The Moral Demise

Daughter  killed her father …..

Shocked when I heard the news that a teenage girl killed her father; reason, he was stopping her from having an illegitimate affair. It was a breaking news on electronic media and reported widely, shocking for the entire country that how she confessed her crime and was actually not feeling any guilt about it.

One thought that continuously struck my mind was what made a daughter so angry that she went to the extent of shooting her father. What was the real cause? Was her ‘teenage love’ for a boy so strong that she didn’t care about her blood relations? Perhaps she was thinking that something magical  would happen as often witnessed in famous Indian movies and she would succeed in getting rid of all obstacles  that hindered her path & she & her lover would live happily ever after.

Similarly, a shocking news came about an elite school managing a debate on gay rights in Islamabad and I was thinking that where are we heading towards? Do these elite schools give a damn about religious and ethical values or they just believe in blindly following the ultra-liberal ideologies. They are having fun with fundamental religious and ethical values while we are sitting as mere spectators.

Few years ago, during my college days, once a friend was sitting on  the stairs, deep in thought. I asked what happened and he said, ‘ Looking at the current trends, I am thinking that If after 20 years my daughter is having an affair, how will I stop her’. It sent shockwaves down my spine at that time, but now we are seeing things actually we never thought about. Lifestyle has entirely changed in our country in past ten years. Just look at the language of our kids these days and it will shock you.

Lets play the blame game. Lets blame media for polluting the mind of the girl who killed her father. Lets blame our educational system for these shallow moral values. Lets blame parents for not teaching the kids properly. Lets blame society for promoting unethical values. Lets blame the government …  Lets simply blame!!

This blame game won’t result in anything positive. We certainly need to identify the ‘root-cause’ of the problem and take corrective measures. In my opinion, the root cause is that we have not defined our own role models. We need to define the real role models. And for that purpose, we need to put a lot of question marks on our real ideology. Who are our heroes? Who are we aspiring to become?

Kids idealize the heroes, and whoever heroes they think, they would try to follow them. We need our own real life heroes.  Or should I say, we need to project our own real life heroes, because we already have them, but our kids don’t know as many of us have also forgotten.  Is our hero Hazrat Khalid Bin Walid, Hazrat Mus’ab Bin Umair or any Bollywood/Hollywood hero. Everyone in Pakistan would certainly respond that Companions of Prophet (SAWW) are our heroes. But then how much we and our kids know about them. How much do we talk about them. How much do we try to follow them?

Our problem is much deeper. We live in a hypocritical society. We have double or triple standards in everything. We have different standards for ourselves and our future generation. We  have confused concepts of right and wrong. We want our kids to be modest, polite, religious, and yet they should be westernized, liberal, and exclusively English-speaking.  We are exactly as Ghalib said

رند کے رند رھے ، ھاتھ سے جنت نہ گئ

To sum it up in a sentence, we are confused on our ideology of ‘successes’. We need to define what does success means for us. Is having a successful love affair a success? In movies it might be true, but in real life what is the end result. A girl killed her father to succeed in her love affair. Did she get what she wanted? Can she be called successful?

Let’s turn to Quran to get the meaning of success and Quran says

And whoever is removed away from the Fire and admitted to Paradise, he indeed is successful. (Ch 2 :v 185)

Unless we redefine the success in our minds and reteach our kids the problems will only increase. Bollywood style affairs would be more important in the lives of our teenagers and issues like LGBT will be talk of the town in ultramodern Pakistan with no values to uphold and be proud of.

The misleading labels

Ignorance is no bliss and its captives are unknowingly in a sorry state of affairs. In my opinion, stereotypes are a form of ignorance defined by a restricted and conventional set of perceptions about a thing, a place or a people. Most of us rely on them because we don’t know any better and unconsciously our belief in them becomes so stringent that often the boundary between what is real and what is merely a ubiquitous opinion becomes blurred . We cloud our own minds with mumbo jumbo that hasn’t an inkling of objectivity and proudly stick up for these nonsensical perceptions.

