Friday , 3 December, 2010
By Asghar Ali Engineer

EVERY now and then fatwas are is sued by muftis around the world regarding one issue or the other. Some of these can be offensive to existing sensibilities.

The Darul Uloom, Deoband, India, though it does commendable work for peace and communal harmony, also issues fatwas which reduce women to a status that is secondary to that of a man. Recently someone from Dubai typed on his computer the word ‘talaq’ three times, and he was told that his wife had been divorced; that she would have to marry another man and be divorced by him to reunite with her erstwhile husband.

In Iran a middle-aged woman, Sukaineh, was sentenced to death by stoning as she was alleged to have committed adultery, though the Quran nowhere mentions such a punishment and prescribes only 100 lashes for zina (in Arabic there is only one word for a sexual act outside the wedlock, be it rape, fornication or adultery).

Such judgments and fatwas are issued because some jurist or the other had so opined hundreds of years ago keeping in view the social conditions then prevailing. On most such issues there is no ijma (consensus), and many of them are even based on controversial hadiths. Most of the jurists, when asked for a fatwa, consult only mediaeval sources and never bother to apply their own reasoning power in the present day. Taqlid (mechanical following) is considered as the safest in this context by such jurists.

However, even in mediaeval times many jurists had condemned taqlid. Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Hazm were great jurists, and both have condemned the thoughtless following of who said what on a given issue before or in their own times.

Ibn Hazm was from Spain and used to give great importance to independence of thinking in his juristic judgments. He was influenced by his teacher Abul Khayar. He was also of the opinion that one can be called alim (knowledgeable) as long as one is engaged in seeking knowledge. But one who thinks he knows enough is, in fact, ignorant. Our jurists, as we know them today, have long stopped thinking in and for their own time.

The Quran is a fundamental source for Islamic jurisprudence, but Ibn Hazm puts the Quranic verses in three categories: one, verses which need no other source to understand; two, verses which can be understood in the light of other verses; and three, verses which can be understood in the light of authentic hadith (authentic is one which has been narrated by most reliable and many narrators). If this method is followed Islamic jurisprudence, especially in respect of family laws, can be revolutionised.

Most of the jurists, unfortunately, rely in matters of family laws more on weak hadiths than on the Quran, the primary source of Islamic law. Ibn Hazm, who apparently followed the Zahiri school (but not by way of taqlid), strongly criticises those who do not think for themselves and resort to taqlid. He said all this in 14th-century Spain. By contrast our living jurists in the 21st century still resort to the ‘mechanical following’ of their respective schools of jurisprudence.

Another Spanish jurist Al Shatibi was also very creative in his thinking about Sharia laws. He said that one must first understand the maqasid and masalih i.e. the basic objectives and welfare of the people for whom the Sharia laws are being framed. Our muftis and jurists do not keep the objectives and welfare of the people in mind and simply consult standard books of their respective schools of jurisprudence to issue fatwas nowadays.

It is because of the fatwas based on imitation that Islam is negatively projected today, and then we complain of Islam-bashing by non-Muslims. A truly religious person should look at his/her own faults first before blaming others. As someone said, we try to remove dust from the mirror instead of removing it from our own faces. The mirror is going to show dust on our face in any case as long as it is on our face.

Today it is highly necessary to dust off our own face and restore dignity of the Islamic Sharia by rethinking several issues pertaining to personal laws, restoring the dignity and rights of women, as given by the Quran, that was taken away due to the personal opinions of jurists in their own circumstances and times. Imitation should be thrown out of the window and all eminent jurists from the entire Islamic world should come together and compile a corpus of laws giving equal rights to women in matters of marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc., which the Quran gives women.

There is no doubt that if we keep the objectives and welfare of the people foremost, and delve into thinking for ourselves in our own time, Islamic laws would become not only highly just but a model to be followed by all. Ibn Hazm, for example, was of the opinion that if a man is economically weak and his wife wishes to be divorced to settle for a well-off man, it should be for the divorced woman to maintain her former husband; such was the parity with which he viewed marital relations.

In the end, we must go directly to the Quran and accept only the very authentic hadiths in order to formulate laws that can dispense social justice.

The writer is an Islamic scholar, who also heads the Centre for Study of Society & Secularism, Mumbai.

Dealing with blasphemy

By Nilofar Ahmed
Friday, 10 Dec, 2010

THESE days there is much talk about blasphemy and what should be done with the blasphemer. Blasphemy can mean being irreverent about, or desecrating, a sacred subject, object or a person. Since the Prophet’s (PBUH) actions and teachings were based on the Quran, we should examine it to see what is expected of Muslims in such a case.

In Surah Al-Anam it is said, “When you see people engaged in vulgar arguments against Our signs, turn away from them, until they engage in some other matter. And if Shaitan makes you forget do not sit, once you remember, with those who transgress (6:68). There is no responsibility on the pious on account of them at all, except to explain, perchance they might become God-fearing” (6: 69).

The first reaction one has to show when difference of opinion arises in matters of faith, is to simply move away from the argument. We will also have to examine the various meanings of the Arabic word ‘ayaat’ or ‘signs’. The verses of the Quran, which are referred to by this very word, all the prophets sent by Him in order to deliver His message and the miracles they wrought are also “signs of God” (3: 49).

The question that arises here is: what should the believers do with those who blaspheme against the “signs of God”? Abdullah Yusuf Ali in his English commentary on the above verse writes, “If in any gathering the truth is ridiculed, we must not sit in such company. If we find ourselves in it, as soon as we realise it, we must show our disapproval by leaving.”

