The writer is the Chairperson of the History Department at Forman Christian College, Lahore
In Pakistan, we mostly work with extremes. So, either a person is good or bad, honest or corrupt, a saint or a sinner. The notion of being somewhere in-between and having a grey area is something lost on us. JS Mill famously warned us against such extremism. In his defence of free speech, Mill argued that we should never put limits on free speech and debate, since hardly anything is hundred per cent true or false. As there is always an element of doubt in every opinion, debate should be allowed, even if it means one person versus the entire human race. But in Pakistan, we only work in binaries, there is nothing in between. So, if you criticise Mohammad Ali Jinnah for something, for example, you must think that he is evil, and if you like him, you cannot say anything against him. There is no idea that maybe Jinnah, being a human, might have actually committed some mistakes, together with good things, and therefore, it is perfectly possible to criticise him and still like him and be patriotic, etc.
Such an outlook has also permeated the realm of politics in Pakistan. As I have mentioned earlier in an article here, General Ziaul Haq’s insertion of clauses in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution was emblematic of his distrust of the democratic process. Zia, like other military dictators of Pakistan, did not believe that Pakistanis were capable of choosing good representatives, and therefore, he, being a better human being, should guide the hapless population. By Zia’s time, the better qualifications of a dictator were not merely better education and experience, but religious and moral qualifications. Zia’s presidential referendum where the question was essentially, if you want Islam, then Zia is your president for the next five years, was the classic example of such a move as it simply silenced all opposition in the name of religion.
The recent debate about the implementation of the aforementioned Articles in the Constitution are not so much the fault of Tahirul Qadri highlighting them or the returning officers being extra efficient — it is simply the case of the chickens coming home to roost. Sections in these articles were in effect inserted to undermine democracy, in the interest of electing sinless, sadiq and ameen politicians. While no one would object to better politicians, how can one expect people to qualify under such stipulations when the vast majority of the people in this country do not qualify under its clauses? In a democracy, the people’s representatives are supposed to come from among them, and therefore, normally reflect the state of the society. If the society is full of sadiq and ameen people then naturally the legislature will be full of them; if not, then well, what we have had so far. In a way, it is good that problems with certain clauses of these Articles have been highlighted now, and I hope the next parliament will excise them. It is high time that parliament stops treating Islamic amendments by dictators as a sacred cow and rationalises them.
Now that I have ensured that I will never qualify under Articles 62 and 63 as they are today, let me make a larger point. Pakistan was largely fought on the basis of “political Islam”, i.e., the Muslims of India as a political, rather than a purely religious, community. That is why the Ahrar (Majlis-e-Ahrarul Islam) and the Jamiat and other religious parties opposed Jinnah, since he did not clearly articulate how “religious” the state would be. However, there is a thin line between political and religious Islam and Jinnah’s repeated references to Islamic principles opened the way to purely religious interpretations — hence our current state.
Pakistan is still struggling with the concept of democracy and religion and the recent search for “good” Muslims through the recitation of surahs is an example of our confused state. It is time that we seriously ponder over such questions and try and find an amicable solution — whatever it might be. As long as we stick to the maxim of Mill and not unnecessarily limit free speech and discussion, maybe we can move beyond our search for saints and banishment of sinners towards focusing on people who can actually lead to development in our country.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 9th, 2013.
COMMENTS (32)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
GP65,
The last sentence of your post would do!The rest is just rhetoric and unnecessary and is based on misunderstanding. We all commit sins and lie and we avoid paying taxes, our elites and politicians are more corrupt than those from the east and they all have deposited thei rwealth from cayman islands to switzeland to singapore. But we do not have a systemic problem nor is it related with religion or traditions. Besides, majority of sweeds are not atheists. European majority is christian, atheism is a new masche( new step inthe ladder) of jewish people, who publicly claim to be atheists simply to avoid invokng anti-semit sentiments.
India has a progressive constitution today, but it is running into problems with Bharat culture and traditions which are apparently not compatible with the constitution and hence the nonstoppable rapes and excesses against women. Dr Manmohan says that India has to do more for women rights. But this is another subject. Now all this what I have said is not out of malice or any benefit to me personaly but represent an academic view of the observer who has never been to the country.
Rex Minor
@Rex Minorr: I don't know how you keep on bringing that one incident. Of course if you saw it millions of other Germans may also have seen it. But how can you take that one instance and draw conclusions about a billion Hindus? Did Musharraf lie about Kargill (i.e. it was mujahids and not NLI? yes. Did Pakistani leaders lie to their own country men about who started 1965 war and till date celebrate September 6 as Defense Day? yes. Does that mean Islam teaches people to lie? No. It just means those specific leaders lied. Likewise if there are so many terrorists and suicide bombers who happen to be Muslim, can one say that Islam teaches this? Surely not. Please do not generalize.
