-abdication of great many political minds and men: thanks to Machiavelli’s work, The Prince. In his over-rated book, he suggests that for rulers, ethical norms do not matter. In fact, being truthful and honest is inefficient. His dajjalic policies are just another case of modern man’s declaration of independence from heaven. Similar strains on ideologies and humans actions are attributed to Sigmund Freud. These mistaken ideas have in fact formed the basis of human nature, society, economy and government, with harmful consequences for societies and even for individuals who practice it.

Ideas of Darwin and Karl Marx are the nails in the coffin of education. Karl Marx perpetuating Darwin’s theory of evolution into historical materialism (as he was took Darwin’s book as building block for his own theory) suggests in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy that:

“… in every historical epoch the prevailing economic system by which the necessities of life are produced determines the form of societal organization and the political and intellectual history of the epoch; and that the history of society is a history of struggles between exploiting and exploited, that is, between ruling and oppressed, social classes.”

On his funeral, F. Engel summed up Marx’s grand theory about human life on earth:

“Just as Darwin discovered the law of development of organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of development of human history: the simple fact, hitherto concealed by an overgrowth of ideology, that mankind must first of all eat, drink, have shelter and clothing, before it can pursue politics, science, art, religion, etc; that therefore the production of the immediate material means, and consequently the degree of economic development attained by a given people or during a given epoch, form the foundation upon which the state institutions, the legal conceptions, art, and even the ideas on religion, of the people concerned have been evolved, and in the light of which they must, therefore be explained, instead of vice versa, as had hitherto been the case.”

According to him, the structure of society including politics, religion, arts, and philosophy is founded on the basis of economic conditions of prevailing era alone. Economics explains everything in Marxian worldview. Religion and ethical systems are either products of economic realities, or merely tools used to justify a given economic system. Moreover, if a system is exploitative, religion will be used as opium to cancel out resentments of the masses. (Actually, “opium is the religion of masses.”) People often read and are influenced with these writings without being critical, just as Ilich Lenin was influenced and brought up the revolution in Russia.

The curriculum of today take these adulterations as credible and as “scientific facts,” mal-nourishing young minds philosophically. In reality these ideas have exploited the darker sides of human conscience & mind, bringing forth those attitudes which were once considered taboo. “With the sword of furqan,” says one Islamic thinker, “Muslim minds should destroy the idols of western ideologies.”

Revolutions and Wars

“Wars and revolutions and battles are due simply and solely to the body and its desires. All wars are undertaken for the acquisition of wealth; and the reason why we have to acquire wealth is the body, because we are slaves in its service” – Socrate

The unrests and revolutions that came in past few centuries have also framed the worldview of education and its outcomes. The French revolution attributes a significant place for wiping out feudalism and is credited with giving birth to liberalism. People overthrow the government of King, the oppressor, to free themselves. This idea found in this revolution gained strength later on and reached in its purest form in the Human Rights Charter.

A sceptic might object: how can this be freedom that a mob can overthrow a king and then take control of everything for themselves? Instead of one king, a state is created for few to rule. They maintain the cycle though: they print the currency, impose taxes, compel everybody to work for material gain, start a competition in the society, bring women out just to boost economy, make children learn things that are not going to matter to them except for increasing taxes and wealth of only a bunch of people. All it does is to make the suffering swallowable for sensitive minds.

This revolution preceded by the American Revolution instills a spirit of absolutist liberty in the approach of institutions of teaching and learning. It also contributes the idea of democracy in the western world and it was through this revolution that basis of modern political thought is inspired. Political theorists and students now advance their thought after considering the universality of the ideas of democracy and capitalism, without analyzing critical the implications of these systems and without challenging its naive assertions.

Similarly, the Russian Revolution and Marxism have brought with it a completely different mindset and values. When these values were first implemented after the revolution, ferocious was the attempt to impose these ideas to the whole world. Nazi Nationalism was another despicable event that took place and failed. Now the world is left with a single dominion of Capitalism awaited to be replaced with something more ideal.

These revolutions have then helped fringe these (and other) concepts of liberalism.

20th century World Wars can safely be attributed to Nationalism (and other psychological diseases and delusions). Education served the warfare. Many of the subjects and fields of study were developed owing to the demands of warfare like Operations Management, Supply Chain Management, and Resource Planning etc. Even the invention of internet is accredited to the needs of military communication after World War II (and to some pure mathematical pursuits too, we must mention).