Pir Karam Shah, who also served as a judge in the Federal Shariat Court, in his Urdu commentary Zia-ul-Quran, says, “…Allah has forbidden Muslims to sit in the company of those whose pastime it is to day and night ridicule Islam, the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) and the Quran.”

Abul Ala Maududi in his commentary Tafheem-ul-Quran remarks, “…it is not the duty of the believers to refute their (the opponents’) absurd objections but present the truth before them … the pious people should not waste their time and energy by entering into useless polemical disputes, discussions and argumentations with the disbelievers”.

All these three eminent scholars have come to the conclusion that all the believers have to do is to move away and avoid confrontation which, in such a case, is a clear commandment in the Quran.

Once, when the Prophet went to negotiate with the unbelievers, they plotted to kill him by planning to roll a boulder in his direction. He was given a timely warning by Gabriel and was saved. Some of his companions were so infuriated that they wanted to kill the enemies. But the Prophet stopped them by saying that he was sent as rehmatul lil aalimin (21: 107), “mercy for all the worlds” and did not seek revenge for his person.

Even at the conquest of Makkah, all the Prophet’s adversaries who had persecuted him throughout his prophetic career were afraid that there would be a reprisal. But the Prophet announced, “Today I forgive you, the way my brother Prophet Yusuf forgave his brothers.” Similarly, when people ridiculed him he simply ignored them, and asked his followers to do the same. He practised the Quranic injunction of “repelling the evil with the good” (13:22; 23:96; 28:54; 35:32; 41:34).

It is not always non-Muslims who ridicule Islam, and everything such people say need not be interpreted. The Quran has granted freedom of religion to everyone by saying, “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256). Throughout the Quran, Muslims have been asked to establish justice for which there should be a complainant, an accused, witnesses and the final authority, the judge, to listen to all of them and then decide the case according to the prevailing law. The punishment, if any, will be carried out by the state.

Can, then, any pesh-imam (prayer leader) of a mosque self-appoint himself as a judge, pass judgment without giving the accused a chance to defend himself, without following any legal procedures for a fair trial and then lead lynching mobs to murder an innocent victim? It is the duty of the state to take note of such incidents and to punish those individuals found trespassing their authority, including imams and maulvis who sanction and instigate murders in the name of blasphemy. The accusers, when found to be lying blatantly, should also be punished.

In Article 33 of the constitution of Pakistan, it is said that it is the state’s duty to “discourage parochial, racial, tribal, sectarian and provincial prejudices among the citizens”. The laws and the judgments passed should not favour any one person, based on the said grounds.

It is the duty of those charged with investigating the case to make sure that there is no personal axe to grind or a personal vendetta to settle, which is usually the case as a hidden agenda behind the accusation of blasphemy. It should also be mentioned here that unlike other religions, there is no institution of and no authority for the clergy or the maulvis in Islam.

Civil society and those in authority must step forward to stop this mad witch-hunting.

In the globalised world of today, if we want Muslims to have freedom of religious thought and practice in non-Muslim countries, we must also give non-Muslims in Pakistan these same rights. In fact, that would be following the practice of Prophet Muhammad himself.

nilofar.ahmed58@gmail.com

__________________
No signature...

Spirit of Karbala

By Qasim A. Moini
Friday, 17 Dec, 2010

BEYOND rituals, Karbala is a living symbol that has for 14 centuries inspired man to rise above mediocrity, materialism and self-centredness and aim for the lofty heights of truth and sacrifice. It is a byword for chivalry and an ethical and moral benchmark. And the personality around whom all these sublime virtues and traits orbit is Hussain bin Ali.
In this age of moral bankruptcy and excess, where empty rituals dressed up as religion and rampant, selfish materialism are in an increasing competition to win partisans, Karbala stands out as a beacon, a revolutionary ideology that has the power to change human conduct and transform society. How right the sage of the subcontinent, Khwaja Moinuddin Chishty, was when he emphatically declared ‘deen ast Hussain’ (Hussain is the faith).

All of us have heard the virtues of the Imam at different forums. For example, our rulers make it a point to issue statements every year on Ashura lamenting the Imam’s plight and pledging allegiance to his noble cause. Yet if they were even remotely sincere about walking on the path of Hussain, we as a nation would be in a much better condition. Very few of us endeavour to go beyond the tears and mourning rituals and dive into the bottomless ocean of ma’arifat (gnosis) that is Karbala.

The message of Karbala is not constrained by time and space: it is eternal, as emphasised by the tradition Kullu yawmin Ashura wa kullu ardin Karbala (everyday is Ashura and every land is Karbala). And it is not limited to any particular sect, race or creed. It is universal. Josh Malihabadi put it best when he said that ‘Insaan ko bedaar to ho lene do, har qaum pukare gi hamare hain Hussain’ (Let man awaken; every nation will cry out ‘Hussain is ours’). The name of the Imam contains within it a sublime substance that has the power to shake mankind out of its petrified slumber. Karbala has the alchemic power to turn lead into gold.

Two distinct philosophies emerged on the day of Ashura in 61AH: Hussainiat and Yazidiat (a third characteristic — that of the spineless Kufis also emerged — but that is a discussion for another time). With different names and with different faces, the Yazids of the day continue to propagate the philosophy of Yazidiat, its identifying characteristics being arrogance, tyranny, amorality and naked ambition. Yazidiat today has abundant manifestations, some of its more recognisable forms being terrorism, global neo-imperialism, economic injustice and oppressive regimes. And just as the Imam unmasked and challenged Yazidiat 1,400 years ago, so too must the Hussaini revolution continue in its struggle against oppression of all shades.

