]Sharia`s attributes[BY ANWAR ABBAS]
SALVATION and grace cannot be regarded as the monopoly of any one faith, any one sect or any one people. No one can achieve it merely because he (or she) is a member of any particular religion or fiqh, because God`s infinite beneficence is open to all who do good deeds.

This attribute is summed up in the Quran in two words Rahman and Raheem that envelop the entire universe.

None can claim that the Almighty will be partial to them. Islam frankly recognises that amongst the Muslims (and nonMuslims) there are both persons of deep and sincere faith as well as persons whose faith does not go beyond lip service.

While the interpretations of Sharia vary from one culture to another, in its strictest definition it is the infallible law of God, as opposed to human interpretation of the divine law. There are two primary sources of Sharia: the precepts of Quranic verses and the examples set by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

The introduction of Sharia is a longstanding goal for Islamic movements globally. But attempts to impose Sharia have been accompanied by controversy, violence and even warfare.

The differences between Sharia and secular laws have led to an ongoing controversy about whether the two are compatible.

To recognise what Sharia means we must understand that religion has been a continuous unbroken movement in human history in the quest of a good life and that all great religions owe their inspiration to the same divine source.

Hence the founders and prophets, as also their places of worship, deserve our highest respect and tolerance and appreciation of other faiths is a duty enjoined on all men, in particular Muslims.

But many Muslims have forgotten this significant truth and have tended to adopt a narrow-minded attitude towards other religions. Some historians, poets, scholars and divines have even extolled Muslim rulers and men in power who showed intolerance in religious matters which was quite clearly repugnant to the real teachings of Islam.

It is therefore necessary to remind the Muslims of their heritage and have them reaffirm their faith in the high tradition of tolerance.

There is a good deal of misunderstanding on the issue amongst the Muslims due either to ignorance or the intolerance shown by some Muslim rulers, or indeed the ill-advised attempts of some non-Muslim scholars to present Islam in an aggressively unsympathetic light.Islam starts with the postulate that all religions derive their original inspiration from God and there can be no basic contradiction in it.

The Holy Quran declares (21:25)`And we have not sent any messenger before thee but have given them the inspiration that there is no God but I, therefore, worship Me.

Undoubtedly there are doctrinal and incidental differences in methods of worship, but these can be traced to different periods of history or different places and environments. Also, we must consider later accretions made by priests and divines to preserve their power and authority or rulers who wanted to reinforce orthodoxy to guard what they felt was the special identity of their religion.

The Quran, on the other hand, has taken the view that all messengers of God have preached basically the same message, stressed the same values and truths, that the deen (spirit of religion) is the same while the Sharia (the way of realising it) may differ.

Nothing can be more foolish than to ignore the unity underlying different faiths and start quibbling over the methods prescribed for the practice of the faiths.

The differences among religions are marginal and only in the details while their commonality has greater significance. If God had willed to create a world in which all humans were alike in every way they would have followed the same religion, spoken the same language and evolved an identical pattern of culture and conduct. But He did not do so.

The messengers of God emerged out of the community for whose guidance they were sent and spoke the same language.

Interestingly, few who belonged to the rich or the ruling class identified with common men.

To win over followers, messengers did not rely on the power of armies or offer material temptations. They relied, instead, on the power of love, service and sacrifice. Yet mankind stands divided. According to the Quran there is one link that can reunite humanity devotion to God.

God`s time is cosmic time and He is very patient and forbearing. He gives men the grace of time so that they may return to the right path. If they fail to do so, His laws bring about their undoing and replacement by others more amenable to receiving His grace and guidance.• The writer is a freelance contributor with an interest in religion

MAN and woman are the two wheels of human civilisation. They both spring from the same root and draw their life support from the same source.

One cannot survive without the other; the welfare of one is the welfare of the other.

Their mutual indispensability requires reciprocal feelings and sentiments for each other.

In fact, nature has devised a system in which their role is closely interlinked in the social set-up of society. They support each other in procreation, sustainability and in the development of future generations. Thus, their interplay is crucial to the whole scheme of nature.

However, in most societies, the woman is considered to be weaker and a victim of social injustice, perhaps more so in Muslim societies. Some prejudiced forces erroneously link the unequal status of women in Muslim countries to Islamic teachings.

But Islam accords due importance, dignity, respect and honour to women. Even during its early years it remained supportive of elevating women`s social status and challenged many spurious and anti-women traditions of pre-Islamic Arab society.

The Holy Quran often abhors the disgusting attitude of the Arab tribes, especially towards women. For example, in Surah 16, verses 58-59 it is mentioned that when a female baby is born and the news is received by the [father], his face turns dark and the heart is filled with inward grief; he hides himself from society and being sad, thinks continuously of evilness. He ponders whether he should keep the baby girl alive with disgrace or bury her in the earth. The Quran equates the latter decision with evilness.

The Holy Prophet (PBUH) worked hard to change their mindset, transform society and raise the status of women in society. He got a little over 22 years for his mission to reform Arab society a society which was deep in the ocean of ignorance. He transformed the highly male-dominated patriarchal society into a humane one where men and women worked together.

They were made equal partners and women in particular were given rights to own property. Besides, they were given a share in inheritance from the father`s property, a choice to refuse marriage against their will, and a right to demand dower and maintenance allowance from the husband etc.

These were the revolutionary changes introduced by the Prophet in seventh-century Arab society.

The reason for victimization of women in most societies, including Pakistan, is machis-mo. Frequent mistreatment of women in certain areas of the country through outdated cultural practices like swara, vani, watta satta and `marriage` with the Quran, etc is causing much harm to Pakistan.

