Wednesday, 23 October 2019

Failure of the Pakistan Project (Part 2)



بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
ولا حول ولا قوة الا بالله العلي العظيم
Having recently shifted back to Pakistan, I have encountered a great but disturbing change in the society. Since its inception, Pakistan has been on a trajectory of modernization, cultural Westernization and secularization. But in recent years, this trend has picked up its pace exponentially. The entertainment industry and the widespread use of social media in particular serve as the catalysts for a general rejection of Islamic values. Alongside these two factors, there is the active force of the state, which according to my thesis, is consciously committed to curbing the influence of Islam, by means of weakening the forces which campaign for Islamic values. I have particularly noted that the Ulama have lost a great deal of influence, and that it is the State which is penetrating its own self-serving, modified version of Islam into the nation. Cunningly, the project of secularization begins with a call to radically increase female social mobility and challenge traditional gender roles. Brazenly, and without so much as a peep from the traditionalist Ulama and so-called Islamic political parties, the Pakistani State has now recognized the legality of the existence of the so-called “transgenders”. In Pakistan, these are basically cross-dressing perverts who generally function as sex workers and erotic dancers. In short, they are nothing but a morally destructive presence in the country. But without digressing into too much detail of various examples of how Pakistan has degenerated and is fast catching up to the rest of the degenerate world, I must point out that of course there is still a conservative, religious element within the country though it is considerably demoralized. The polarization between the inward religious society and the outward looking, ascendant secular, liberal and irreligious society is extremely pronounced now. In other words, there are two parallel societies that are cohabiting this land whose values diametrically oppose each other and who at heart loathe each other. This is best illustrated in the two radically different schooling systems, i.e., the secular schools to which the majority of children are sent, and the madaris (religious schools) where a considerable number of mostly impoverished families send their boys to study. Sadly, the noble objective of acquiring and imparting religious knowledge isn't the intention of the vast majority of poor families who enroll their boys in the madaris. On the contrary, they have no alternative due to the unaffordability for them of secular schools. But the problem lies in the fact that these two parallel education systems are diametrically opposed to each other, when in fact they should have been complimentary. Take for example the uniform of the government and private schools – European dress. At the very least, these schools in the so-called “Islamic Republic” should have trained their students to wear the traditional clothing of the Muslims, especially the skullcap. Furthermore, the government and private schools are increasingly gender integrated (secondary education, i.e., colleges and universities even more so). The result is a completely different mindset between the secular school graduate and the madrassa graduate. There is also a conspiracy to prevent Islamic outreach and missionary organisations from operating in public schools and secondary educational institutions. And there is yet another conspiracy to “mainstream” or “reform” the private networks of madaris, which, despite their shortcomings, are the last bastion of Islamic ideology in pretty much the whole world. Once the shell of the madrassa has been cracked, the secular forces (which in reality should be termed the satanic forces), will have succeeded in overcoming their greatest obstacle to completing the project of transforming Pakistan, the homeland of South Asian Muslims, into a modern, liberal and secular nation state. Quite frankly, the Ulama, who are meant to be the vanguard of the resistance to this demonic project of secularization and liberalization, have utterly failed to not only fully comprehend the threat, but devise a competent action plan to effectively neutralise it. This is because, as is also my thesis, the religious leadership of the Muslims is extremely corrupt and hypocritical itself. The forces of secularity take full advantage of their miserable condition. Fundamentally, the reason for the failure to enact an action plan by the Islamic forces is internal disunity and petty rivalries. I have often argued that the so-called “Islamic” political parties like Mawdudi's Jamaate Islami, and the Jamiat Ulama-e-Islam of Mawlana Fadlurrahman are not actually sincere to the cause of Islam. The latter in particular acts without any principle and is corrupt to the core. It is merely a vehicle to enrich the Ulama who are its members as a class along the same lines non-religious political parties function to enrich their industrialist and feudalist leadership. The Mawlana has planned a mammoth march to the capital Islamabad for the last day of October in protest of the current government. However, this protest march, which shall mobilize madrassa students to crowd the streets, is purely political and has nothing of substance for the Islamic cause. The Mawlana is simply protesting election results which he claims were rigged because his party suffered a humiliating defeat and lost many seats. As for the Jamaate Islami, its modernist ideology means it is simply not equipped to both comprehend the real danger of the modern nation state and the project of secularisation and to successfully bring about a truly religious revolution in the hearts and minds of the people. These political parties using the label of Islam are nothing but bureaucratic institutions which lack any vision, charisma and above all zeal for the cause of Islam.
Returning to the bifurcation of Pakistani society, it is my message to the faithful, lovers of Islam, that they begin to see themselves as separate from the society they live in. Sure we are all Muslims. The growing liberal segment of the population are confessionally Muslim though they obviously cannot be described as true Believers. Therefore, despite them being fellow Muslims who have religious rights upon us such as having their greeting of salam replied to and their funerals offered, etc., we must increasingly separate ourselves from them for the purpose of maintaining the purity of our faith and as a protest against their corruption. This principle can be derived from the following Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam):
مَثَلُ الْجَلِيسِ الصَّالِحِ وَالْجَلِيسِ السَّوْءِ كَمَثَلِ صَاحِبِ الْمِسْكِ، وَكِيرِ الْحَدَّادِ، لاَ يَعْدَمُكَ مِنْ صَاحِبِ الْمِسْكِ إِمَّا تَشْتَرِيهِ، أَوْ تَجِدُ رِيحَهُ، وَكِيرُ الْحَدَّادِ يُحْرِقُ بَدَنَكَ أَوْ ثَوْبَكَ أَوْ تَجِدُ مِنْهُ رِيحًا خَبِيثَةً