The need is to recognise the components of Hussainiat and to apply these to cure the spiritual and moral disease that is Yazidiat. The Imam’s message is stunningly clear across the expanse of space and time: resist the oppressor and side with the oppressed. This is beautifully communicated through one of the Imam’s sermons, quoted in Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s The Martyrdom of Hussain:

“You witness the existing state of affairs. The world has changed its colours. It is completely devoid of virtue…. Don’t you see that truth has been relegated to [the] background? Falsehood is deliberately being acted upon. It is high time a believer should try to defend the truth for the sake of Allah…. It is an offence in itself to live with oppressors”.

Tears for the martyrs of Karbala soften hearts but are not enough. Karbala teaches one the twin lessons of ilm (knowledge) and amal (action). Azadari, or mourning for the Imam and his companions, is in fact a dynamic force that has carried the revolution of Karbala through the ages. It cannot be limited to rituals and it cannot be stopped by terrorism. It infuses the Hussaini spirit within all who hear of and are moved by the Imam’s struggle. As reputed scholars have stated, azadari stands for character building: a person of unremarkable character should leave a majlis a changed person.

It would be unfair to mention the merits of azadari without crediting the driving force behind the movement and the primary exponent of the Hussaini revolution: Zainab bint Ali. For it was this brave lady of the household of the Prophet (PBUH) that marshalled the women and children of the Ahlul Bayt when all the male adults of the house — apart from Imam Ali bin Al Hussain Zain Al Abidin — had been martyred at Karbala.

This distinguished lady upheld the dignity of the Ahlul Bayt, while her fearless speeches, mirroring the eloquence of her noble father, shook the court of Yazid under the most adverse of circumstances. It is to Syeda Zainab we owe an eternal debt for preserving the truth of Karbala and preventing the distortion of this gross injustice of history.

It is beyond this writer to comment on the power and articulation of Syeda Zainab’s epochal speeches from Karbala to Damascus. But it would not be wrong to say that after the blood of the martyrs had been shed in Karbala, Syeda Zainab launched her own jihad through her moving speeches. The courage and faith of this noble lady can be gauged from the address she delivered in Yazid’s court:

“Oh Yazid! We take our case to the court of Allah and rely on Him. We will not deviate from our righteous path under the pressures of your oppression and deception… You will not be able to obliterate our name for our message and divine mission cannot be destroyed just as your shame and disgrace cannot be washed clean.

__________________
No signature...

Learning from experience

By Khurram Ali Shafique
Friday, 24 Dec, 2010

THE year 1987 was memorable because even those segments of the population that had not been much interested in politics during the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy (MRD) earlier in the decade were now feeling restless. This view was confirmed by the historic turnout during the elections that followed a year later.

The 1988 elections were the second occasion in the history of Pakistan where the results, however rigged they may have been, were at least accepted by all major contestants (the first such occasion were the elections of 1970). In the light of the ideals Muslims of this region indigenously developed since 1887, and the goals achieved through them, there are reasons to believe that the new goal that had appeared before the nation in 1988 was ‘emancipation’ rather than anything else. This goal had to be achieved through the “inner synthesis” of diverse political experiments carried out in the previous twenty years. The ideal to be pursued whilst in quest of the goal was “learn through experience.”

Emancipation was the new goal. This may be concluded from the fact that according to the generally accepted views, conventional democracy (i.e. western democracy) pre-supposes a high literacy rate, which did not exist in Pakistan at that time (nor does it now). If so, then the masses had less reason to care for such democracy and more to care for the other, indigenous, variety that had already been idealised by them: it had been taught to them by the most influential Muslim teachers, preachers, poets and artists for more than a thousand years.

It was a spiritual democracy, envisioned by the more genuine schools of Sufism in the past, and more recently turned into a political idea by Muslim thinkers like Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai, Shah Waliullah, Waris Shah, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, the Ali Brothers and Allama Iqbal. In The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (1930-34), Iqbal stated that for a Muslim, this idea was “a matter of conviction for which even the least enlightened man among us can easily lay down his life.” Hence, the indigenous concept of democracy does not pre-require literacy or formal education; instead it pre-requires a certain shared consciousness of purpose and a sense of destiny. Does it then not appear natural that the true aspiration of the masses can only be achieved through this indigenous variety of democracy? It does not degrade the people because of a poor literacy rate. It has been ingrained in their consciousness by the best-loved poets and teachers over a period of thousand years.

Just as conventional democracy pre-requires literacy and education, the indigenous variety calls for spiritual emancipation (in the mentioned passage, Iqbal goes on to say, “in view of the basic idea of Islam that there can be no further revelation binding on man, we ought to be spiritually one of the most emancipated peoples on earth”) does not require it. Spiritual emancipation, in this sense, means emancipation in all spheres of life rather than just political. Artistic and literary, social and political, religious and legal, education and psychological emancipation collectively amounts to spiritual emancipation.

In retrospect, we may recognise that we started pursuing this goal in 1987. Unlike some of the earlier goals, such as Muslim nationhood, separate electorates and Muslim homeland, the goal was not clearly stated on this occasion. Beginning with the election of a woman prime minister ahead of any other Muslim nation, the journey towards emancipation was carried forth, perhaps, unknowingly for the most part.

The quarrels between Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, the work of the human rights activists and the feminists, the so-called enlightened moderation at the turn of the millennium, the emergence of an all-powerful media with its good and bad influences, and the uneasy alliances with western powers may all have contributed towards achieving this goal. The strongest factor, however, was undoubtedly the “inner synthesis” of the diverse political ideologies that had been tried out since 1967.

In the absence of a well-stated ideal, the only ideal to be pursued was to learn from experience. This was also important because the emancipation that we were trying to achieve was unprecedented. It was a long-cherished goal that had never become a reality for our society during centuries of rule by tyrants and despots. Therefore, the best way forward was to learn from experience.