In some areas of Pakistan, women are not allowed to cast their vote, while their economic activities are not counted in the national index. They are barred from getting an education and in the matter of marriage, they are forced to accept what is offered rather than to choose. In some areas, they are considered a saleable commodity and our media very frequently reports crimes against women in society.

The Quran makes it clear that both the male and female are created from a single soul (4:1) and declares them equal as far as their spiritual obligations are concerned.

They are equally accountable in the hereafter for whatever they do in their material existence, but there is a promise of a good life for doing good deeds (16:97).

They have been equally awarded the spiritual and intellectual potential to develop.

However, biologically they have a different make-up with different functions. In society, they are to fulfill their respective roles and responsibilities.

Islam is a natural religion and encourages us to think of nature and its systems. Every individual (male and female) is indebted to a woman for his or her existence in the material world. It is the woman who conceives, holds and embraces every child and nurses him or her immediately after birth. Almost every child grows under the supervision of a woman who also provides company through thick and thin.

Keeping in view a woman`s crucial role in the building of future society, it is absolutely necessary that the nation must give priority to female health and education and elevate the social status of women. If a woman is healthy, then society will be healthy and the nation will reap the benefits of her good health. Similarly, if a woman is educated, the whole nation will subsequently benefit from her education.

In order to improve and elevate the status of women in our society, it is necessary that school curricula must be updated. All material believed to promote gender discrimination should be replaced with chapters about creating harmony between males and females.•

The writer is an educationist with an interest in religion.

__________________
Think 100 times before you take a decision, But once that decision is taken, stand by it as one man.

Child marriage
BY KHALID ZAHEER | 3/28/2014

A RECENT recommendation by the Council of Islamic Ideology to allow child marriage in Pakistan has invited a new debate on whether Islam allows marriage of minors.

At the very heart of the CII`s recommendation is the understanding of our traditional religious scholars that since the Prophet (PBUH), according to interpretations of some ahadith, married Hazrat Ayesha when she was six years old and nine years old at the time of consummation of marriage, no law that ignores this historical reality can be deemed to be valid from an Islamic point of view. If the Prophet can marry a minor girl, so goes the argument, how can doing so be declared unacceptable for Muslims? The important question that must be asked is this: is everything mentioned about the Prophet in history a part of Islam? The fact is that there are two categories of Islamic information that are available to us: one that is completely authentic and the other that is not. The former type of information is fully reliable because God made it so. The other category is not fully reliable because it is based on human efforts, beset with a number of threats to its authenticity.

The Almighty states most emphatically in the Quran about the first category of information: `Indeed We have revealed this reminder and indeed We are going to ensure its preservation` (15:9). This emphasis itself implies that other categories of information do not enjoy a similar divine confirmation of authenticity.

It is not simply a matter of our faith alone that the Quran and the authentically transmitted religious rituals such as prayers (Sunnah) are deemed fully reliable. They satisfy two universally accepted criteria of reliability: unanimity among all (ijma` of Muslim ummah) and uninterrupted continuity (ratvatur) in the process of transmittal.

A piece of information that has been agreed upon by all Muslims from the very first generation and has been available during the entire Muslim history cannot be faulted. This foolproof reliability has been arranged by God. The information that has been thus preserved is the core content of Islam. Every other religious information must be consistent with this core content in order for it to be considered acceptable to Islam.

Unless the authentic sources of theQuran and Sunnah endorse it, it cannot be claimed to be definitive Islamic information. Many Muslims are thus guilty of presenting in the name of Islam what God Himself has not arranged to make a core part of His religion.

The information regarding the age of Hazrat Ayesha at the time of her marriage is derived from books of hadith which convey recorded information from individuals. That is why this category of information is called khabre ahad (information transmitted by individuals) and is not always consistent.

Credible sources give us good reason to believe that Hazrat Ayesha`s age was 18 at the time of her nikah and 19 at the time when she joined the household of the Prophet.

It is mentioned in Ibn Kathir`s AlBidayah wa al-Nihayah that Hazrat Ayesha was 10 years younger than her sister, Hazrat Asma, and that Hazrat Asma died in 72 Hijra at the age of 100. In other words, she was 28 at the time of the Hijra when her younger sister was 18.

We know that one of the conditions of a valid nikah in Islam is that both the bride and the bridegroom must agree to it voluntarily. We also know that a six-year-old child is not mentally mature enough to take rational decisions of far-reaching consequences. How could an arrangement which does not satisfy an important condition then have been promoted in religion? In generalised terms, it takes a few years for boys and girls to reach a certain level of maturity, physically and mentally, after reaching puberty, to understand the meaning of the bond of marriage and responsibilities this lifelong partnership brings to the pair.

In Islam, marriage is an institution and both the mother and father bear the burden of bringing up their children to be not only responsible citizens of the state but responsible and pious believers. Can children understand the import of such responsibilities and can a small girl be a good and healthy mother, herself still a child? In view of the above-stated arguments, it is neither prudent to promote the view that the Prophet of Islam married a sixyear-old girl, nor is it a good idea to introduce a piece of legislation based on such information. • The writer is a religious scholar.
kzuiuk@gmail.com

http://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.p...3_2014_009_004

BY JAN-E-ALAM KHAKI

GIVING of one`s charitable feelings to the needy has been an integral part of human society since time immemorial.

This tradition is now being extended beyond the personal level to institutional, societal and state levels.

The magnitude of giving has also multiplied. The best part is that giving is no longer limited to one`s community, religion or city.

When a natural or man-made disaster befalls a community or society, people and states in many parts of the world come forward to donate, in cash and kind, to the affected people.

Human beings must feel proud of this development of moving beyond one`s clan or community, creed or caste, state or society, to reach far-flung areas affected by disasters.