The parable of a good companion (who sits with you) in comparison with a bad one, is like that of the musk seller and the blacksmith's bellows (or furnace); from the first you would either buy musk or enjoy its good smell while the bellows would either burn your body or your clothes, or you get a nasty smell thereof.”
Therefore, the origin of this affair is to avoid association with those whose association will result in harm to one's faith, even if they happen to be professed Muslims. Surely, the religious-minded Muslim (who may himself not be personally pious or strictly observant – but who nevertheless admires the men of religion and sincerely loves Islam) must strive to keep company and association with the Ulama, the pious, the people of the mosque, etc. He should avoid those who don't give off the vibe of religiosity. The religious forces by being conscious of their distinction from the broader society will therefore be more vocal, because the vocal minority is stronger than the silent majority. As for the strategy to counter the state's nefarious project, we must first cleanse our hearts of any love or devotion to the state. Ironically, it is the religious forces of this country that tend to be among the loudest in their unnecessary praise of the state and particularly the institution of the military establishment. We must educate our people about the ugly reality of this state including the fact that the constitution is thoroughly un-Islamic. The idea that Pakistan's constitution is a purely Islamic document is a deceptive myth that must be debunked academically. The very preamble of the constitution is cited as proof that it is absolutely compliant to Islam: “Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone” without carefully considering the very next clause: “and the authority to be exercised by the people of Pakistan within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust”. Did anyone bother to ask if Allah actually authorized the people of Pakistan to exercise any authority even “within the limits prescribed by Him”? In other words, the preamble of the constitution has self-declared the people of Pakistan as Allah's khilafa on the Earth. In truth, the people of Pakistan are not deserving of such a lofty position. Next, this preamble states: “Wherein the State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people;” Again, who authorized the people to collectively exercise any power or authority, through the agency of chosen representatives or otherwise? The people of Pakistan include all kind of evil, corrupt, infidel, adulterous, wicked, and polytheist elements. How can it be argued that Allah has either authorized or is agreeable to the people of Pakistan exercising authority in His Holy Name? The preamble of the constitution enshrines democracy: “Wherein the principles of democracy...as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed”, “Pakistan would be a democratic State based on Islamic principles of social justice”, “Dedicated to the preservation of democracy”. Firstly, Islam has not “enunciated” democracy. Democracy is diametrically opposed to the principles of Islam. Yes, Islam prescribes consultation but that should never be confused with democracy, which literally means rule of the people. The Islamic institution of shura (consultation) only includes the qualified and pious individuals of the Muslim community, not every Tom, Dick and Harry. The Islamic prescription for government is meritocratic not democratic. The verse of the holy Quran which is the basis for the principle of consultation clearly states that they are those who consult “among themselves” (Sura 42:38), not that they consult with everyone. Thus even if one were to argue that in Pakistan democracy is limited and the chosen representatives of the people are not authorized to legislate anything or authorize anything that is in clear violation of the Shari'a, that is still insufficient for such a system to be declared “Islamic”. In a democracy with universal suffrage, everyone is entitled to vote and have his or her say, including the open sinner, the wicked oppressor, the infidel, and those hypocrites who are bent on extinguishing the Light of Allah. When even consulting with such elements and soliciting their advice is not Islamic, how can it be Islamic to give them the right to vote and elect representatives. And more often than not the representatives are themselves corrupt, sinful, and hypocritical. With perhaps only a handful of exceptions, the entire Pakistani Parliament is full of individuals who are open sinners and many of them are hypocrites who are actively working to subvert the cause of Islam.
Now one of the most outrageous articles of this contemptible constitution which is only worthy of being toilet paper (after all holy words and expressions have been cut out from it): “(1) Loyalty to the State is the basic duty of every citizen. (2) Obedience to the Constitution and law is the [inviolable] obligation of every citizen wherever he may be and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan.” Keep in mind loyalty to the State has not been defined. Does that include loyalty in one's heart, or is disloyalty only understood as disloyalty in action, not words or thoughts? The fact of the matter is, a Muslim must only be obedient to someone in a position of political authority over him (provided he is not commanded with disobedience to Allah and His Apostle) but never commanded with loyalty. This article in the constitution itself has made a distinction between loyalty and obedience. Absolute loyalty is only to Allah and His Apostle, not to any state or manmade, fallible institution. Suppose the State of Pakistan becomes transgressive and goes to war against another state that is innocent, is the Pakistani citizen required to maintain loyalty to his transgressive state? Will mere avoidance of public service that contributes to that transgression be considered “disloyalty” according to this constitutional article? As for obedience to the constitution being an “inviolable” obligation of every citizen, since that has not been qualified, it is nothing but an idolatrous statement and proclamation. It is only obedience to Allah and His Apostle (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) that is an inviolable and sacred obligation. In summary, the Pakistani constitution was cunningly written with statements that apparently conform to Islamic principles such as acknowledging the absolute sovereignty of Allah as stated in the preamble, in order to give the false impression that this is a document that is purely Islamic. But virtually every other article and clause within this document is manifestly against Islam. The problem is that mere acknowledgment of Allah's absolute sovereignty is insufficient. The mechanism for interpreting the Will of Allah is flawed and that is what effectively nullifies any Islamic aspect to this ridiculous constitution.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Taliban, Huthis and Near Future Emergence of the Mahdi

  بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الصلاة والسلام على سيد المرسلين وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين The changes to the geopolitical chessboard is acc...