I think a larger part of the problem lies in the fact that we are too quick to judge, consequently forming set opinions. A prudent approach would be to just observe for a while, analyze and digest the concept that experience is the best teacher. Joining the bandwagon because everyone is doing it makes one prone to harbouring prejudices. Stereotypes need not always have negative connotations; they can be positive too but the point to note is that they are generated through the media and get literally ingrained in our thought processes.  More often than not, these stereotypes propagated by the media have covert agendas. For instance, the meaning of Taliban which is plural for talib means a group of students, but now the term is akin to a terrorist organization; courtesy the western media. In newspapers, magazines, editorials, television news, entertainment, documentaries, popular fiction and textbooks, the general consensus points towards the fact that Arabs and more generally Muslims are being portrayed in a racist, stereotypical and negative fashion.l. A lot of news channels admit to not being able to report fairly about Islam and as a result they report on and talk about Islam based on their limited and often misconstrued knowledge. For instance, reporters often define ‘Jihad’ as a holy war when it’s real meaning is struggle against an unjust cause. Another term that is often misused is fundamentalism which is almost always used to mean Islamic fanaticism.

Another prime example is that of the African Americans who are generally considered to be hustlers and potentially dangerous. However, research proves otherwise, disclosing that most serious crimes (homicide, rape, robbery, and assault) in inner cities are committed by a very small proportion of African-American youth estimated at around 8% but despite that, the tendency to characterize all African-American males as criminals has an unnerving prevalence in the American society. I think Walter Lippman, journalistic critic and author was absolutely right in saying,

‘The subtlest and most pervasive of influences are those which create and maintain the repertory of stereotypes. We are told about the world before we see it. We imagine most things before we experience them. And, those preoccupations, unless education has made us acutely aware, govern deeply the whole process of perception.’

It is sad to see even the most educated of people having very constricted notions and speaking out of utter ignorance. If anything, an educated mind focuses on rationale, objectivity and common sense. It is a fact that no two people are alike, so the very idea that entire races are categorized never fails to bewilder me. Media is no God and what it portrays is not always accurate, sometimes it is better to delve into a quest for knowledge about different cultures, their social fabric, their beliefs etc. rather than blindly following it.

I feel social interaction can really change your mind about a lot of things you thought were true about people from different parts of the world. It certainly helped me broaden my spectrum of thought. I have to be honest, when I first decided to move to Australia for higher studies, I too had preconceived notions of what people would be like, although I did not openly profess them. I anticipated supreme white attitude and was mentally prepared to face it. Now, having been living in Sydney for six months and travelling daily on public transport, I can safely say that I was mistaken. So far I have not encountered even a single case of racial discrimination. If anything, I was pleasantly surprised at how affable some of the Australians I cut paths with were. I won’t say that all Australians are forthcoming and open to foreigners simply because I have not met all of them, but I will say that there is potential for good and bad amidst every society. Traits just cannot be generic.

So for me, if there is one thing that holds true, it is the notion that you just cannot believe it until you see it!

Money, Money, Money..

History itself is the best teacher for mankind. People, who learn from it, record their names in the history as successful. These lessons and the examples keep on cumulating day by day as the time waits for none and keeps on flowing like water streams endlessly by turning future into present and the present into a past.

Nowadays we are so busy in making money that we even forget the people who surround us and complete our lives. Our busy schedule only incorporates workplace as the highest priority where we try to make our wealth multiply every day and never are satisfied with what we have. But after decades trying to earn money, we see a completely changed scenario. We are wrinkled, weak, dependable and needy of care and comfort and everyone else is running on the same path like we did years ago. In Quran, Allah says

“Man is, indeed, very ungrateful to his Lord” (Surah Al-Adiyat Ayat:6).

I was once told a fable about a king and a saint. The king out of his pride orders the saint, standing in front of him, to ask whatever he desires. The saint moved the mystical bowl towards the king and asked the king to fill it. The king tried to fill the bowl. He emptied his pockets filled with gold and silver coins, took out his gold chain and all the rings from his fingers but wasn’t able to fill the bowl completely as the bowl was big. He immediately asked the royal treasurer to bring the complete wealth to him and fill the mystical bowl. The order was obeyed but the bowl was still not filled completely. The king, to avoid further embarrassment, asked his ministers to contribute but the bowl remained empty as there was nothing in it. One by one the whole city’s wealth was poured into the bowl but that too was of no use. Finally, the king accepted his defeat. The Saint turned the bowl upside down and to everyone’s astonishment, it was empty. The saint smiled and moved towards the gates of the palace. The king rushed towards saint and asked him about the mystery of the bowl and that what it was made up of? The saint smiled and replied to the king that the bowl is made of human wishes and can only be filled through the sand of the grave.

In 1923, the eight richest people of the world met and combined their wealth which happened to be more than the wealth of the government of America at that time. They were at their best in the art of doubling the money. But they forgot that they were created by their creator who has also created declines after every escalation. They impaired their relations for the sake of earning money. Within the very next 25 years of time span, they became a history to the world and majority of us don’t even know them.