Giving can take many forms: sharing professional knowledge, experience, time, cash or kind, inspiring through words or deeds, giving honest advice, consoling an aggrieved person, supporting the elderly, and so on.

In Islam, we have been advised to share our resources whatever they may be with others, not just when we are self-sufficient, but also sharing whatever we have in however small measure.

Muslim communities are considered among the most generous when it comes to giving. Giving is part of a Muslim`s daily life, not just an occasional act. Even a generous and genuine smile is considered sadaga, nay even ibadah (worship). The Quran exemplifies and ennobles giving in this way: `The likeness of those who spend their wealth in Allah`s way is as the likeness of a grain which groweth seven ears, in every ear a hundred grains. Allah giveth increase manifold to whom He will. ...

(2:261).

In Muslim ethics, giving is guided by a few key principles. First: giving without boasting or showing off. The Quran very meaningfully says one should give from what God has given, so there is no question of being boastful.

You give because you have been given.

Be generous as God has been generous with you in granting you so many bounties.

It is part of being grateful (mashkoor) to God.

Second, giving without hurting the dignity of the receiver.

This is done by forgetting the generous deed and not causing hurt to the receiver by constantly reminding him or her of thefavours done. An Urdu saying captures this very well: `neki kar darya mein daaP (do a good deed and throw it in the river).

In Islam it is better to say a few good words than to show off your charity to receivers.

The Quran also says: `Those who spend their wealth for the cause of Allah and afterward make not reproach and injury to follow that which they have spent; their reward is with their Lord. ...` (2:262). This means doing good to others in a way that when your right hand does a favour, your left hand does not know it, ie helping somebody away from the gaze of others.

Third, help the needy in a way that you don`t teach them how to eat fish; but how to fish. I add to this: teach them in a way so that one day they are able to develop fish farms to produce fish.

If we only teach people how to fish, where is the fish going to come from? The purpose of this approach is that one does not give charity only to get a reward but to enable the needy to stand, one day, on their feet. The receivers of charity today should in the long run become givers to the needy.

Thus, Islam teaches us a way of generosity that ultimately aims to enable its believers (and others in its environs) to become givers (of charity) rather than receivers.

This is perhaps the context in which the Prophet (PBUH) reportedly has said that the upper (giving) hand is better than the lower (receiving) hand, encouraging us to become givers rather than receivers.

In sum, the ethics of giving should respect the dignity of the needy and help them in the best possible manner; it should aim to eliminate poverty rather than directly or indirectly encourage it.

As part of the education of our young, we should encourage giving with the purpose of improving the quality of life of the needy and vulnerable.

In both secular and religious education systems, as well as in homes, religious sermons and social forums, charity and voluntary service to humanity must be encouraged.

The motto of the Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy in this regard is worth noting: `Give effectively, give intelligently, give smoothly, give strategically.`• The writer teaches Histories and Cultures of Muslim Societies at a private university in Pakistan.

http://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.p...4_2014_009_004

__________________
Live and Let Live!

BY K H A L I D Z A H E E R | 4/25/2014

WHILE mass murders continue to take place in the name of religion, a report of grave consequences has shaken the faith of many in the country.

Some time back, Dawn carried the report of a massive fraud carried out by a group of clerics and no less than 40 prayer leaders who allegedly misled several people, including widows and orphans, to invest in a supposedly Islamic banking system of modaraba. This seems to have driven home the paradoxical phenomenon that those who profess piety and preach religion are usually the ones to lie and cheat most often.

One of the reasons for why the socalled believers cheat and lie with impunity is that they believe that the rituals they perform (prayers, fasts, Haj, almsgiving, etc) would far outweigh the sins that they have committed. They could not be more wrong in this misconception.

The Quran says very clearly that God will take His decision based on the weightage given to the deeds which shall be based on the intentions and inclinations, and not on the apparent acts of the individual. It is thus not the physical act itself, but the purpose and quality of the deed that will tilt the result one way or the otherforthe doer.

If a religious act is undertaken by a person to outweigh the ill effect of some harm he has inflicted on a fellow human being, or to show off to another, it is unlikely to carry any value in the eyes of God.

Secondly, those who claim knowledge of religion also hope that they will be interceded for by the Prophet (PBUH) which, of course, will be accepted. Such an understanding of intercession has been denied thrice in Surah Baqarah. On the Day of Judgement, no soul shall come to the rescue of another soul, no friendship will matter, no intercession will be accepted, nor any other form of external help be entertained (2:48; 2:123; 2:254).

There is, however, only one exception.

There will be a group of people whose performance in this world may not be absolutely clear cut so as to allow them to be admitted to paradise, and in such cases, God will allow some outstanding individuals to intercede on their behalf. Such a situation is not one that is meant for people who have committed sins that God has forbidden clearly and openly, such as usurping therights of widows and orphans.

Certainly it does not give any ofus an opportunity to become complacent and begin to cheat and lie in the hope that someone will intercede for us in the hereafter.

A third prevalent reason for the widespread tendency to cheat among those claiming to be religious is the claim itself. They believe that because they are Muslims, they are unlikely to go to hell, whatever sins they commit, while others whom they believe to be kafir would be punished.

Unfortunately, this is the same thinking that was common among the Children of Israel, who believed that because they were the chosen people of God, no punishment would ever come to them, or even if it does, it would be for only a short period of time.

Man is weak and is also tempted by Satan, so he will commit wrong. But God, who is infinitely merciful, will forgive provided man truly repents and asks for forgiveness. In Islam, repentance means an immediate realisation of one`s mistakes, a seeking of forgiveness, a commitment to correcting oneself, and a strong effort never to make the same mistake again.

Another unfortunate justification for lying that some people have come up with is to claim that even some prophets have not told the truth (God forbid).