As far as Lakshmi Mittal and France is concerned, it is a business dispute that is unresolved. Even if it turns out that Mittal did indeed lie, it would just prove to be a second example of some Hindu lying. The fact is plenty of people lie including Muslims - please do not repeat your bigoted statements again and again.
@Rex Minorr: So your rationality depends on nicks. but , yes that's the point , I don't want you to add anymore irrational blah!~
ET: Pls. do not filter out my rebuttal. The ongoing maligning of Hinduism by @Rex Minor without right to rebuttal is frustrating.
@Rex Minorr: "Were you brought up in your childhood not to lie? If so with on what grounds?"
You DID imply that Muslims are honest while Hindus and atheists are not. So clearly you are implying that your faith is superior. This conclusion you reached based on some TV show where a kid lied and was not reprimanded. Are you telling me that you have never seen a Muslim lie? Pakistanis themselves say that the elites do not pay taxes. Does tax cheating not amount to lying? Does that mean Islam is to blame? OF course not.
And Yes. I was taught not to lie on the basis that to do so was sinful.
@amoghavarsha.ii:
I fully agee, and therefoe we and I mean the believers consider themselves as Sinners not Saints. But I can assure you none of the believers feel happy about it, only infidels do!
Rex Minor
Evil,
You have choosen the right name, EVIL, I do not need to add anything.
Rex Minor
Modeators; if appopiate please let my reply through to GP65 so that she knows the difference between a believer and the infidel! We must all look inward before we critisise others . We are all sinners and none saints. This is is in Islam as it is in other Ibrahmic religions...
@Gp65:
This is not the question that an atheist lies and the theist does not! Nor have I ever claime the superiority of muslim eligion ove Hnduism, which I understand is not a religion since it incorpoates Atheism and agnostics.
What we have seen on the ARD(Germany) TV netwok report that hindu children are not repimanded for telling fibs and lies in their childhood. This was unknown in Germany atleast.
I have no intention to denegrade any one, but understand those who do not trut Athist statements. I
Were you brought up in your childhood not to lie? If so with on what grounds?
I certainly was and on the grounds that the creator God the almighty one commands it so. And be careful with the use of your bigotted language!.
Rex Minor
@Rex Minor: Stop spreading lies minor. the biggest hypocrites are those who take oath in the name of God and then lie. I can only laugh at your twisted remarks about Gandhi. your cherry picking mentality to favour your stand and using a poor example to generalize an entire religion shows your poor critical thinking ability n religious prejudice. "atheists don't have any morals" are lies spread by fanatics. atheism is not a religion and atheists can easily embrace "secular humanism" as a way of life and be reasonable humans. its far better than killing and oppressing people over religious fanatism. Humans are fully capable of being honest and good without fearing or believe in God.~
@sure? I was not the only one who saw the hindu child lying in innocence, millions others did as well. Not very long after this report Mr Lakshmi Mittal, the great industrial Boss was told publicly by the French Industry Minister to leave France because of his constant lying to the Fench Government.
The children of muslims, christians and jews ae taught that one must not lie because it is forbidden by the creator! And this he or she learns in the MADRASSA, The sixth commandment of God to Moses, " Though shall not lie or give false testimony".
Where do you think the young Indian learns that he must not lie? The United Nations human rights were based on the input from the theists believers and not from atheiests.
Rex Minor PS And if you still have not understood the point then I am sorry.
ET Mods: This man has said Hindu religion teaches one to lie. Please allow me to challenge this absurd statement.
@Rex Minor: "Are you with us or against us is not a dictum, it is the ancient expression mostly used by Emperors, kings and Warriors to separate allies from enemies The neutality was not a choice without risk. It has nothing to do with religion."
I see. But lying does have to do with a religion because you heard one Hindu kid lie on a TV while his mother watched. IT is not an ancient behavior right? You are a genius!
@Rex Minor, It seems you know nothing of yourself first. Better know who you are and what you are. No person is there in this world from the begining, who has not lied to others at some point of time. There is no proof that there is a person who has never lied to others.
Et mods : This is the second time I am trying to challenge outright bigoted statement by Rex Minor where he implies that Hindus and atheists are liars and untrustworthy and only Muslims can be trusted. How can ET allow statements like that but filter out rebuttals? @Rex Minor: First of all you are using Indian and Hindu interchangeably. For all you know the boy could have been an Indian Muslim.