Charles Schwab, president of largest steel company died bankrupt. The president of largest gas company Howard Hubson went insane. Arthur Cutton, known as one of the most famous future commodity trader died bankrupt. Richard Whitney, who was known as the president of NY Stock Exchange of his time was sent to jail. Albert Fall, the secretary of interior became the victim of Teapot Dome scandal and held guilty for conspiracy & bribery, died after long illness. Jesse Livermore known as the famous stock speculator after a crash of 1929 fell into the well of financial crises and committed suicide. Ivar Kreger, known as the Match king & Leon Fraser the president of Bank of International Settlement, both committed suicide. They all are mostly known as an unsuccessful person rather than their wealth.

Life is same as a ship and the sea water surrounding it is the wealth required by the life to float. If the water of wealth enters into the ship then the ship of life will start sinking. So take some of your precious moments from the busy life and ask yourself repeatedly if the sea of wealth has started to sink the ship of life?

Of Regrets and Apologies

“We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military. We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again”, said Hillary Rodham Clinton to Hina Rabbani Khar on a telephone call, and Pakistan reopens its border to NATO supply convoys into Afghanistan after a seven-month blockade since November, when an American aircraft killed 24 Pakistan soldiers.

The nation went into shock and twitter was bombarded with questions like ‘Was this really an apology’, ‘they said sorry which they say even when they sneeze and did not apologize’ and ‘Is Clinton Camera-shy for a formal apology?’

I sat down and thought for a moment, ‘Would we be happy and satisfied if the word regret and sorry is replaced by an apology, a formal one, with a US official appearing on media?  The civilian and military leadership was so inclined to open the land routes that even a slightest blink of the eye was enough for them?  How was  it different from Cameron Munter’s condolences given immediately after the incident and those too in Urdu for which he must have done an extra effort to sound more convincing to the sheeple he was addressing. And, hand over heart, would you be satisfied if your wishes or demands of a ‘formal apology’ are met. Would you believe these statements coming from a super power that has a history of war crimes and blatant lies, very well acknowledged by internationally accredited activists and impartial commentators. Let us go through just a few of these.

-Just a few months ago, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta apologised to the Afghan people for an incident in which copies of the Quran were burned and said that it wasn’t intentional.

‘These actions do not represent the views of the United States military. We honour and respect the religious practices of the Afghan people, without exception.”

NATO commander John Allen also addressed to the ‘noble Afghans’ and that too with an extra effort of learning to say ‘Assalam Alaikum’ and ‘Manan, Tashakkur’ to ‘calamin-ise’ the blistered sentiments with his amazing Pushto and Persian.

-Shortly after that, international media breaks the news, that a course for US military officers has been teaching that America’s enemy is Islam in general and suggesting that the country might ultimately have to obliterate the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina without regard for civilian deaths, following second world war precedents of the nuclear attack on Hiroshima.

“This would leave open the option once again of taking war to a civilian population wherever necessary (the historical precedents of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki being applicable to the Mecca and Medina destruction decision point).”

The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman General Martic Dempsey responded to it as “the material in the course was counter to American appreciation for religious freedom and cultural awareness. It was just totally objectionable, against our values, and it wasn’t academically sound,”

-A few weeks after burning of the Holy Quran incident, comes the horrible news of a US sergeant killing 16 innocent civilians, out of whom 9 were children and later all the bodies were set alight.  As always, the authorities tried to explain, they do not represent anybody. They were just mad (disagrees Robert Fisk).

Remember, US senator John Kerry was “deeply sorry” over the killing of two Pakistanis by a US official, and promised justice if he was handed over to the US? Similarly, there are numerous incidents which have torn apart United States claims of freedom and equality, belief in humanity and justice for all. Illegitimate drone attacks on Pakistani soil and civilian casualties are very frequent. Detainees in the Guantanamo held without charge, Abu Ghraib’s disturbing pictures where the soldier refuses to apologize for her ‘prisoner on the leash’ and other disturbing treatment, US military officials using Quran as target practice and urinating on corpses,  Aafia Siddiqui’s physical and sexual abuses in the world’s most horrifying jail,  sentenced for allegedly shooting (missing the target) a US soldier while a Marine gets three months in jail for massacring two dozen civilians in Iraq, are just a few. With a war that began with a lie of ‘Weapons of mass destruction’ in Iraq, US remains the first and the only country to have used Nuclear weapons and is the biggest manufacturer and supplier of chemical weapons. Let’s also recall heavy usage of white phosphorus on the city of Fallujah.