They cite the examples of Hazrat Ibrahim when he had broken all the idols and told the people to ask the idolhe had left untouched, and of Hazrat Yusuf, when a cup was found in the bag of one of his brothers, instead of the suspected royal bowl.

These are stories that have been bandied about without an understanding of the Quran, merely to support the lies that people tell. While in the first case it was an effective way to make a stubborn group realise how foolish their approach was, the other case was of Yusuf getting unprecedented help from God to keep his brother. There was nothing immoral about either episode.

If people read the Quran with an open mind, listen carefully to other views, and be tolerant, without believing everything others say aboutreligion, our society can perform far better morally. • The writer is a religious scholar.

kzuiuk@gmail.com

http://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.p...4_2014_009_004

__________________
Live and Let Live!

Value of compassion

One of Karen Armstrong`s less-known pieces of writing is a Letter to Pakistan, a booklet whose focus is on peace, kindness and forgiveness as the central feature of Islam and the life of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). She has a more original piece of advice for Pakistan: compassion should be made part of the curriculum in Pakistani schools, colleges and universities.

Given the hate wave sweeping across Pakistan, this is a sound bit of advice if we realise that compassion is the one component that is absent from Pakistanis` theory and practice of Islam. Ms Armstrong feels for Pakistanis, because they had `so generously welcomed` her and because the country is being mauled by terrorism.

The British scholar begins by defining two concepts that are diametrically opposite Islam and jahiliyyah. Originally, she says, Islam was known as razakkah, which means `refinement, generosity, chivalry`.

Its contrast, jahiliyyah, meant `hot-tempered, prone to anger and resentment`.

While the unbelievers of Makkah were `brimful of self-importance`, Islam centred itself on the surrender of the ego. In fact, because Muslims were ridiculed and persecuted, the Quran urged them to practise sabr (patience), not retaliate violently andencourage one anothertobe steadfast.

Iman (faith), she says, requires not only courage in the face of aggression and illtreatment, it also has `connotations of safety and protection`. She quotes Rumi as saying that `wrath is the distinctive characteristic of kafirun` According to Ms Armstrong, plurality is ingrained in the Quran. Muslims are `fortunate` to have a book like the Quran, because, she says, it is `unique in its positive view` of other peoples and other religious traditions. `There is nothing like Quranic pluralism in either the Torah or the Gospel`. Religious diversity is God`s will, because it was the unbelievers who thought their ways were inherently superior to others and who brool
Even though she is talking about TV talk shows in the Western world, the writer`s words hold true for Pakistan. `Do they always know what they are talking about?` she asks. They talk about all subjects under the sun. But if you question them closely you will find out that `the amount of reliable information they possess could often comfortably be contained on a mall postcard`She emphasises the etiquettes and manners of debate, and cautions against discourse that is aggressive. Questions and answers, she says, must be exchanged in good faith. Pakistanis must listen to this because often arguments degenerate into bitterness born out of personal attacks by the participants on each other.

Quoting from Socrates` example, she says nobody must be pushed into a position where he feels uncomfortable. `Each participant should listen sympathetically to the ideas of the others, allow them to unsettle his convictions, and permit their minds to be changed by his contribution.

During a panel discussion, says Karen Armstrong, participants do not really listen wholeheartedly to their opponents but simply use their remarks `as grist to their own mill` and are thinking about the next brilliant remark they are going to make.

This approach is unhelpful when an issue arouses passions. `It can become especially contentious when people claim to speak in the name of God.

In discourse, she emphasises the importance of hilm (forbearance) and says violent speech was a characteristic of the opponents of Islam. `It is no good responding to injustice with hatred and contempt, because that will simply inspire further antagonism and make matters worse.` The jahiliyyah code believed that violent retaliation should not be held in check. On the other hand, the Quran (14:47) took an entirely different view, emphasising that retribution should be left to God.

She quotes Ibn al-Arabi: My heart is capable of every form of faith: A cloister for the monk, a shrine for idols, A pasture for gazelles, the pilgrim`s Kaaba, The tablets of the Torah, the Quran.

Love is the faith I hold: wherever his camels Turn, still the one true faith is mine.

To practise this, she advises Pakistanis to perform `just one act of kindness every single day`. This need not be a dramatic gesture; rather let it be a `small kindness` that is unobtrusive and doesn`t attract widespread praise that builds ego. She warns that an ego trip could be counterproductive, for it is not unusual to find do gooders making `spiteful remarks, indulging in gossip, or pouring scorn on other people`s religious beliefs or cultural practices`.

Value of compassion

__________________
Left is Right

Ethics in Islam

With Western countries at the top of those considered most ethical, it is tempting to generalise and claim that the best political and economic practices prevail in places that are affluent, secure and free from conflict. A state in constant war, suffering from extreme poverty, military dictatorship and lack of social and economic development will obviously curtail ethical values in the public domain, and may begin to erode them even in the home.

The principles of ethics are often discussed with respect to gains and benefits to society at large. What is good or bad is supposedly determined by the rule of the majority, with little attention given to the principles of morality. Islamic ethics differ from the Western concept as these are derived from God, directly from the Quran, and from the practices of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). It is therefore a set of beliefs and actions that is divine and transcends the limitations of time, place and tradition.

Unlike the commonly held belief that man is evil by nature, Islam holds that man is born with a morally good nature that responds to faith and ethical values. Over time, it may get corrupted due to temptations and man’s inability to exercise control over his desires. According to Islam, there is universal equality among mankind, with the single exception of moral goodness and strength of character or taqwa.