A benchmark came in 2006, when judicial activism of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhry, prevailed upon the combined whim of a native military ruler and the sole superpower on earth, and made them answerable in a court of law for “the missing persons”, most of whom were not only common but also disfavoured citizens.

As if to symbolise the ethos of the past twenty years, six women cadets and a Sikh male cadet were seen among the contingent that took over guard duties at the mausoleum of the Quaid-i-Azam on December 25, 2006. The 130th birth anniversary of the founder of Pakistan was indeed a good day to mark the end of a stage in the history of this nation, and to start preparations for the next stage. “Emancipation”, which was the goal achieved in the past twenty years, was soon going to become a tool for achieving the next goal, and a new ideal would then be pursued.

The writer is the author of Iqbal: an Illustrated Biography (2006) and other works on the history and culture of Pakistan. KhurramsOffice@yahoo.com

__________________
No signature...

Of probability and faith

To be overtly religious is easier and more common than to really understand one’s religion.

By Iftikhar U. Hyder
Friday, 31 Dec, 2010

THE contribution of the early Muslims to the development of mathematical ideas is widely recognised among scholars and well documented. From the development of Arabic numerals to the invention of algebra, their contribution is indisputable.
In his landmark book on the development of risk management, Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk, Peter Bernstein asked why was it that despite early Muslims’ impressive achievements in mathematics and their advanced mathematical ideas they did not proceed to develop probability and risk management. The answer, he believed, lies in their view of the world.

Bernstein argues that the early Muslims largely believed that the future was determined by God or fate and not by humans while the idea of risk management, based largely on the mathematics of probability, “emerges only when people believe that they are to some degree free agents” and “like the Greeks and early Christians, the fatalist Muslims were not ready to take the leap”.

The Europeans ultimately developed probability and risk management with significant contributions from the French philosopher, mathematician and physicist, Blaise Pascal (16231662). At age 31, Pascal decided to devote his life to the study of religion. He died at 39.

In 1662, a collection of Pascal’s thought that he had written in a fragmented form was published posthumously. In that book, appropriately titled Pensées (Thoughts), Pascal argued that probability favoured a wager in believing in God. This argument became known as Pascal’s Wager.

In some ways, Pascal was expressing in the mathematics of probability what Hazrat Ali had expounded almost 1,000 years before Pascal was born. Hazrat Ali was one of the greatest intellectuals of his time. He had reportedly once told a pagan who did not believe in life after death somewhat along the lines of that if there was no life after death, that is, if he (Ali) were wrong and the pagan was right, then he could be at a loss in this world but would have no loss in the hereafter.

However, Hazrat Ali argued that his loss in this world as a believer would be much less compared to the loss of the pagan in the hereafter for not believing in life after death if in reality there was one.

The eminent French mathematician Pierre-Simon Laplace (1749-1827) once said, “The most important questions of life are, for the most part, only problems of probability.” However, is the question of belief in God also a matter of probability? One can say there is no belief without certainty. Is belief in God then a matter of certainty and not probability?

In the Pascalian logic, the odds of wagering favour believing in God. Religion is thus effectively reduced to a tool for managing risks after death. While many people may rightly scoff at the idea of comparing belief to managing risk, the idea may not be that far-fetched.

The American religious philosopher, Huston Smith, has argued that many religiously inclined people may simply “believe in believing in God” rather than “believe in God”.

In an unflattering allusion to the religiously inclined American Christians, he wrote in his book, The Religions of the World: “A nation can assume the addition of the words ‘under God’ to its pledge of allegiance [which] gives evidence that its citizens actually believe in God whereas all it really proves is that they believe in believing in God.” Religion, it can be argued, for some people is a form of risk management for the afterlife. The term ‘risk’ can simply be defined as the possibility that things in future will not turn out as expected.

Since no one alive has credibly reported life after death, humans have a propensity to question its existence in varying degrees. They therefore fail to appropriately manage the risk they face after death that religions allow. It can be argued that people who merely “believe in believing in God” rather than “believe in God” are not managing this risk appropriately.

Whether or not most people realise, people who bet on the existence of God as Pascal’s Wager demands for gains in the hereafter as well as people who merely “believe in believing in God” appear to be fairly common. To be overtly religious is so much easier and probably far more common than to really understand one’s religion, believe in it and also act on it.

Granted, there must be many people who really believe in God without regard to any rewards for doing so. However, most humans are probably not like that. As rational beings, they do not want things to turn out against their expectation after death, especially since the ability to avoid a potentially adverse situation in the hereafter is only available in this life. The duration of this opportunity is also unknown. As they age, most people realise that the opportunity is slipping by and thus may try to make the most of it then.

To be certain of an outcome that is essentially unknowable with potentially adverse consequences is not very prudent. Yet, many people continue to reject God’s existence, a belief that is not really based on any proof. The same can be said for the opposite position as well. However, the level of risk and the gains/losses associated with the two positions may be very asymmetric. Hazrat Ali pointed this out and Pascal demonstrated it mathematically.

EMAIL : iftikharhyder@netscape.net

__________________
No signature...

By Asghar Ali Engineer

SOME time ago, I went to Turkey for an international confer ence focusing on family values and other related affairs. It was an impressive international forum with participation from around 50 countries, comprising some 300 scholars, social scientists and activists.

Several papers were read and discussed on various aspects of matters related to family values. A common concern was that the institution of family is weakening and, being the very foundation of our civilisation, it must be saved. I was asked to talk about Islam and the institution of family. The subject is worth revisiting.