A former American soldier who fought at Fallujah says:

“I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military jargon it’s known as Willy Pete. Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone, I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for.”

What has the US or the NATO apologised for in the past? And if they have apologised, have the injustices and war crimes stopped? Have they ever apologised for Hiroshima ‘formally’ or for the usage of napalm bombs and chemical weapons on Vietnam civilians? I must mention, they felt ‘sorry’ for deliberate syphilis infections in Guatemala as a part of medical tests without prior consent.

So my dear countrymen, what is it that we really want? With this history of regrets and condolences of the masters, even a formal apology means nothing. I remember from my childhood what my mum used to say every now and then to my little brother, ‘My son, you say sorry and then repeat the same thing? What kind of an apology is this? Saying ‘sorry’, means you admit your mistake and you would never do that again’. Unfortunately this does not mean anything in the real world and our mums had kept us in a world of fantasy and text bookish philosophy which we only come to find out as almost non-existent as we grow up to the ugliness of the mighty in this world.

A dog is no doubt man’s best friend. But, either our spineless leadership should come out of this ‘ideal friendship’ and let us live like a sovereign nation, who is capable enough to deal with its own issues (including terrorism that started after US invasion) or keep wagging the tail and make us all a mere joke . The precious 24 soldiers would never come back and nor would the thousands of other soldiers and civilians who didn’t get a name. The solution is:  this war MUST end!

I leave with you the words of an American activist, a daughter of a Jewish mother and an Iraqi father demanding the same as I do today. No justice, No peace!

Pseudo-liberal Trends of Pakistan

It is extremely sad to admit that the profession of journalism in Pakistan has suffered nightmares and moral atrocities for decades now.

• Biased reporting, twisting the history for vested interests and igniting hatred is on the timelines and news of the hour.

• The volume of biased reporting upon the educated masses has increasingly damaged the ideological frontiers of Pakistan.

• Regular criticism (for the sake of it) on decisions which hold strategic value of national interest is prevailing. Criticism is accorded to diminish the unity amongst races and ethnicities.

• The writ of monitory authorities is lost in the name of freedom of expression.

• Sarcasm and mockery regarding Islamic values is performed with pride which further wages intolerance and sensitivity amongst the masses.

• Conspiratorial attitude has poisoned the nurseries of upcoming talent to the profession.

• The conduct of pseudo-liberals is aiding to the level of extremism in our societal thoughts. The element of neutrality is no more seen as the value of profession but a taboo instead.

It is now a challenge to raise our voice against the ultra elite who pose to be the deciding majority however in reality they enjoy terms with those who are known to the masses as enemies.

Change is always gradual and the recent spring in the Middle East has endorsed to the effect that the final battles of the struggle happen on the streets. The aspiration for an Islamic Welfare State shall be realized as it is driven by real men with no benefactions and defects.

A liberal elsewhere in the world is defined (according to Oxford Dictionary) as:

“someone willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas, favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms”

But in Pakistan, a liberal (a ‘pseudo’ I’d say) is defined as ‘extremely’ intolerant, proudly abusive, Islam-bashing, Muslim-ridiculing person and who prostrates in front of the West. If you are a religious person or talk about upholding decisions in the interest of state, no matter how sensible and open to discussion your are, oh no! how dare you called yourself a liberal?

The Rise of Revivalists

It was a sunny day on 12th February 1949 when the leader of Muslim Brotherhood, Hasan al Banna was invited for a meeting with an Egyptian government minister in Cairo. At the venue, the minister never appeared and hence the brotherhood’s leader had to leave. While he was on the street to get a taxi, he was shot by unknown person.

The Brotherhood’s leader death was widely assumed as an officially planned assassination. Hasan al Banna funeral was publicly banned by the then Egyptian government and only his father, brothers and some family female members were allowed to carry out his final ceremony.

Hasan al banna was a highly charismatic person and a sharp-minded school teacher who laid the foundation of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in 1928. This was the first mass based Islamic party, which overtly worked politically and within country’s legal framework. Brotherhood challenged the ascendancy of secular and western ideology in Egypt and in the whole of Middle East countries. Hasan al banna strongly felt that in the unislamic ideology lays the root of the decay of Islamic societies in the modern world, and advocated a return to Islam as a solution to the ills that had befallen Muslim societies. The message of Brotherhood had spread swiftly not only across the adjacent Arab countries but reached countries far away like Indonesia, Malaysia, Iran and Pakistan.