For man’s conduct to be ethical as per Islam, there are two conditions which must be fulfilled: his intention must be good and his action must be according to what God has instructed. If either is corrupt, his behaviour is unlikely to meet ethical standards. For example, if a wrong deed was done with good intentions that ultimately produced a good outcome, it cannot be termed ethical. If the intentions were wrong to begin with, and the outcome was accidentally good, there is no question of ethical behaviour. Good intentions and good deeds must go hand in hand.

There are three very important and interrelated ways in which ethical principles in Islam differ from those that are understood and practised in the West. The first is the concept of individual freedom and independence. In Islam, one’s freedom ends where another’s physical and moral space begins. Indeed, alongside freedom of expression and liberty for individuals, society also has moral rights. Thus, how one individual behaves morally must be guided by how that behaviour impinges upon and influences the behaviour of those around him.

The Quran is replete with clear messages about ethics.
Secondly, Islamic teachings expand outwards with the family as the unit of society, not the individual. Islam believes in collectivism, not individualism. There is, therefore, no concept of being responsible for the self alone.

And thirdly, ethical principles, by virtue of their divine source, are not determined by the vote of the majority. If the majority in a society votes that speculation on the stock market is ethical, Islamic ethics will not accept this decision.

Corruption and bribery may very well be the order of the day, and so could the consumption of drugs, and they may be declared legal. But they could never be morally right in Islam. Obviously, this also points to the fact that what may be the law in a country may not be necessarily ethical.

The Quran is replete with clear messages pertaining to ethics (akhlaq), the standards of behaviour that God expects mankind to adopt because He has sent him to this world as His vicegerent. These cover all aspects of truthfulness, honesty, kindness, integrity (that includes being consistent in word and deed), meeting commitments and sincerity. The best example of ethics is in the life of the Prophet himself. When Hazrat Aisha was once asked about the personality of her husband, she had replied: “he was a reflection of the Quran itself”.

Islamic ethics is a code of conduct that calls for mankind to undertake a continuous process of self-purification, in thought, feelings and emotions (tazkya nafs); in social interactions through intentions and deeds that benefit other human beings as well as other creations of God; in using the resources that God has given him in a wise manner; and in bringing him closer to the ideal as described by the Prophet: “the best amongst you are those who are the owners of the best morality.”

Why is the Muslim world, then, among the most corrupt and depraved, demonstrating all the sins that the Quran has warned against? The answer lies perhaps in its collective failure to use intellect and reasoning, learn from mistakes, ponder over the message of the Quran and abstain from living in the fantasies of past glory.

Ethics in Islam

__________________
Left is Right

SOME beliefs are life-negating while others are life-embracing. Islam is unique in its message that a believer should show moderation in all walks of life. It does not allow a believer to ignore the requirements of worldly life, nor does it allow the disregard of spiritual life. Rather, it encourages a balance between the two.

With the onset of modernisation in the West during the 16th century, hectic efforts were made to divorce religion from the daily life of the common people. Religion was reserved for special occasions like birth, marriage, death etc.

On the contrary, Islam considers religion an essential element in the life of a person, family, the community and nation. It aims at creating a balance between the material and spiritual aspects of life. Balance does not mean segregating the material aspect from the spiritual existence. Nor does it mean dividing existence into equal portions, devoting 12 hours to religious and 12 hours to worldly activities.

Here balance means fulfilment of obligations of different connections one has with society. In other words, an individual’s birth creates connections and relationships with different organs of society such as the family, relatives, the neighbourhood, community, country and humanity at large. These connections carry mutual rights and responsibilities, and one has to fulfil the same and maintain a balance.

In all activities, one should be moderate.
Above all, one has to strengthen his spiritual connection with the Creator. This promotes peace and humanism in society, paving the way for development. It enjoins the believers to fulfil the Haquq Allah and Haquqal Ebad (rights of the Creator and rights of the servants [of God]).

The physical life of an individual is limited in time and space while the life of the soul is unlimited. The good deeds performed in the world build the society on earth and spiritual life in the hereafter. The Holy Prophet (PBUH) has said the world is a sowing field for the hereafter.

Building the material and spiritual life is like constructing a two-floor house. If a person builds a two-floor house, he selects proper space and designs and lays the foundation according to the number of floors he intends to build. The Quran also poses a similar question: “Is it then he, who laid the foundation of his building on piety to Allah and His good pleasure, better, or he who laid the foundation of his building on an undetermined brink of a precipice ready to crumble down…?” (9:109).

The life of the Prophet is a glorious example of maintaining balance between the material and spiritual aspects of life. He participated in all life-related activities such as earning livelihood, maintaining family; nourishing social relationships; and fulfilling his state responsibilities.

At the same time, he remained conscious of the spiritual side of his life. He kept night vigils, maintained regular prayers and fasts to keep strengthening his spiritual link with the Almighty. He felt Allah’s presence around him. This has been amply described in the Quran. Islam teaches believers to seek goodness in both worlds. The Quranic prayer (2:201) asks believers to pray … “...Our Lord! Give us in this world that is good and in the Hereafter that is good and save us from the torment of the fire.” This teaches us to seek goodness in both worlds.

The ultimate purpose of life is to have success, but this lies in moderation. Moderation implies avoiding two extreme positions and preferring a middle path. For example, while cooking food over a stove, the flame should not be heavily stoked so that it burns the food, nor should it be so lightly lit that the food is not cooked. Rather, it should be medium.

In the same way, Islam does not allow a believer to be a miser, nor does it allow extravagance in spending. It does not approve of being infatuated with material life, nor does it allow us to forsake the basic requirements of spiritual life. It advocates a balance between both. It does not like celibacy and overindulgence in carnal pleasures but encourages a happy and harmonious married life. Islam does not favour aggression against anyone, nor does it allow cowardly submission.

Thus in all life-related activities, one should be moderate, whether it is eating, sleeping, studying, exercising, and even working. Over intensification of any activity can lead to hot-headedness and is detrimental for individual health and that of society.