The overall focus of the education in previous two centuries hasn’t been on the moral grounds, because if it was so people would be enjoying a more safer, indiscriminate and peaceful planet. These so-called “management” and “engineering” fields are nothing but the tools to keep the “system” running and to spread the void between rich and the poor, powerful and the oppressed, from one perspective.

A conscious citizen knows that industrial-military-complex is at the heart of American economy. Those who set up wars, sell weapons and then blame others for mischief are equally responsible and real barbarians.

Anti-Principlism

A brief survey of modern thought and its educational system will show that it’s based on overturning principles, notes Hamza Yusuf, an American convert and preacher. Whereas, he further said, in Islamic educational system, you cannot question those principles. Prof. S. H. Nasr notes that in old days, when Islamic Tradition was fully intact, the intellectual environment was like a sea in which all kinds of fish would swim, with all kinds of colors and shades; but none would question existence of water. No one would doubt unity of God, for instance, but have very sharp differences at the same time. Secular, positivist, modern education attempts murdering this holistic and sacred understanding of knowledge and instruction.

Today, ulema are anathematized for having deep theological differences (when in fact those differences lead to greater synthesis, as per M Iqbal); whereas, the very modernists would dare disagreeing with Quran, and whole of the Orthodoxy developed and perfected by the best generations of Muslims – progressive-academics like Amina Wadud for instance.

Logical Positivism in Social Sciences: Rejection of the Unseen

No understanding of western social sciences (hence its educational system) is complete without delving deep into logical positivism. Western social sciences are based on logical positivism, which rejects belief in and study of the Unseen. An implication of rejection or indifference to the existence of God.

It only studies what can be seen and observed, while rejecting underlying realities like courage, love, goodness, etc. For instance, we cannot see gravity. Hence, we won’t talk about gravity, but we’ll only study its effects. Equations describing its effects will be studied only. (However, physicists don’t bow to positivism much and always talk about such unobservable things as gravity, strings, etc.) Similarly, in psychology, many things are unobservable, unconscious for example. Behaviorists reacted to this invocation of unseen concepts and called for rejecting the study of such areas in psychology. Not many heeds their call anymore.

Unfortunately, despite having failed, logical positivism continues to stick (like a sticky tape) and be taught in many areas. This is evident from its two basic dogmas, which have also taken disbelievers away from light and into darkness:

“S1: Unobservable entities cannot be invoked as explanatory factors. Social science, like the physical sciences, must be built around quantifiable and measurable concepts.

S2. Morals, values, ideals are unobservable and hence unscientific. Activism, or efforts to create a better society are not part of scientific activity. Social scientists must act as neutral, detached observers seeking to describe laws of motion for human and social activities.” (Source, please read the paper for a detailed description, history and criticism of logical positivism.)

One can appreciate that these misunderstandings are opposite to Islamic understanding of knowledge and method of inquiry. Islam on the contrary is for those who believe in the Unseen, and that invoking unobservables is necessary and only rational to be objective in social sciences.

Media: The Mind Control Machinery

Brainwashing and conditioning doesn’t end with classroom sessions in the afternoon. The very potent one begins afterwards. It can be said that today many are reading, writing, learning, understanding, persevering, and moving forward only for the sake of money and lifestyle. Not for the sake of Allah, which has severe consequences, as evident from pupils’ boredom with the education. Media, advertising and our education reinforces these “ideals.” But the fall is much grave and deeper. The subtleties of men now rest in the hands of some ignorant celebrities and movie stars, or a bunch of business giants who’re controlling and influencing a major portion of the population. These corporations are centralized and concentrated. A few many firms own large, diverse businesses like magazines, gaming, newspapers, etc. They won’t let research published against them spread so easy.

With its unprecedented influence, media is termed as the fourth pillar of the state and is the most influential tool rampant in the circles of life of contemporary global culture. The “culture” is nothing but the monoculture imported from America (like McDonalds, etc.). It frowns upon facial hairs, turbans, sandy terrains, and everything more natural. At deeper levels, it’s contemptuous towards various manifestations of traditional civilization, especially the latter’s anti-absolute-freedom-to-do stance.

It’s a mind control machine that ‘manufactures consent’, to put it mildly. But it is much more than that, and impacts deeply spiritual state of those who’re exposed to it without caution. Our national identity, and moral growth of individuals is at stake due to this media because it has torn apart the garment of modesty from people’s eyes and it has once again took humanity to those primitive times when there was degradation of feminine gender and immodesty it faced. In Islam, bashfulness is the essence. In modernity, it is a meaningless commodity that doesn’t help.