Hasan al Banna’s achievement was creating a flexible and dynamic structure aiming to transform his vision into reality. He founded numerous schools, factories and mosques in less than 10 years. He was able to provide over a half million committed workers and twice as many supporters to the Brotherhood. The work of Brotherhood started to transcend the national borders. It was the time when Hasan was invited by the British ambassador for tea, complimented for his good character and admired for his work for the poor. He was told that it is in the Brotherhood’s interest to get assistance from British. Hasan politely listened to ambassador and told him that all of his money belongs to Egyptians and the time for British was soon coming to an end. This caused the starting of the conflict between him, British and the then Egyptian monarchy.

No one could have imagined the future of the then Egypt’s most influential and largest revivalist party after his founder, Hasan al banna was mercilessly murdered followed by a massive crack down on his party. Scores of his party members were arrested and subjected to worst physical torture inside the military jails. The party’s assets were confiscated. The situation not only lasted for months and years but for decades and any association with Brotherhood was consider as a serious and unforgivable crime.

The dawn of June 24th,2012 comes along with the election commission’s announcement that Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate, Mohammad Morsi, had won the country’s first contested presidential election, making him the first ever islamist president in the arab world. It took eight decades to Hasan al banna’s dream to come true. Morsi addressed to the tens of thousands at Tahrir square,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“I’m your president, but not without you. I’m your president, but I’m not the best of you…I fear Allah (swt) and no body else.. I will be always one of you. I have been given the authority over you, but I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me; and if I do wrong, set me right. Obey me so long as I obey Allah (swt)and His Messenger (s.a.w), but if I disobey Allah (swt) or His Messenger (s.a.w), you owe me no obedience.”

Despite the time taking and tough period, The Egyptian socio political Muslim Brotherhood has shown its commitment to its cause and vision, given many decades before by Hasan al banna. It would be interesting to see how their counter parts in other countries especially in Pakistan would be performing in the Elections to come. Jamaate Islami claims not only to have close ideological ties with Brotherhood, but due to the amazing similarity in organizational structure and working strategy, is considered to be the Muslim Brotherhood of Pakistan.

The political battle between Islamists and regimes all around the world is not over, it has not only begun but in fact has gained momentum. The brotherhood and such revivalists are emerging as significant forces in the politics of several Arab and non-Arab countries, either directly or through the movements they inspired.

They are appealing most to the masses and cultural conservatives who want their government and society to reflect and defend certain basic Islamic values and principles, and who favor a pragmatic and incremental approach to achieve these goals. The legacy of Hasan al-Banna is thus still presents, and will continue to shape the destiny of societies in the new millennium.

Islam and Rule of the People – III

The instinctual problem that arises with democracy is the belief that democracy originated in the west. The history of democracy is therefore presented as troublesome. The Ancient Greeks, who are told to be the founders of “democracy”, would probably be shocked and be dismissive of modern democracies. As modern representative governments are radically different in nature than the democracies of Greek city-states where all citizens would gather to make decisions. Democracy is a very fluid concept with radically different forms; direct, representative, functional, parliamentary, republican, federal, proletarian, and so on.

Modern democracy, however, from a conceptual standpoint, has a troublesome dynamic. In the west, it evolved in the background of the renaissance and the revolt against the authority of the church. It was in this sense a blow against religion and the ecclesiastical order. It was also a revolt against the European Monarchies, those of which claimed that they had the divine right to rule. While in actuality, as the slogan of the French Revolution went “We want neither a Lord nor a master”, the struggle was one of the masses against oppression of monarchy and theocracy at the same time, it became expressive in a revolt against the justifications presented by the regimes; Divine right and representation.  Hence, against the claim of the church of ‘the rule of God’, the movement demanded ‘the rule of man’.  The revolutionary notion of man’s independence from God manifested itself in form Secularism, Nationalism and Western Democracy.

Fortunately, however Islam does not endorse any religious class to begin with. While Islam does value knowledge and deeds, it does not give monopoly to either a scholarly or holier-than-thou class on the power-centers of society. Popular participation is a fundamental aspect of the Islamic socio-political order.  In this sense, an Islamic state is a civil state against what is understood as a “religious state” (a theocracy).

According to reputable Islamic scholar, Syed Maududi (RA), the Islamic ideal is unique in itself. But to describe it in its nearest terms for understanding and categorization, it can be called a “Theo-democracy”.  This is because while Islam recognizes the sovereignty of God alone, it gives the people the right to choose their rulers and be consulted.

