Author: Razi Azmi
Publication: Daily Times
Date: July 28, 2005
URL: http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_28-7-2005_pg3_2
Only the true believers will deny
that Gen Ziaul Haq's Islamisation has been an unmitigated disaster for
Pakistan. It did nothing to address, let alone resolve, the core issues
of illiteracy, poverty, crime and corruption, but put a lot of emphasis
on ostentatious piety and religious correctness
According to news reports, candidates
who went to register themselves for the upcoming local bodies elections
in the Khanewal-Mailsi office of the Election Commission were asked by
the returning officer, a senior civil judge, to prove that they are "good
Muslims". Apparently, they could do so by giving the right answers to questions
on Islam.
An earlier report revealed that
Shehzad Tanweer, one of the four London bombers, was very devout. His cousin
in Pakistan, in whose home Shehzad spent three months earlier this year,
is quoted as saying that the 22 year-old prayed five times a day and would
fast from dawn to dusk on Friday and Saturday. "If you woke up in the night,
sometimes he would be praying on his mat."
Our streets are now adorned with
religious incantations. Religious education forms a significant part of
our television and radio programmes, school curricula and publications
of all types, scholarly as well as popular. Mosques, with loudspeakers
aiming in all directions and more, and madrassas are now to be found virtually
everywhere. But, together, they have done nothing to improve standards
of personal honesty and public morality or helped achieve social harmony.
On the contrary, there is more indecency, corruption and civil strife.
Our religion, we are repeatedly
told, inculcates the values of moderation and tolerance. But, in reality,
Shehzad, like many other young men, acquired extremism and intolerance
in the same measure as he grew more religious. This is not only true of
young Muslims, but also of Jews and other adherents of religious fundamentalism.
It is not fortuitous that the most
extremist and intolerant Israelis are the religious Jews, who reject any
concession to, or accommodation with Palestinians. Using biblical verses
as a pretext, they defend occupation and denounce Palestinians. Old and
young, devoutly religious in appearance, observances and jargon, and distinguished
by their skull caps, long gowns and flowing beards, they are fanatical
and violent in their opposition to Palestinian rights. For them, even Ariel
Sharon is not sufficiently Jewish or patriotic!
I recently asked a member of the
Tableeghi Jamaat to explain why the situation in Pakistan, in terms of
corruption, crime and social morality, was getting worse even as attendance
at mosques and the numerous religious congregations had increased manifold
over the years. By way of an answer he told me that whereas the aakhri
munajat (concluding prayer) at Tableeghi congregations now lasted no more
than a quarter of an hour, in years past these would go on for hours at
a stretch and the participants would weep as they prayed.
Of course, this line of thinking
has no relation to reality, evidence or common sense, but it surely begets
the question, how much is enough. There is nothing to indicate, now or
in the past, that progress, prosperity or public morality is related to
prayers. Prayers are credited with causing rain, but Arabia remained arid
and prone to famines even in the times of the "pious caliphs". Are we not
told that Caliph Omar was so just and kind that he suspended the punishment
of amputation of limbs for theft when the land was gripped by hunger caused
by famine?
Devoutly Christian Philippines and
Mexico are examples of corruption and incompetence, while nominally Christian
but avowedly secular USA and France are progressive and prosperous. Only
the true believers will deny that Gen Ziaul Haq's Islamisation has been
an unmitigated disaster for Pakistan. It did nothing to address, let alone
resolve, the core issues of illiteracy, poverty, crime and corruption,
but put a lot of emphasis on ostentatious piety and religious correctness.
There was even an official campaign
to correct, quite literally, the direction in which people offered their
prayers (qibla duroost karain). It was officially announced that on a certain
day and hour, the shadow of a stick vertically fixed on the ground would
accurately indicate the qibla. Even the vocabulary was subjected to Islamisation,
for sala'at replaced namaaz, and Allah hafiz pushed out Khuda hafiz. In
a mad scramble to imitate the Saudis, we were not only reforming our language,
but breaking with our forefathers in the process.
It has become fashionable ever since
for people from all walks of life, starting from president and prime minister
down to office clerks, to perform as many haj and umra as one possibly
can, although Islam enjoins only one pilgrimage, conditional upon financial
ability. In a country where millions of people cannot get one good meal
a day, and where charities struggle to raise funds, people with any money
to spare would much rather dash off to Saudi Arabia for yet another haj
or umra than donate their money to a good cause.
In this new "Islamised" Pakistan,
Jinnah, Liaquat, Nazimuddin, Suharwardy and Ayub Khan would be total misfits,
while its first and ablest foreign minister, Chaudhry Zafrullah Khan, would
be hounded out of office as a heretic. The nation's only Nobel laureate,
Dr Abdus Salam Khan, died sorrowfully as he was shabbily treated and virtually
disowned because of his particular religious belief.
In this Pakistan, presidents and
prime ministers have constantly to iterate their leadership credentials
within an Islamic framework, while the likes of Qazi Hussain Ahmad, Maulana
Fazlur Rahman and Maulvi Samiul Haq strut about with the swagger of men
who control our national destiny.
Islam's rich, early tradition of
free thought has been buried in favour of conformity and the big stick
for so long and so deep as to vanish from memory altogether. Even an educated
Muslim of today will be surprised to hear of the Mutazilites, who, as early
as in the ninth century, sought to reconcile faith with reason. Mutazilite
concepts, which originated in eighth century Basra with Wasil Ibn Ata (700-748),
will be denounced as totally heretical by the dominant ulema of today,
but at the time they were adopted by some of the most enlightened Muslim
rulers, whose achievements take pride of place in the Muslim lore.
In the year 827, Al-Mamun, who is
regarded as one of the greatest rulers in Islamic history, adopted the
Mutazilite doctrine as state policy through an edict. It was also enforced
by his successor, Caliph Mu'tasim. Both Al-Mamun and Mu'tasim were the
sons of Caliph Harun-ur-Rashid, who "gave great encouragement to learning,
poetry and music. He was a scholar and poet himself and whenever he heard
of learned men in his own kingdom, or in neighboring countries, he invited
them to his court and treated them with respect."
Of Harun, Syed Ameer Ali writes:
"Weigh him as you like in the scale of historical criticism, [he] will
always take rank with the greatest sovereigns and rulers of the world."
Orthodoxy was restored under Caliph
Mutawakkil (847-861), whose hostility to Mutazilites extended to the Shias,
to the extent that he destroyed the mausoleum of Hazrat Ali in Karbala.
And to Christians and Jews, who were required to wear a distinctive dress,
forbidden to ride on animals other than donkeys or mules and prevented
from building churches and synagogues. A rigid version of Islam, as represented
by Ahmed Ibn Hanbal, was now in favour. Ameer Ali describes Ibn Hanbal
as "a red hot puritan, breathing eternal perdition to all who differed
from him."
Sound familiar?