The Prophet (PBUH) did not approve of a life of celibacy except under a certain situation. He also disapproved of renunciation of the world (ruhbaniyyah) and preferred living in the world, facing all situations. Various pronouncements in the Quran are related to family life, marriage, divorce and children. The Quran also says if you have no means to marry and sustain your family, lead a pious life until Allah gives you the necessary means. Also, it prescribes punishment for fornication, rape and adultery.

According to Islamic teachings, sex is permissible only within the institution of marriage; it is basically meant for raising a family. Today, in western countries, people do not want to take responsibility for raising a family but want to fulfil their desire for pleasure. Hence ‘live-in’ arrangements are in vogue. This concept of living together has dealt a great blow to the institution of family. In this arrangement, the man and woman can walk away any time they like.

Thus the basic idea is not to have any responsibility towards each other, much less towards children. In fact, every attempt is made to avoid having children, and if children are born out of wedlock the entire responsibility shifts to the single parent, especially the mother. The result is that the man tries to have multiple partners and the woman is burdened with children and faces psychological stress and strain.Desire for intimacy cannot be an end in itself, as happens in a ‘livein’ arrangement. There are, according to the Quran, two important purposes of marriage — to raise a family and to provide companionship to each other. The very philosophy of marriage is based on love and companionship. The Quran says: “And of His Signs is this, that He created mates for you from yourselves that you might find quiet of mind in them, and He put between you love and compassion. Surely there are signs in this for a people who reflect.” (30:21) Thus, the institution of family, according to the Quran, is based on higher values of life. Simply to gratify one’s desire can never lead to higher civilisation and stability in life. Stability, compassion and love are the very basis of human civilisation, and the family is an important institution in building civilisation. A family, as far as possible, should not break up. That is why, according to a hadith, divorce is the most disapproved among permissible things. According to another hadith, the heavens shake when a man pronounces divorce on his wife because divorce delivers a blow to the very institution of family.

In the contemporary world, this institution is increasingly getting weakened due to certain contradictions arising in our life under pressure from modernity. In the modern world, women also work and become quite independent and hence refuse to bow to their husband’s wishes. In the past, women were economically dependent on their husbands and felt more secure in acceding to their husbands’ wishes. The husband was thought to be master of the house. Today, women from middleclass families are also highly educated and draw high salaries, so many refuse to bow before their husbands.

Many orthodox Muslims feel that this is the result of women getting educated and earning for themselves. It is destabilising family values. This is a wrong conclusion because we are still embedded in patriarchal values if we think like that. If women are to have dignity and self-respect they should not be asked to submit to their husbands’ authority. Any institution based on authority rather than higher values cannot be stable and cannot lead to a higher civilisation. The Quran, while giving women the right to earn and own property, also gives them equal dignity and self-respect. It makes clear that family values should be based not on the husband’s authority but on love and compassion between spouses.

If these values are meticulously practised the husband and wife have mutual respect and consult each other before taking any crucial decisions, a woman’s education and earning make a family unit much more stable and prosperous. If our culture remains patriarchal and the husband’s authority is held supreme, a family in which a woman is highly educated and aware of her self-respect and dignity would tend to come under strain and break up. Even in highly modern societies, many women have little role in decision-making on crucial matters. Hence, family life comes under severe strain and the percentage of divorce goes up because the woman refuses to submit to the man’s whims.

The solution does not lie in abandoning the institution of family and going for a free-living relationship. There cannot be genuine love and compassion in such relationships. The solution lies in according equal dignity to women and an equal role in the decision-making process. This alone will strengthen the institution of family. Thus, if the philosophy of family, as propounded in the Quran, is followed the institution will not fall apart. Indeed, it will be strengthened.

¦ The writer is an Islamic scholar who also heads the Centre for Study of Secularism & Society, Mumbai.

__________________
Mitta do apni hasti ko, agar kuch martaba chahiye,
k dana khak men mil kar gul-i-gulzar banta hai.

Cornelius and Sharia law

A. R. Cornelius, a Christian and Chief Justice of Pakistan from 1960 to 1968, was a relentless defender of Sharia.

By Khurram Ali Shafique
Friday, 14 Jan, 2011


WHEN America was a new nation, foreign observers usual ly remarked on the widespread popularity of the legal profession in the new state.

In 1968, American political scientist Ralph Braibanti observed a similar phenomenon in new states like Pakistan and India: a remarkably large number of people seemed to be involved in the legal profession and the “legal mode of thought” seemed to be a distinguishing feature of the new nations.

Braibanti also noticed a difference. While most studies about the United States in its early days had paid attention to the role of the legal profession in shaping society, “the study of legal institutions and the legal community [had] been neglected in analyses of the political development of new states” (such as Pakistan). Unfortunately, this area remains conspicuously absent from our studies even today: except for a few politically significant events, we seldom bother to learn about how our legal institutions have developed and affected our society.

Understandably, the “legal mode of thought” in the first 20 years was dominated by two opposite currents: pro-secular and pro-Islamic. A peaceful co-existence of these two currents is precisely what distinguishes the first 20 years (1947 to 1966) from the next twenty (1967-1987), when the two currents became increasingly divergent in Pakistan.

The pro-secular tendency was apparently inherited from the colonial past, and was widespread among the intelligentsia and the educated. For a number of reasons it has been epitomised by Justice Muhammad Munir (1895-1979), who was the main author of the Munir Report (1954) about the anti-Ahmedi riots in Punjab. The report has long been hailed as a masterpiece of secular values.

Therefore, it is often seen as a matter of surprise that the same judge, after being promoted as the Chief Justice of Pakistan, upheld the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad soon thereafter. Yet, it might help to remember that Munir’s argument in favour of dictatorship — his famous ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ that provided excuse to all subsequent dictators — was also rooted in his western learning just like his secularism (he supported his argument on a maxim of the 13th century British jurist Henry de Bracton).