The Holy Quran says: “But seek, with that (wealth) which Allah has bestowed on you, the home of the hereafter and forget not your portion of legal enjoyment in this world. …” (28:77).

Our times are testing. We live in the distracting environment of busy cities, more and more obsessed with materialism. Spiritual pursuits become rare. This unbridled pursuit of material well-being, if unchecked, would fill our future with melancholy. Therefore, we should opt for a balanced approach.

The writer is an educationist with an interest in Islamic learning.

valianiamin@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, June 20th, 2014

THE military operation in North Waziristan has raised hopes of getting rid of the militants. In this euphoria, nobody is interested in tempering the expectations of the public and preparing them for the long drawn-out struggle this proposes to be, with chances of success only if all the parties play their role effectively. The parties in this game are the federal government, the army alongwith the agencies, and most importantly the four provincial governments.

The narrative of each of the four provinces and the army are different. Punjab wants to end terrorism but has no problem with entering into political dialogue with the likes of Sipah-i-Sahaba Pakistan. Sindh wants to end violence but sees no problem with going soft on the militant wings of political parties. If the MQM has a militant wing, the PPP is not left behind either and comes up with its People’s Amn Committee. The Awami National Party has its own gunmen.

Balochistan wants peace but wants to treat Baloch nationalists differently from the manner in which the army/FC do. It refuses to acknowledge the Taliban problem, even though foreign sources inform us that Quetta is the favourite destination for the Afghan Taliban. The Balochistan government prefers to follow a wait-and-see policy in terms of Punjab-based sectarian groups that are sworn enemies of the Shia Hazaras.

The KP government wants to continue with dialogue because, given the geography, it feels vulnerable to the onslaught of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. The army has its favourites in the tribal areas, which it perceives will help it retain and enhance influence in Afghanistan. For influence on the eastern front, there is another set of favourites. The federal government’s narrative is neither here nor there; it is too scared to take a stand on anything to do with terrorism and prefers to run to the National Assembly, hold all-party conferences or hide behind the army.

Is anyone doing anything to develop the national discourse that is so crucial in fighting terrorism?
There are thus five clear narratives in the country, if you count the federal government out. Is anyone doing anything to reconcile these narratives and develop the national one that is so crucial in fighting this curse?

The other day, a counterterrorism resear*cher working abroad addressed a seminar in Lahore. The main theme of his findings was that around the world, only those countries have effectively countered insurgencies that were able to put forward a consensus narrative. In our case, we are not only miles away from that consensus, no one is even flagging it as crucial.

The best-case scenario of the ongoing operation in North Waziristan would be neutralising the non-Mehsud Taliban of the tribal areas alone. What will happen to all the gun-toting extremist groups in the country who are supported by one of the provincial governments or the army itself? This includes half a dozen well-known groups ensconced in the tribal areas, southern Punjab, Sindh and Balochis*tan. A number of them are operating under new names after having been proscribed by the government. Does anyone think there can be sustainable peace while extremist wings and political militant wings thrive? We may win respite for a few months, but the extremists will continue to haunt us and push us into poverty, international isolation and despondency until we take the bull by the horns.

Despite our desperate state, where most agree that fixing the terrorism problem is more important than fixing the economy or the power shortages, are any of the main players willing to come on one page? The only consensus they have is to demolish the TTP; but they see no need to touch the extremists that serve their own purposes.

The whole thing started when Pakistan trai*ned mujahideen and entered into America’s war in Afghanistan to contain the USSR, and took the initiative of training non-state ‘soldiers’ for India and Kashmir. It is these trained ‘ghazis’ whose claim to fame is their ability to wreak violence that are our main problem. They may be from any lashkar or jaish; they are available to share their violent skills for money or, in other cases, break the spell their teachers or handlers cast on them.

When there were reports of fighters heading to Syria from the tribal areas, there was no reaction in Pakistan — unless perhaps there was a sense of relief, not realising they would be back after a year or two, with even more sophisticated skills.

These fighters can only be removed through two methods. First, if the six entities mentioned above, including the army, develop a national narrative rather than their own institutional narrative. Or second, if the state establishes its writ and demonstrates zero tolerance for banned parties under any banner, as well as implementing strict gun laws, depoliticising the police and re-establishing a working criminal justice system. The government does not seem to be working on either of these options.

The writer is a former federal secretary interior.

tasneem.m.noorani@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, June 27th, 2014


THROUGH a combination of indifference and ineptness by successive governments in the recent past, Pakistan’s manufacturing sector has been pushed into long-term decline. This unfortunate and inauspicious trend is evident in the numbers. The share of large-scale manufacturing (LSM) in GDP has declined sharply since 2000, dropping from 14.7pc of total value added to a provisional 10.9pc in 2013-14.

The most worrying aspect of this trend of “de-industrialisation”, if it can be called that, is that new investment by the private sector in large-scale manufacturing has fallen by more than half since 2007. In seven short years, the share of new investment in the LSM sector has declined from over 22pc of GDP to only 10pc. This sharp decline in new capital spending by businesses in large-scale manufacturing for the past several years portends a “weak” outlook for the sector in the years ahead, particularly as the continued opening up of the global and regional economies translates into ever-rising competitive pressures.

In fact, in a related development, Pakistan’s ranking in global competitiveness (as compiled by the World Economic Forum) has plummeted from 83rd in 2007 to 133rd in 2014, a drop of 50 places — the sharpest for any country.

While new investment in the LSM sector has virtually stalled, overall private investment in the country has also declined to record lows. For 2013-14, total investment by the private sector dropped to 8.9pc of GDP. However, this figure is inclusive of $2 billion of Eurobonds purchased by international bond investors. If this resort to dubious accounting is corrected for, fixed investment by the private sector has actually sunk to a new multi-decade low of 8.1pc of GDP in 2013-14.