Secondly, assuming that the boy was in fact a Hindu, the fact that the boy lied and his Mom did not care is a reflection on the boy and his mother not on Hinduism just as all these suicide bombers and terrorists are not a reflection on Islam. Please learn to show respect for other people's faiths just as they show respect for yours even in the country where ou live - Germany and and where Islam is not practiced by the majority.
Thirdly, I am not aware that atheists need certificates to be trusted. @Foreign Leg was not defending atheists as much as challenging your bigotry. Look at a country like Sweden where majority of people are atheists and yet there are practically no tax cheats. Then look elsewhere. One should not make sweeping statements about a whole class of people based on one interview or one TV show as you are wont to do. You have claimed plenty of times that you are a Muslim so it is unclear why you are ambivalent here.
@deep: George w was a peasant; Are you with us or against us is not a dictum, it is the ancient expression mostly used by Emperors, kings and Warriors to separate allies from enemies The neutality was not a choice without risk. It has nothing to do with religion.
Rex Minor
@Foreign Leg: You have debunked nothing; It is the Atheist who wants to be trusted! I did not say that I am a religious person The Atheist must provide the collateral for believers to trust him.
I meant `'Hebraisch'.! The christian Bible new testaments were altered by Emperor Constantine.. A documentary recently released on German TV netwok showed an innocent Indian school boy telling a lie about his income fom selling videos, while his mother looked on smiling. The boy's explanation was that it makes him feel happy. This is extaordinary for the Indian childen to be raised feely without having any obligations to an authority. This remnds us of Voltair who said that if we did not have a God, we had to invent one for ethics and morality. What is you way of nature or indicator of moral compass? I am not from Pakistan but know about Gandhi, the man who preached non violence was a practicing debaucher! Every Indian is aware of this and this must be considered when we talk about moality. Indian leaders today have no solution to the rapes which ae being committed every 23 minutes in India, placing India below Saudi Aabia in womens rights.
Rex Minor. ..
U free to choose then u r responsible what u choose i gues this is our choice.
What is there to laugh about Atheists being untrustworthy? If you are an Atheist what are credentials for telling the truth and nothing but the truth? . Let me pose this question to you. If you are religious, what are your credentials for telling the truth? Absolutely nothing! . Atheism means not believing in religion. A lot of so-called atheists may be gnostics instead who do not believe in organized religion but in the ways of nature. Religion is not the only indicator of moral compass. I have debunked many of your false accusations earlier and instead of admitting, you still spout falsities. . What is the compass for your morals and if you are a hindu too, how come that hindus are not brought up by their paraents to tell the truth and not lies? . Hindus are nor brought up by their parents to tell the truth? Where did you come up with this gem? Please take your head out of the Pakistan Studies notebook and know that many Hindus are morally upright and non-violent. If nothing at all, read about Gandhi.
@Rex Minor: what about kitman muzzie ? what about taqiya
@Rex Minor: If, however, one is not a believer, he should read Tora or Bible in hebraesh language first to learn the story of the Ibahimic religions. . By :"hebraesh", I guess you mean Hebrew. But part of the Tanakh is written in Aramaic! In the case of the Christian Bible, the entire New Testament was originally written in Greek, not Hewbrew! However learning Greek is not at all required for Christians as authenticated versions such as the NRSV suffice. . Also what you refer to as "Ibahimic" religions are actually called "Abrahamic" religions.
I do not know about Iqbal, but father of the nation, Jinnah is my ideal. I eat and drink, the way father of the nation did. Praise be Allah
@Murthy:
What is there to laugh about Atheists being untrustworthy? If you are an Atheist what are credentials for telling the truth and nothing but the truth? What is the compass for your morals and if you are a hindu too, how come that hindus are not brought up by their paraents to tell the truth and not lies? The entire French people are in turmoil currently since a minister told a lie in the parliament. The members of parliament are under oath when they speak.
I do not detect any malice in the statement that you heard on TV.
Rex Minor
Hamid Mir in his Capital Talk programme epitomises the binary process of thinking. His recipe to resolve the knotty issue of whether you are for or against the ideology of pakistan is to know if the person is a friend or foe of Jinnah and iqbal. he said - "all friends of Jinnah and iqbal are our friends, all their enemies are our enemies." He was targetting the Maududi group with this theory - but inadvertantly extends this to almost all the major politicians of the time in KP, Sindh and the Punjab.