That it was left to a Christian to present the case of Islam at the highest ladder of jurisprudence in the formative phase of the Pakistan would be regarded by some as a paradox, and by others as corroboration of Quaid-i-Azam’s dream. Alvin Robert Cornelius (1903-1991), Chief Justice of Pakistan from 1960 to 1968, was a relentless defender of Sharia, and arguably played the most important role in inculcating some Islamic values in the legal institutions of Pakistan.

The cornerstones of his legal philosophy may be summarised in three points: (a) Law has a moral function in society; (b) Law should be culture-sensitive; and (c) Islam is a valid foundation for a universal society. How he built upon these simple ideas in his 57 speeches and papers, and how he demonstrated them through his judgments, is what makes him arguably one of the greatest legal philosophers.

In 1954, when the bench headed by Chief Justice Munir upheld the decision of the Governor-General to dissolve the constituent assembly, Cornelius was the only judge to write a note of dissent. Four years later, when the same court upheld the case of Dosso against the martial law authorities, Cornelius wrote a concurrent judgment (i.e. he agreed with the decision but felt the need to explain himself separately). He observed that fundamental human rights are inalienable, and cannot be suspended even by martial law. This point of view was so different from the rest that it was later seen as a “note of dissent”.

However, Cornelius’ concept of inalienable rights seems to be slightly different from how the issue is usually projected. He was of the opinion that the people deserved to feel secure that law shall safeguard their cherished values and norms. In ‘Crime and Punishment of Crime’, the paper which he read at an international conference in Sydney in August 1965, he mentioned several cases to indicate “the extent to which the law supports the indigenous disciplines operating in our society, through the authority of the elders.” For similar reasons, he defended the indigenous institution of jirga as well as the punishments prescribed by Sharia for crimes like theft and robbery.

Acutely aware of the tendency to treat each individual as an island, Cornelius offered a few words of caution to his international audience, and his words reflected the ethos of his new nation that had come into being with the specific goal of rediscovering society as an organic unity. “It must be recognised that crime is a biological fact of society, whether ancient or modern,” he said. “It grows out of social condition and is not to be contained without the most careful examination of its etiology… In that process, it would be well not to reject, out of hand as being out-dated, the principles and techniques laid down and applied by the ancients, for dealing with the problem in their times. They may have their uses, and certainly in eastern countries, they still possess validity.”

The writer is the author of Iqbal: an Illustrated Biography (2006).

__________________
No signature...

Self-devouring saviours

By Haris Masood Zuberi
Friday, 21 Jan, 2011

SUFFICIENT is Allah as Reckoner [33:39]; And suffices Allah as Disposer of affairs [33:48] , says the holy Quran. The following incident is just an example.

In the year 571 AD when Abraha, the warlord from the Kingdom of Aksum (Yemen), marched on the Kaaba to raze it down with his army of elephants, Abdul Mutalib, the sagacious chief of the Quraysh, led his tribe into the hills around Makkah, leaving the battle for Kaaba to be fought between God and His transgressor.

Meanwhile upon setting camp in the outskirts of the town Abraha captured the Makkans` livestock, including 200 camels belonging to Abdul Mutalib and sent for the Makkan chief to negotiate. Upon being asked by the powerful aggressor of his terms to assure no resistance would be offered by his tribe, Abdul Mutalib merely requested that his beasts be returned. Surprised, Abraha inquired if the chief had no concern for the Holy Kaaba which all of Arabia regarded a Sanctuary? “The House has its Lord and He shall defend it. I am a mere lord of the camels, and seek their return,” proclaimed Abdul Mutalib, and with his demand met, he turned to the hillocks, concerned more about the welfare of his clan than the Almighty`s House.

Wise, old Abdul Mutalib was no messenger of God, but a man of reason. And reason had taught the pre-Islamic tribal chieftain to perceive well that the Almighty would look after what`s His without craving help from, or sharing His burden with his tribe. Surely enough, Abraha having invited God`s wrath, met a terrible fate. He was the obvious transgressor, not the Quraysh for logically minding their business and leaving God`s work to God. The same year, Abdul Mutalib`s household was blessed with the birth of his grandson, who the world came to know as Muhammad (PBUH), `the last Messenger of Allah, a blessing for mankind and the universe`.

Today, 14 centuries years later certain lessons radiate from this episode between AsHaab al-Fil (people of the elephant) and the Quraysh. We ought to wonder why the self-appointed protectorate of Islam is ever so concerned about Allah`s House and his message while neglecting their camels (economy, wellbeing of the people). This blatant incongruity doesn`t seem to be helping Islam or its cause. The fanatical anxiousness to preserve Allah`s supremacy while ignoring matters of pressing human concerns, despite basic religious values emphasising personal faith and human rights equally, reeks of ostentatious conduct. The depraved, self-styled saviours of Islam seldom feel the pangs of Allah and His Messenger`s (PBUH) teachings being violated by widespread defiance of Islamic principles when immorality of every possible order is committed right under their noses.

Consequently, in our land some 2,800 kilometres away from Makkah, Islam and its teachings are mocked everyday by rampant acts of corruption, murder, rape, theft and plunder committed most often by Muslims against Muslims. It`s ironic the only evils the protectorate of Islam finds directly desecrating Islam or our Holy Prophet (PBUH) have the least to do with Islam`s elementary teachings pertaining to matters affecting everyday lives of Allah`s creatures — for whose very wellbeing and salvation Islam was revealed upon mankind as a code of conduct.