The whole concept of Bay’et, or pledge of allegiance, in Islamic history, is a perfectly appropriate methodology to establish legitimacy based on public consent. The ballot system, and the whole electoral process, is just a more advance and modern way to achieve the same principle. For it’s time and circumstances, the Bay’et system was most suited and applicable. Now we simply have a more advanced and modern method to achieve the same end. Unfortunately, even this Bay’et system was misused by despotic rulers in our history. Forced Bay’et, or consent, became a method to justify monarchal rule in Islamic terms, which faced resistance, starting with the revolt of Imam Hussain(RA), from time to time. In modern times too, despotic rulers have used similar methodologies to justify their tyrannies by the illusion of consent, from Hosni Mubarak to Pervez Musharaf.

There are two main contentions left with the anti-democracy argument. The first refers to the failures of most Western democracies. The ‘corporations’ and ‘lobbies’ are the true parties that hold the strings in such so-called democracies, while public opinion is manipulated through mass media. While this may be true, there is an inherent admission of these democracies not being the real thing; a scam of sorts. In further response, one has to say that within an Islamic framework, monopolistic tendencies in corporations or interest groups are both to be contained. While an explanation of Islam’s socio-economic ideals and characteristics are too detailed to accommodate in this essay, one has to simply understand that they’re different from those of Western capitalist societies.

The second contention refers to the failures and the shape of democracies as ours in Pakistan. People at large are blamed for choosing the corrupt people again and again. This may be true but many other factors are involved, including the incessant shifts between dictatorships and democracies, the general moral and intellectual degeneration of our society, the gap between the elite and the masses, the colonial legacy, and the feudal structure of most of Pakistan. If we find the people today to be ignorant at large than it is the responsibility of the responsible few to create a critical mass that would reach out to the people. While this is another topic, I believe that the elite in Pakistan must take responsibility to engage with the masses. The professional and educated elite have generally been apolitical, while leaving the masses vulnerable to demagogues.

Democratization and Islamization in the Muslim world go together. This fact must be realized. For in true democracy, the consent, traditions, values, approval, customs and religion of the people must all be reflected. On the other hand, secularism in Muslim societies can, and has always, been imposed by force at the hands of despotic rulers. We must also understand that the greatest opponent to democracy in the Muslim world has always been the Western hegemonic powers. If true representatives of the people come to power, there is always the chance that they’ll reflect public aspirations.

 

Click here for Part I and Part II

Islam and Rule of the People -II

Islam is very democratic in its application of things. After all, in its truest essence, democracy is not only elections, but a variety of things. These include pluralism, free speech, freedom of association, basic human rights and so on. Islam encourages all of these within its own framework.

As far as the objection that in a democracy, people can make laws as they wish, one has to understand that Islam itself gives a framework within which there is room for human creativity and reason to come into play. In a constitutional democracy, democracy is restricted by the constitution. Legislation can only be carried out within that framework. If a constitution is based on Islamic principles, than there is abundant room for legislation. In fact, from the standpoint of being Muslims in a democracy, one cannot, by his allegiance, legislate or make decisions against the teachings of Islam. If he does, it is no less different than breaking the constitution. For in theory, one can always do that as well. Acting against faith, or law, is a crime. So to the response of ‘what happens when a Muslim parliament legislates in favor of alcohol’; one can simply reply that  when such a thing will happen, the members of parliament and their supporters, will be committing a crime against their faith, or even against the constitution, if it is based on Islamic principles. The blame will hence go on the whole Muslim community. And Allah has referred constantly in His revealed book in regard to what happens when a whole nation cooperates in wrong deeds.

Islam is not totalitarian, and does not have precise details and orders for every minute thing. In fact Islam sets broad guidelines and principles, while also setting some limitations. This aspect is sometimes missed, and mostly those who are overly defensive of their religion contest that Islam gives us a game-plan and to-do list for every single situation we face. While one may think that such were true, he must always realize that if it were than it would not be possible for Islam to have a universal character, and hence apply to changing times and circumstances. If the object in question changes, then how can the way we deal in it not? This doesn’t mean that Islam changes, but in fact the principles and guidelines it suggest remain universal and permanent.