Conclusion

An education that only makes us honest, efficient, hardworking and loyal to the system can be very deluding. If the system negates the many clear-cut commands of Allah, honesty, efficiency and hard work won’t do any good to the individual and society. This, to us, is the case with education in Pakistan.

Many things must have been left while writing this as this is no short topic it requires deliberate working and understanding of human conscience and zeitgeist of time in order to identify its fallacies. This article is just an effort to compile the thoughts into an organized form to better understand the problem at hand and to convey it to others. We welcome you to amend, add and expand the scope, contents and depth.

The Islamic concept of educational system is based on the spiritual and moral grounds and implies a set of principles which are completely different and in fact in conflict with the contemporary world view of education. The modern education has moved on after renouncing the existence of any other world other than what they perceive and feel, this attitude has casted a curse on society which has sabotaged its moral values. Dignity, courage, austerity, justice, freedom, wisdom, virtuousness, integrity, and absolute sincerity are absent from today’s learned and literate man. Because if it were a part of the education or if education would have taught these moralities; there must have been less suffering by human race.

“To learn is to understand and to understand we need free thought and for free thought we need not to be slaves”

خرد کو غلامی سے آ زاد کر

The above article has been co-authored by Muhammad Umer Toor with Hassan Habib

We Are All Shahzeb Khan

Just like Madame Defarge of Charles Dickens’ ‘A Tale of Two Cities’ silently kept knitting the registry of all those condemned to death and punishment, once the simple and humble peasants eventually rise to the massacre of the oppressors, the nature is writing down all the names and crimes of the feudals acting as pharaohs in the land of the pure. Just as the ‘bloody red queen’ of Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland uses pigs as her foot rest, flamingo as a mallet, hedgehog as her croquet ball and monkeys as her throne support, feudals in Pakistan enslave the commoners and treat them like animals. You annoy them slightly and the verdict comes ‘Off with his head‘ and job done. Remember the pharaoh who said to Moses ‘I give life and I give death’. These are no different.

Feudalism in Pakistan is a disease, the metastasis of the primary ailment called colonialism. It’s been ages since the imperialists left us but the common man remains enslaved to the feudal lords all across Pakistan. Big lands, property, cars, arms, luxurious pastimes, oppression of the poor, harassment of women and private jails symbolise them. And when these above-the-law feudals become a part of government and legislation, the country becomes a perfect example of anarchy and lawlessness.

Shahzeb, the 20yr old handsome young man, the only son of his parents was killed in cold blood right after his sister’s valima dinner, not on a huge feud but a trivial squabble. ‘You don’t know who I am‘ attitude of the feudal youth driving those lavish cars, surrounded by armed men as their security guards, has replaced the humans in them with devils. Shahzeb Khan is not the name of an individual nor does the killer represent an individual criminal. Shahzeb represents a commoner, who like any brother would be annoyed if someone harasses his sister and would get over it if the issue is settled amicably. He has no right to protest or raise voice against an influential monster and can be cleaned out of the way if need arises, with no one to look for justice. The killer represents the pharaohs of the society, with their right to attack, grab, harass and then feel humiliated if a ‘kammi-kameen’ makes noise, eventually plucking the weed out of their way. The whole picture of this tragic incident is a portrayal of our intolerant society. ‘You annoy me – i’ll kill you. You disagree with me – i’ll kill you. You don’t know who I am, but i’ll make sure you will as i’ll kill you‘.

Shahzeb killing symbolises a menace which should be dealt with an iron fist. But who wears an iron fist in front of the pharaohs? Yes. The same commoners, the peasants, the ‘awam’ which are painted black in face by an angry zameendaarni who uses the filthiest language for a man of her father’s age and he stands helplessly in front of one ‘bloody red queen’ of the area like a helpless animal. Or, the common man who is beaten and taken to task for annoying another ‘red queen’ by telling her that the bakery is closed and he can’t sell her the cake. Or, you and I who would be creating more Shahzeb Khans in future if we opt to stay silent.

The Color of the Painting

The painting was absolutely stunning. It carried a latent meaning which was profound and deep. It was both intriguing and complex. No single narrative or interpretation could really sum-it-up. It was colorful; you could see all sorts of colors of all sorts of variations and shades.

And there stood the painter gazing at his work and wondering how complex the human mind could really be. It was then that a rather blunt man walked right in the gallery. He saw how people were being fascinated at the sight they were beholding. He too looked at the painting, and, wondering what was so special about it, asked, “Umm… what color is this painting?”