Despite years of suffering from socio-economic dereliction while a dozen people are being blown up by suicide attackers or target killers every week and another half-dozen resort to suicide upon losing unforgiving battles against poverty every month, these saviours choose to remain comfortably numb. Their piety and morality remain unshaken against evil-doers, oppressors and violators of Allah`s laws, causing misery and suffering to the Almighty`s creatures.

Never does one witness religious rallies held to express solidarity with victims of rape or demand punishment for violators of a woman`s dignity. There is no tyre-burning ritual observed by religious party activists to protest against absconding robbers, phone-snatchers or kidnappers harming life, property and peace of society across the country. Never is there a long-march from Karachi to Islamabad to get broad daylight killers of the Butt brothers of Sialkot punished. Never ever has any drug trafficker relying on mighty back-savers or benefiting from tardiness of our judicial system been a victim of any form of religious mob justice.

While the Almighty is fully capable of protecting His Supremacy, religion and prophets, and punishing whomsoever He feels is His lawbreaker, mankind`s real test remains in the way individuals relate to Him and treat their fellow beings on earth. Our honour lies in protecting our societal interests (read camels), standing up for the weak and the wronged, and challenging the might of evil; a natural predisposition to ensure any fire consuming those next door doesn`t end up engulfing our backyards.

In suppressing this instinct out of overzealous religiosity founded upon symbolism, instead of striving towards fulfilling individual duties to one`s self and fellow creatures, the dilemma of Islamic society to our utter detriment, has always remained in focusing strengths towards defending Allah, His Messenger and Islam — all of which by any logic are in no need of such support or the blood that`s spilled in their name.

Woe unto such decadent saviours of Islam who are devouring Islam`s sanctity through their conceited disregard for the principal Islamic duty not to harm another human`s life and for lacking the essential moral purity to rightly perceive which acts desecrate our Holy Prophet`s (PBUH) honour and the Islamic way of life as per Islam`s most basic teachings. Until such time that Islam`s men of honour uphold Islam`s honor by doing honourable deeds, Islam shall continue to be ridiculed.

Initial interrogations in the grave and on the day of resurrection shall pertain to faith and human rights. Allah can protect His House, and will not question us about dust particles which the desert wind blows into the courtyards of the Kaaba. We meanwhile must account well for our camels.

__________________
Thanks Allah

Spiritual practices

By Nilofar Ahmed
Friday, 28 Jan, 2011

BELIEVERS often religious perform practices to express obedience to God, without thinking about their purpose and beneficial effect. Salaat (namaz or formal prayer), Saum (fasting), Hajj (pilgrimage) and Zakat (charitable tax) are all obligatory acts, from which the believer can progress to voluntary practices such as zikr, nawafil, i’tikaf and voluntary charity.
In Salaat, the obligatory, five-time, daily prayer, in which every worshipper faces the Ka’aba, the time of performance follows the movement of the sun, ensuring that the prayer is always being performed at some place in the world. Of the various positions that one assumes during salaat, sajdah is the most intense and spiritually elevating, in which the forehead and nose touch the ground in adoration, the person expresses humility and obedience in this lowest physical position in relation to God and feels close to Him (96: 19).

Except for the human beings and the jinn who have been given a choice, all of creation including the angels, the sun, the moon, the stars, the hills, the trees and all the animals perform a compulsory sajdah to God (22:18, 16:49), meaning that they all bow in complete obedience before Him. The worshipper can progress to tahajjud, which is a voluntary prayer for the believers, but an obligation for the Prophet (PBUH), as defined in the Quran (17:79).

In saum, or fasting, the believer abstains from heeding to the most immediate needs of the body, thus detaching temporarily from the physical and material world and striving against nafs or the ego. Fasting is not done for self-mortification, but the abstention is for learning to discipline and control the bodily appetites, discovering the actual needs of the body, taking control of one’s desires, getting rid of the obstinate addictions and for detoxification of the body.

Fasting is a proof of, and helps to strengthen, taqwa or Godconsciousness and consequently spirituality. The experience of fasting can be likened to experiencing a little of the taste of physical death before dying and feeling close to God. This taste is so immediate and satisfying that even people who do not say their prayers regularly are willing to fast.

Hajj in its present form had been established in the time of Prophet Ibrahim. During Hajj, which mostly commemorates the acts performed by Prophet Ibrahim and his wife Bibi Hajira, all pilgrims dress in the same humble garb, travel the same path, recite the same prayers, perform the same rituals and bow together in humility before the Merciful Lord. Hajj is an obligation on those who can afford it, to be performed once in a lifetime (3:97). When performing the tawaf, or circling the Ka’aba, a person forgets one’s position in the world, becoming one with the universe in which every planet is circling in its orbit, becoming aware of a higher scheme of things and of one’s own humble role in this plan.

Zakat is not charity but a poor tax, based on the giving away of a fixed portion of one’s wealth. It teaches the believer to recognise the share of the needy in one’s wealth, cures the ills of greed and helps in detachment from material possessions.

Zikr, or remembrance of God, can be obligatory, as in salaat, but is otherwise a voluntary act through which great spiritual rewards can be reaped. Zikr can be hidden when every act is performed according to the wishes of God. It can be obvious, such as repeating the names of God, or some verses of the Quran. Sometimes, zikr is done with a recommended name or a verse for a special purpose. For example, according to Imam Ghazali, if a person persistently recites Ya Rehman, that person will invoke God to have mercy and will also earn a share from this attribute of God and will start being merciful. The most elevated form of zikr is done purely for gnosis and love of God. Sufis are focused on all forms of zikr.