Tax revenues and job-creation will be impacted by the decline in Pakistan’s manufacturing sector.
Why should the decline of the country’s manufacturing sector worry the government — or anyone else for that matter? Despite the much-trumpeted arrival of the so-called “New Economy” at the beginning of the 21st century, the “Old Economy” consisting of smokestack industries, factory floors and mass-production assembly lines remains very much a vibrant part of the global economy.

In fact, for many of the dynamic emerging economies of the world (Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, China among others), “manufacturing” continues to occupy a dominant share of domestic value-added and non-agriculture employment. Despite the sharp rise of commercial services on the global stage, manufactured exports provide the bulk of foreign exchange for non-oil exporting countries, with the share of manufactures in world exports amounting to 67pc.

In Pakistan’s case, the manufacturing sector provides a large proportion of government taxes, and accounts for a still-significant share of new investment, jobs, foreign direct investment (FDI), innovation, the imparting of skills and the diffusion of technology. Apart from prospects for tax collection, the rather dim outlook for large-scale manufacturing in the medium term should be a cause for worry for the government on another important front: job-creation. If industry in general, and large-scale manufacturing in particular, continue to operate at only a fraction of their installed capacity, new employment opportunities will not be created.

The principal reasons for the decline in manufacturing in Pakistan since the 1990s appear to be:

• The disturbed internal security situation

• Policy inconsistency and uncertainty

• Political uncertainty

• Exchange rate policy

• Energy crisis (especially gas)

• Unchecked smuggling and under-invoicing

• Tax policy and practice

While all the factors have played an important part, increasingly it is the resort to what I have called “predatory taxation” by the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) that is resulting in the suffocation and slow death of the large-scale, formal manufacturing sector in Pakistan. I am reproducing what I wrote in a previous column:

“In broad terms, this is reflected by the fact that industry accounts for over 70pc of total tax collection by FBR, with agriculture’s contribution at less than 1pc. (In fact, despite all the ruckus about indirect taxation of agri-inputs, this avenue provided Rs 20.9bn, or only 0.3pc of the sector’s value added, to the exchequer in 2012-13).

“Similarly, investors on the stock market continue to be handled with kid gloves. On a capital gain of Rs 2,828bn (US$29bn) in the past 18 months, most of it accruing to a narrow circle of large investors, the stock market’s contribution to the national exchequer was an abysmal Rs588 million (around US$6m) in 2012-13 — for a tax incidence of 0.02pc.

“On the other end of the scale, according to data compiled by the World Bank, a formal business in Pakistan makes 47 different payments of tax and government levies a year, while, on average, it spends 577 hours a year in dealing with tax matters. On both counts, Pakistan is ranked amongst the highest-burden countries in the world.”

The increase in the ambit of the withholding tax regime in the recent budget puts an additional burden of responsibility on withholding agents, adding to their transaction cost. Finally, a potential new layer of complexity for large sales tax payers has been added by the setting up of provincial revenue authorities, with no clear or uniform policy on using the origin or the destination principle for determining the tax liability. Adjustments and credits for input taxes have also been affected.

The bottom-line is that rather than burdening the formal (principally manufacturing) sector, as is happening in practice, the government should strive harder to widen the tax base before it is too late. The slow-motion implosion of large-scale manufacturing is already under way, and if allowed to continue, it will have serious long-term consequences.

The writer is a former economic adviser to government, and currently heads a macroeconomic consultancy based in Islamabad.

Published in Dawn, June 27th, 2014


AFTER a week acclaiming it as the ‘final solution to terrorism,’ everyone is now clambering to highlight the fallouts of the North Waziristan operation. The government, opposition, and everyone else in between have suddenly woken up to the fact that hundreds of thousands of local people have been forced to flee the bombing zone. The plight of the so-called ‘IDPs’ has, in rather quick time, become the most significant public interest concern in the country.

Odd, is it not, that it requires us to see images of men, women and children strewn out across the plains of Bannu with nowhere to go before we realise that the ‘wipe out the Taliban’ celebrations will have to be put on hold? Indeed, one can only wonder whether we are completely devoid of collective memory given that this story has played itself out for millions from Swat, Bajaur, South Wazir*istan and Khyber — to name but a few — on numerous occasions over the past decade.

Or maybe we just like grappling with ‘disasters’ and ‘conflict zones’ that require development interventions? Perhaps we want to make the thousands of reports written by government, donors and consultants using such terminology actually seem relevant?

I, for one, still have a hard time digesting the term ‘IDP’. Devoid of any political and historical content whatsoever, it is the epitome of 21st century development-speak that is increasingly dominant in journalism, academia and popular culture.

Waziristanis are far better equipped to come up with a ‘final solution to terrorism’ than us armchair experts.
We are supposed to feel sympathy for IDPs because they have been ‘displaced’ through no fault of their own. We are encouraged to set up relief camps to alleviate their suffering. We are reminded time and again that the IDPs are suffering for the greater common good. But we are not allowed to ask critical questions about this supposed greater common good, who frames it, and why dropping bombs on the people of this country is unavoidable.

The usual suspects are predictably laying into government for not making proper arrangements for the more than half a million people that have been forced to leave their homes. But let us not forget that camps set up in the past were beset by a plethora of problems. There is no ‘right’ way to be a refugee; it is unbearable under virtually all conditions.