I actually had a debate with an emotional friend of mine in which he argued that if something is not already endorsed in the Quran and Sunnah, and absent in Islam, then it cannot be permitted to be carried out. However, when I asked him whether he ever looked at religious sources before deciding to scratch his head, his response was a confused resort.  Another example I had to give him was regarding clothing; while the Prophet (SAW) himself is reported to have worn the dresses of both Persians and Byzantines, Islam still has a dress-code. That dress-code is not particular in the sense that it tells you what to wear, but rather it tells you how to wear what you wear. This means that you can wear clothes ascribed to any culture – Arab, Persian, Western, African and so on – or form as long as the Islamic criterion is met.

Two reputed Islamic scholars write in a collective article

“The Islamic approach is that faith, values and principles and some key institutions such as the Quran and Sunnah provide the permanent framework. Within that framework, there is a lot of flexibility for change and experimentation. Islamic commands have been divided into five categories. On the one end are fardh, the obligatory requirements, which are specific and occupy a relatively small proportion of commands. On the other end are haram (forbidden) elements: this is the bottom-line that may not be crossed. Between these two ends are desirable elements of conduct (mustahab) and undesirable elements (makruh). The rest of human activity falls in the vast middle area of mubah (permissible) conduct, which may be regarded the domain of human freedom.” *

To be continued…

Click here for Part I and Part III

 

References

“Religion, State and Society”  by Prof Khurshid Ahmad & Mahmood Ahmad Ghazi, in “Policy Perspectives, Volume.5, No. 1”

 

Islam and Rule of the People – I

Is there anything wrong with the idea that people should have the right to rule? Many people argue that there actually is something unacceptable and Islam does not permit such a thing; a blasphemy, maybe.  To say that the people have the right to rule, they argue, is to give away a right reserved for God alone as sovereignty belongs to God, no one should be allowed to be partner in it.

Seemingly, this does tend to make sense. More so, in times as ours when people have come to detest democracy in general after witnessing decades of jiyala politics in Pakistan, and hence express their frustration in various forms, including religious ones.

I, for one, cannot comprehend the absolutist condemnation of democracy. One may debate that politics in our country has degenerated to a very humiliating level (to which one can point out many other reasons besides ‘democracy’). But an outright condemnation to the point that one uses religion to oppose it brings many complications as the image of a religion – that is democratic to the core – is put at stake.

I believe that the argument above is based on certain confusions and mishandlings of conceptions in the Islamic tradition.

First of all, it is beyond doubt that God alone is sovereign. This concept emanates from the creed of Tawhid-the oneness of Allah.  This is undeniable and incontestable on all levels. But when we are talking about this world we have to be more explicit and clear in what we imply.

While we may recognize God’s supremacy in this world and the next, we never mean that humans don’t have worldly authority. To say that they don’t would be to deny both free will, everything we see all day and common sense, for the sake of it. It is people who already rule themselves; whether in the form of a singular individual, an institution, class, race, parliament and so on. If human rule is to be denied in its worldly sense then the only plausible form of government would be an anarchic one. Sadly maybe, neither God nor His angels come down on earth and take control of governments. It’s a human decision to make; with or without taking God into consideration.

The question that arises then is, in what form does an Islamic state manifest itself?

Islam has provided a socio-political framework and universal principles that guide us in this regard as well. While Islam recognizes the Divine authority, it fails to recognize a divinely class, and hence closes the doors of theocracy. In this sense, the Islamic ideal is not a religious state. Nobody represents God’s will on earth. Instead, God provides the legitimacy to people to rule on his behalf under the framework of His divine guidelines. He did this by making universal man (all humankind) His vicegerent on earth.

The Islamic principle of governance establishes itself on the basis of shoora (consultation) and Khalifat. Derived from these two principles, we can safely say that while western democracy champions popular sovereignty, Islam recognizes popular vicegerency. While there seems to be common ground on the functional level, conceptually both are worlds apart. It’s somewhat like praying in front of a rock; if your idea of the rock is that it is an idol worth worship then the same action – that would otherwise be completely appropriate – becomes a sin.

The Islamic ideal requires that the Muslim community be taken into confidence not only in the selection of the rulers but also in the decisions of the rulers. The welcoming attitude towards criticism by the Khulfa e Rashideen (the Pious Caliphs) is well established. The attitude of Hazrat Ali (RA) and Hazrat Usman (RA), for example, towards the rebels is without any precedent in history. At a moment, Hazrat Ali (RA) even refused to take action against a rebel who openly declared that he will murder the respected caliph. In both these cases, the caliphs in question had to bear many troubles to uphold such cherished ideals.