How exactly was the painter supposed to answer this query? Well, he chose not to entertain a question that destroyed the purpose of discourse. But then his “ignoring” started to be confused with “ignorance”. People started to doubt the validity of his work. Someone from the crowd stood up and with an inspecting look in his eyes, proposed “I think it’s blue”. “Nah… It looks green to me” commented another. And as soon as you knew it, the audience was arguing about the color of the painting. The painter realized soon enough that joining the conversation would be the worst way to tackle the matter. He knew quite well that when you argue with idiots, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. So the painter decided to leave the place quietly and search an audience elsewhere.

The states of affairs that run our everyday discourses are not so much different at times. ‘Keeping things simple’ as it goes. We want to see the world in binary terms; true and false, good and evil, us and them, and so on. Boring descriptions of things that take place around us don’t do much entertaining. So we choose to overdose reality with a lot of perspective, and a lot of they-are-out-to-get-us and we-are-the-center-of-the-world narratives.

This has led us to conveniently create a world around us that explains everything easily. The world becomes an obvious statement as soon as it is revealed to us. We know that the world is full of conspiracies and plots, and a whole bunch of stuff, and all the while these conspirators and plotters are busy in their twenty-four hour meticulous schemes just to make sure we can do nothing about it.

But alas, it is the notion that ‘nothing can be done about it’ that leads us to a state that we desire most; a state of zero action. We are betrayed by ourselves into a seat of passivity and helplessness. We are then silent spectators of history waiting for it to unfold as time passes by as if some script has been pre-written by “them”, and everything has already been decided by the big guns.

So why not, I ask, should we indulge ourselves in conspiracy theories, simplistic formulas, and populist rhetoric. After all, it suits our inherently lazy character. Taking charge of our destinies, being participants in a greater scheme of things, and, most of all, being responsible for our fate, aren’t things that one would actually want to do. They require too much blood and sweat.

But all the while that we layback and create convenient narratives about the world, we are also inflicting harm upon others and ourselves. By conceiving enemies we are also creating hate. And worse still, we let ourselves be defined by that enemy and by that hate.

One just has to look at the walls of our cities to see such slogans that say “What relationship do we have with India, but of hatred and revenge” (Bharat saye rishta kiya, Nafrat aur Inteqam ka). But really, can we consider this a healthy attitude? Does our religion teach us to hate other human beings from the bottom of our hearts and hope that they end up with the worst of fates? Is this the message of peace and compassion, as well as universality that our religion teaches?

In the process of our hate-generation, we often forget, as Muslims, that we are actually losing subjects of dawah. Human beings, despite their beliefs, or historical-cultural presence, are all common creations of the Almighty. None are creations of Satan. Neither is anyone essentially evil, as we are all human and the Almighty hasn’t made us that way.

Now enemies need not be looked only for outside, but even in our surroundings, and within ourselves. Have you heard of the Yahood-o-Nasaara theory which can be applied to everything you can put your eyes on? I heard it from a friend. I was wearing this shirt that said ‘Smile it’s a Sunnah’, and I asked his opinion on it. His response was that I was being misled by the Jewish lot as they must be laughing their heads off now that I fell to their diabolical scheme of having me wear a shirt that will sooner or later get dirty and hence insult the Islamic message it portrays.

This line of thinking stems from superficiality and results in irresponsibility. Such irresponsibility is equally demonstrated when we start talking of politics in utopian terms. We start looking for a savior of some sort or a newer ‘system’ based on some fancy word we learnt. And then we talk of change.

Talk of radical “Change” and “Revolution”, and thinking that all out of nowhere, and with the help of one person, party, political movement and so on, things would all become A-OK, is fundamentally misleading and inherently irresponsible. It’s irresponsible because we shift the focus from ourselves and portray the responsibility on others. Others here being all those things stated above.

To take hold of our destiny and our persons, we must put some responsibility on ourselves. Iqbal talked of the Khudi, or the Self, but have we ever realized such a thing. Is it not an appeal to the individual to change and overcome himself? But be not confused for I’m not talking about the ‘individual’ in the superficial sense. I talk of the individual in the all-encompassing sense; the personal individual, the social individual, the economic individual, the political individual, and so on.

It is the individual who matters. If he decides to make a contribution then it is he who is making a difference. He has to take hold of all spheres of life and reach out to many other individuals. He must learn to be an active participant of history. But all this requires for him to look at the world more deeply. It requires for him to ask the right questions even more so than to reaching the right answers. He must realize that the color of the painting cannot be changed from green to blue. He must realize that if he likes blue that much he must add it to the color of the painting.