Some of the biggest followers of Bush's dictum - you are with us or against us - are in this part of the world. And a lot of this has to do with the religion and the way the followers have to accept everything as a revelation or be exposed as a blashphemer.
@gv:
No sir! If one is a muslim and want to comment constructively on Islam, then one is advised to learn the arabic language as well as the arabic culture, to be able to at least learn the basics of the divine scriptures. If, however, one is not a believer, he should read Tora or Bible in hebraesh language first to learn the story of the Ibahimic religions.
Rex Minor
@Murthy:
We exist and this proves our freedom as well as free thinking! Free speech without constraints might ba part of the American democratic order, but not a part of democracy. What we say publicy must not cause the public disorder or tresspass on others freedom. There are laws in a democacy to maintain public order.
Rex Minor
Free thinking and free speech should be part of any democracy. But, with religion being the pivot in Pakistan democracy can't move at all. Children should be allowed to seek knowledge themselves, including the freedom to question the very existence of God. There can be nothing wrong if real education is accessible to all. This is being viewed as heretic by those who control society and governance using religion as a tool. I am an atheist and I could only laugh when I came across, in a popular TV debate, a staunch believer express the view that atheists are untrustworthy. Faith shouldn't make one blind.
@rex minor,
So did you learn your islam from St Augustine???
There is no concept of original sin in Islam... as Foreign Legionnaire points out it is a Christian concept..
@YKB Bangash sahib - good balanced and rather apt article.. I would have replaced the phrase 'political islam' with the muslim community of India but you make your point well.
@Author: Thank you once again for a wonderful article! . Like you, I too find it interesting that Pakistanis lionize a few heroes to the extent that they think these heroes are unblemished and can do no evil and forget that they are only human. I am reminded about this almost everyday here on ET when I come across "jiyalas" of various political parties who do not accept their leader's errors. Generally I find people being lionized more in Pakistan than India. . It is not to say that this kind of hero-worship does not occur in India. One does see it in action in a few states, for instance political leaders of Tamil Nadu. However to a large extent, Indians have kept away from hero-worship. Perhaps there can be no better example of this than Mahatma Gandhi who is the Father of the Nation but who is also an ideal that most Indians find difficult to follow. . @Rex Minor: Why complicate issues, there is no such thing as political Islam. . Of course, there is Political Islam. What else do you think Pakistan has? The only question is to what extent Political Islam exists in Pakistan. When you have politics and law driven by Islam and that permeates into the personal, social and political life of its citizens, it is called Political Islam. Article 62/63, Blasphemy Lay, Legal System (though not fully Shariah, but getting there) all point to Political Islam in Pakistan. . @Rex Minor: We are all sinners is the pemise for a muslim, . Interesting because I thought this was a concept from Christianity.
Islam and Articles 62, 63 are there to judge others, what a hypocrite nation we are :-/
@author Sensible article as ever. What is Sadiq and Ameen, how only memorizing the Kalima and Duas will guarantee that? I wonder, had Jinnah been around and tried to submit his papers, could he have met the standards of being Sadiq and Ameen! Articles 62 and 63 give unlimited subjective powers to electoral officials to judge others on moral and religious grounds as per their whims. These kind of measures are not compatible with a free democracy. It's quite obvious that these articles were devised by a dictator to strengthen the totalitarianism and subvert the democratic practices.
One of the best analytic op ed on ET.
Binaries??? Pakistanis have an almost insurmountable amount of freedom of free speech!! Haven't seen it that much anywhere else :) You say what you like and then people say a lot in retaliation- well they too have freedom, don't they!! so they can sort of take it out on you :)
Haan people just LOVE to impose- they fight- people from the sub continent!!!
Btw- no solution to 62 and 63 dude!! Just another article!! Not impressive- was expecting some sort of insight or amendment or even a suggestion on its application :(
There is a thinking that if someone wants to complicate issues which a community is having, a bit of a political spin would do the job. Mr Bangash in his article is inadvertently on this route. . Why complicate issues, there is no such thing as political Islam. Islam is a religion, a way of life and is not meant to be instrumentalised for political purpose.. We are all sinners is the pemise for a muslim, there is nothng good or bad about us , we are humans and are born with a living geist(mind and spirit) and are responsible for our deeds. We must have the civil courage to confront those who have overstepped their competence and have committed evil acts.We must learn the arabic language and the arabic culture before we are able to understand the divine scriptures. The constitution of an Islamic state must reflect the values of Islam and the 21st century laws(sharia) to uphold them.
Rex Minor