On an occasion, Hazrat Umer (RA) spoke unambiguously about the selection of the Muslim ruler. While explaining to people that the selection of Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA) was not to be taken as a precedent because it was only adopted out of circumstantial necessity, he went on to say that “If someone gives pledge (bay’et) of allegiance to another (to become a Caliph) without consulting the Muslim community, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed.” * Obviously, the strict connotation at the end refers to carrying out a crime against both the state and the community. The same treatment would today be reserved for someone who breaks the constitution to usurp power.

Click here for Part II and Part III

Reference“ *Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817”

Where are all these gates leading to

Our nation is obsessed with ‘gates’, be it Watergate or Bill Gates; (though the latter is considered a plural by many). Thus, it has become customary to associate the word gate with every scandal, whether it is  Memo-gate, Mehran-gate, Veena-gate or the latest Bahria-gate; the word ‘gate’ is there as a symbolic representation.

Do these gates open a gateway to somewhere? What is the impact of all these scandals on a commoner’s life in the country? Take Memogate, for instance. A lot of hype was created about it but with the passage of time, the dust settled down. In the end, it was considered as a political gimmick to divert the attention from critical issues. Many talk shows were conducted and costly airtime was used for discussions on every aspect of the memo. Even if memogate was critical and a matter of life and death for the country, what was the outcome of the whole hue n cry? Similar questions can be raised about other scandals in which nothing tangible is infront of the nation which can be called a ‘result’.

Now, consider the recent hype about Bahria Gate. Malik Riaz did a press conference while holding Quran in his hand. He raised some serious questions regarding judiciary and the Chief Justice. It became a breaking news immediately and all channels started running marathon transmissions discussing the pros n cons of every uttered word and gesture of Malik Riaz’s presser. Social Media didn’t stay behind. #BahriaGate started trending on twitter. Everyone with or without an opinion participated. In fact, even I personally tweeted a lot. It was immediately the talk of the town. Malik Riaz tried to prove that he had interaction with the Chief Justice. It turned out that during lawyers movement the interaction was there and Malik Riaz tried to bargain on behalf of  the rulers and CJ never agreed on NRO and meeting Zardari and hence no deal was reached.

Apparently, this scandal is perfectly timed to divert the attention of people from the corruption of current government and issues like poverty, inflation, energy crisis, lawlessness and target killings. Media has created a hype and serious issues of daily life have gone on the back burner.

But in hindsight, when I reflect now I feel that this issue is indeed important. This single scandal shows the reality of our society and unveils the nature of our social fabric. Virtually everything and everyone was bought and confessed about. For me, ‘confessing a crime with pride’ is a bigger issue. Malik Riaz openly admitted that he bribed and offered favours. His intentions cannot be judged, but his actions surely tell that he wanted to influence the judicial system.

Bahria Gate should not be looked upon as ‘just another corruption scandal’. It shows that how a person earned fortunes and on his way up the ladder, he tried to purchase everything that came along. He had contacts with major political personalities, military junta, media tycoons and famous anchors. He had a say in crucial political affairs. He utilized all these deliberately established contacts for his purposes. In some cases, he gave a lot of charity to the poor and deprived people. Thus he used all means to establish his significance. This mentality is not rare. When I joined my first job, a senior told me to ‘oblige’ everyone by giving favours. He told me that’s how I could make my roots stronger in the organization. This culture of influencing others and then taking undue favours is ruining the very essence of our society.   So very few were able to resist the fortunes offered by Malik Riaz and in the process Bahria town developed into an empire estate which had its own rules of the game.

Another important aspect of this scandal is the role of journalists. They are fighting each other and exposing themselves on this issue. Their fight has revealed a lot about the unscrupulous internal affairs of media. It also shows how people from media are manipulated. Malik Riaz is investing a lot in mainstream media by ads which clearly influences the opinion of media.

One significant thing is the deplorable trend of holding Quran during press conferences. Altaf Hussain and Zulfiqar Mirza did the same before and now Malik Riaz repeated it once again. Seriously, it shows ill mentality of our so called ‘leaders’.  The sanctity of the Quran should be maintained and it should not be used in ‘political mimicry’.

This scandal should be taken to the logical and fair conclusion. All the holy cows should be unveiled and slaughtered once and for all. Only then it can bring long lasting peace in the lives of ordinary citizens.  It can decide our future if we punish all the culprits and prove that our nation is not for sale. However, if the history of previous ‘gates’ repeats itself then our society will loose its belief on justice. It will bring more downfall for the morality in our society which is already touching its lows. This scam is a test for our nation and I believe that if we successfully cross this bridge, we will come out as a better nation inshaALLAH.