I’tikaf, a spiritual retreat undertaken mostly in a mosque, during the last ten days of the month of Ramazan, is a tradition of the Prophet (PBUH). The purpose of I’tikaf is to devote oneself to remembrance of God by detaching from all the attractions and problems of the world. It can relax a person to an extent that no psychotropic drugs would be able to achieve. The person in retreat comes out of it feeling spiritually elevated, relaxed, refreshed, more patient and with better moral values, to face the world anew.

By going through these obligatory and voluntary practices, the soul progresses from the nafs ammarata bis suh, or the soul which commands to do wrong, to the nafs lawwama, or the blaming soul which acts like the conscience and keeps back the person from committing wrong and evil acts, on to the nafs mutmainnah, or the satisfied or blissful soul which has reached the highest spiritual station. Here worldly concerns do not perturb and the nafs is totally satisfied by God and God is satisfied with this person.

In Surah Al-Fajr it is said: (Those who are successful will be told), “O blissful soul, / Return to your Lord, such that you are pleased with Him, and He with you. / Enter with My devotees / Enter My Paradise!” (89:27-30). The purification, refinement, experience of gnosis, the awareness of closeness to God and the higher stations of the immortal soul achieved through spiritual practices will hold one in good stead on the Day of Resurrection, the eventual meeting with the Lord and in the eternal life.

__________________
No signature...

Training the ulema

By Asghar Ali Engineer
Friday, 04 Feb, 2011

THOUGH there is no concept of priesthood in Islam, a cleri cal class has come into existence. In Islam any person, if he/she has adequate knowledge, can perform all the functions and rituals, be it related to marriage, death or other obligations for Muslims.

Alim (plural ulema) means one who knows. Thus the whole emphasis is on knowledge irrespective of class, caste, race or nationality. Since knowledge is central this class came to be called ulema.

Now the question is what knowledge should be imparted to these persons who are supposed to guide the community. The ulema often quote a hadith that since Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the last prophet the ulema are like stars after him and Muslims should seek guidance from them as stars guide and become source of light in the darkness of night, and ignorance is like darkness.

In those early days when a bunch of ulema began to come into existence the most important knowledge was that of the Quran and hadith which embodied total knowledge for the guidance of the community. Anyone having that knowledge was counted among the ulema. However, as Islam spread to other countries with their own old cultures, civilisations and indigenous sources of law, besides the ulema of the Quran and hadith, other types of ulema also came into existence, i.e. those who acquired knowledge from other sources like philosophy, mathematics and physical sciences. These ulema put emphasis on reason and rational sciences besides traditional sources of Muslim knowledge.

The rational sciences, over a period of time became so important that they became sources of syllabus for training of ulema and came to be known as ulum al-aqliyah, which mainly consisted of translations from Greek philosophy and other sciences. In those days Greek sciences were the most advanced and these rational sciences were supposed to broaden the vision of the ulema. Muslims produced great philosophers who contributed richly to world knowledge and whose commentaries on Greek philosophy were taught in European universities and Christian seminaries throughout the Middle Ages. Thus the Christian priests studied al Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, etc. in their seminaries. All kinds of rational sciences flourished during the mediaeval ages in the Islamic world and Muslim ulema learnt and built on these sciences.

The Greek sciences are mostly of historical importance and humankind has made tremendous progress in social and physical sciences, so no one can claim to be an alim today without knowledge of contemporary developments. Unfortunately, the colonial period and the development of these sciences in Europe had to be simultaneous and since Muslim countries were victims of colonial rule, Muslims in general and our ulema in particular became highly prejudiced against all western or European advances made in the sciences, subsequent to Muslim scientists’ efforts.

Also, Islamic seminaries while taking out their anger against their colonial masters did not understand the difference between the colonial rulers and the scientists; many of the latter were persecuted by the same rulers. It was not western rulers who developed the sciences but the scientists who did so. The Christian church had also resisted Greek knowledge, and many philosophers were persecuted, but later they adopted and made these sciences part of their syllabus, and then of their theology.

Similarly, traditional Muslim ulema at first resisted modern social and physical sciences as irreligious and as being imports from the colonial West, and rejected these ulum. However, later they began to accept these sciences but would not teach them in Islamic seminaries. Still, they teach traditional Greek sciences as if it is part of Islamic knowledge. Now it is high time that Islamic seminaries integrate modern sciences, like they had the Greek sciences earlier, and make them part of the syllabus in seminaries.

Today, the whole emphasis in these seminaries is on the traditional sciences and theological issues. This is of course necessary but only as a part of the training. Along with these theological issues they must also train their students in modern social and physical sciences which will greatly help broaden their vision. They should also be trained in interpreting the Quran using modern scientific methods. The earlier commentaries and interpretations were done in the light of knowledge which was available then, and much of it was Greek philosophy. One cannot continue to teach the same commentaries; while the Quran is divine, the tafsir literature is entirely a human effort to understand the Quran within the parameters of available knowledge at any given time in human history.

The existing hadith literature comprises both authentic as well as zaeef traditions of somewhat doubtful origin. The students must be trained in modern methods of sifting through the existing literature and rigorously select only those traditions which are authentic and in keeping with the Quran and reasoning. The integrity of the narrator is not enough; it should also fulfil the criterion of human reasoning. Reason and intellect are divine gifts and the Quran recognises the role of reason.

Also, in those madressahs where sectarianism is flourishing, there is a need for the ulema to learn the value of tolerance and moderation. The fundamental values of the Quran, haq (truth), adl (justice), ihsan (doing good), rahmah (compassion) and hikmah (wisdom), must be taught and emphasised. Also, knowledge of comparative religion should be imparted which is highly necessary in the modern pluralistic world. Only such a comprehensive syllabus will produce a scholarly set of future ulema. ¦ The writer is an Islamic scholar who also heads the Centre for Study of Society & Secularism, Mumbai.

__________________
No signature...