Let alone the authorities, a wide cross-section of the urban, educated classes remain completely ignorant about the lives and social practices of the people who are conveniently all lumped together under the bracket ‘tribal’. Indeed, there is a barely disguised orientalism at work in urban Pakistan when it comes to the people of the peripheries. It is thus that — in the case of North Waziristan at least — we vacillate between perceiving all ‘tribal’ Pakhtuns as extremists and then obsessing about the dismal conditions to which they are subjected as IDPs.

Accordingly we find it difficult to move beyond false choices such as ‘operation versus peace talks’, and ‘state versus extremists’. We urgently need to recognise that, while people in warzones are often victims, they are also conscious agents, aware both of their own history, and able, if we are so gracious as to allow them, to chart out their own future.

Notwithstanding Waziristan’s geographical location and its deliberate and sustained segregation from the settled areas, a large number of people from the region have been exposed to, and participate in, the same Pakistan as the rest of us. As students, merchants, transporters, and government employees, Waziristanis form political opinions about their condition like anyone else, and are, in fact, far better equipped to come up with a ‘final solution to terrorism’ than us armchair experts.

Rest assured, such a solution would involve a look back into history, at least as far back as British colonialism when the ‘tribal’ polity as we know it was created. It would also involve introspection, because there is little question that religion — including the idiom of jihad — has been a potent ideological and political force in local society over a long period of time. Finally, it would involve recognition that neither is everyone in Waziristan a Taliban sympathiser nor committed to resisting the right-wing onslaught. In short, a solution would involve nothing less than dismantling and substituting a political economy of war fashioned over four decades.

Of course the state has actively prevented those outside the regions that it considers its strategic backwater from going into and learning about them. But this does not excuse the ignorance of those who consider themselves progressives. It is not just colonial perspectives on Waziristan — and the rest of Fata — that many of us have internalised; many other regions, including ‘feudal’ Sindh and ‘sardar-dominated’ Balochistan are also, in our imagination, suspended in the medieval era.

Crying hoarse over IDPs after actively asking for them to be bombed is not good enough. Would we feel so charitable if a military operation was launched in Muridke?

The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

Published in Dawn, June 27th, 2014

FAITH or iman in Islam is premised on three basic beliefs: tauhid, or the oneness of God, risalat or prophethood, and qayamah, or the Day of Judgement.

Each is inexorably associated with the other: weak belief in one is liable to lead to faltering in the others.

However, the journey takes a different path towards belief in each, and once reached, the three converge on a single point: submission to God.

While the reasoning behind tauhid and risalat follow from reflecting on the systems of the universe, the latter’s ability to operate with unimaginable precision, and the necessity thereby of a Creator who must communicate with man through divine revelation through His designated individuals, we must ponder too over the existence of a day of reckoning that, in its microcosmic form, we face each day of our lives.

The Day of Judgement has vanished from our conscience.
Even the most hardened criminal must be naturally aware of what is right and what is wrong, by virtue of the inherent sense of khair (goodness) and shar (evil) that God has bestowed on mankind. We may repeatedly shake our conscience, drug it with vain excuses, or batter it into submission; but ultimately we face an internal court that calls us to justify our acts on a daily basis. In his excellent treatise on Islam, Al-Meezan, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi calls this a ‘qayamat-i-sughra’, which occurs in our daily lives, and brings each of us to a reckoning of our deeds.

When this happens to us regularly, and we find ourselves accountable for what we do, how is it possible that we shall not be held accountable for our lives as a whole and our just deserts be awarded to us one day?

The human spirit has been eternally dissatisfied, and in a state of constant search. We spend our entire lives looking for the elusive something that could quench this thirst within us; we seek knowledge; travel to the peaks of mountains and the depths of oceans; wallow in worldly wealth and fame, but are unable to find peace of mind and soul.

Surely, then, there has to be a place, somewhere, sometime, when we will obtain an answer to our constant restlessness, the sense that we ought to be somewhere else.

This world and its life are immensely unfair and unjust. People are oppressed, and those who commit wrong deeds seem to get away with it all the time. They prosper, with wealth and fame, and are even rewarded with worldly goods again and again.

Criminals and offenders come into power and run the affairs of countries, with control over vast resources. Disasters affect those who are ill-equipped to deal with them, and the ones who were responsible go scot-free, riding on empty slogans.

Wars are waged on innocent civilians in the name of national and global security and religion, and countless individuals are killed, maimed and tortured. It is rare to find criminals brought to justice. Surely, there must be a place and time when all who have done wrong could be questioned by all who have been wronged, and where, finally, everyone shall be equal.

During one of his nightly visits to see how people were faring under his rule, Hazrat Umar came across a woman and her small children living in hunger.

Reproaching himself severely, he returned, carrying a sack of flour on his back, refusing to allow a younger companion to carry it for him, saying: “Would you carry my sin for me on the Day of Judgement?”

When a great famine struck Madina, the caliph refused to eat either meat or consume milk, and took the minimum of sustenance, living with the famine-struck for months on end.

Today, rulers demonstrate a totally opposite behaviour. The ruled either submit in silence, or are complicit. The Day of Reckoning seems to have vanished from our individual and collective conscience. We have corrupted our souls with self-praise and slogans of how good we are to our fellow beings, spending our short time in this world in activities that serve the interests of families and friends.

We usurp the rights of others, commit fraud, make corruption an essential ingredient of our daily lives and are richer at the cost of others.

We lie and cheat easily, frame others in false cases, extort money and are accomplices even in murder and torture. We live as if we will never be brought to book for our (mis)deeds.

To each of us, God extends a lifeline of reflection and repentance, provided that innate good nature is kept alive within us. If, however, we insist on rejecting it, and kill our conscience deliberately, He may decide that we have chosen the path of evil of our own free will. We should all be aware of such an eventual possibility.

by Nikhat Sattar

The writer is a freelance contributor with an interest in religion.

Published in Dawn, July 4th, 2014