Maududi’s Children
How the intellectuality of Political Islam turned into the brutality of faithful fascism: Nadeem F. Paracha
In Pakistan even the traditional Muslim practice of reasoning in matters of religion – originally introduced by the 9th century Mutazilites – is at times treated like some kind of an abomination to be feared, discouraged and repressed.
It is easy to accuse the proverbial mullah for this. And it is equally easy to blame him for being anti-intellectual and regressive.
However, over the years the conventional mullah has already lost a lot of face and respect. But this seemingly anti-mullah trend didn’t always mean the opening up of society to a more enlightening and pluralistic alternative.
On the contrary, the gap created by the conventional mullah’s gradual downfall was filled by religious scholars who only seemed to have intellectualized, modernized and politicized obscurantism. [1]
In Pakistan, Islamic scholars like Abul Ala Maududi and the far more moderate, Professor Fazalur Rahman Malik, were some of the first to occupy this gap.
Their tirades against the conventional mullah were welcomed by the more ‘educated Muslims.’ [2]
Working as the head of the Central Institute of Islamic Research formed by the Ayub Khan dictatorship in 1961, Prof. Fazalur Rahman laboured hard to find that elusive middle-ground between Pakistan’s colonial secular heritage and its somewhat ambiguous ‘Islamic Republic-ism.’
Maududi’s elaborate treatises however, concentrated more on undermining the constructive role being played by the less puritanical Islamic sects in Pakistan. [3]
And even though both Maududi and Fazalur Rahman were staunchly anti-left in equal degrees, Maududi soon turned his intellectual weaponry against Rahman as well after the later published his short but highly acclaimed book ‘Islam’ in 1968.
Maududi and his Jamat Islami accused Rahman for undermining the importance of the hadith and for claiming that not all text of the Qu’ran was eternal and (thus), it should be understood allegorically. [4]
Maududi’s staunch stance against the non-puritanical strains of Islam was a counterproductive move. Because in an ethnical, sectarian and religiously pluralistic society like Pakistan, the factions that Maududi challenged were/are comparatively moderate in essence: Barelvi-ism, Sufism and the Hanaifi school of jurisprudence – which is the most liberal of the four schools of jurisprudence in Sunni Islam – are still at the forefront of faith in Pakistan, boasting a large following. [5]; [6]; [7]; [8]
Many believe they are the very reasons that help keep tensions between religions, and religious sects in the country at a bare minimum. At the root of this is the pluralism-friendly factor emerging from these strains’ historical make-up generated from a healthy cultural fusion between distinct peoples in the subcontinent. [9]
That’s why a ‘progressive Muslim’ in a country like Pakistan must be more pragmatic than either idealistic or political. He may be aesthetically and theologically opposed and repulsed by the more ‘superstitious’ strains of the faith, but he must understand that ironically, the large number of adherents that such strains have in Pakistan, they remain to be the social engine behind the consensual need in the society at large to keep matters like sectarianism and inter-Islamic polarisation in the country largely de-politicised. [10]
But Maududi not only shunned these ‘superstitious’ strains, his alternative of a more ‘unembellished’ and concrete version of Islam was also highly political and compartmentalized. [11]
This meant that not only were the more ‘blemished’ strains of Islam challenged by him, modern western philosophical and political ensembles like democracy, liberalism, socialism and especially Marxism too were rejected.
Maududi’s alternative was an ‘all-encompassing Islam.’ He purposed a single, exclusive version of the religion; a version that discouraged any previous interpretation of the Qu’ran and the Islamic Law (Sharia) that his own analysis did not approve of. And though he was skeptical of all modern secular concepts of ideology, paradoxically, he wasn’t all that allergic to the notions of modern state politics. [12]; [13]; [14].
Calling for the imposition of this politicized and puritanical version of Islam in a socially pluralistic and religiously sectarian society like Pakistan was not only Utopian, it was also dangerous.
Not surprisingly, ever since the late 1960s, Maududi’s philosophy has off and on found itself being used to encourage self-righteous coercion, political intrigues and violence – as seen in Jamat Islami’s role in the 1953 and 1974 anti-Ahmadiyya violence (for which Maududi was imprisoned); the role of the party in supporting (and taking part) in the Pakistani Army’s controversial actions in the former East Pakistan; and the role of the party’s student wing, the Islami Jamiat-e-Taleba (IJT), which was accused (in the 1980s) of introducing the violent ‘Kalashnikov Culture’ on the country’s campuses. [15]; [16].
Worst of all, Maududi-ism (as it is sometimes called), was also exploited by dictators (General Zia-ul-Haq), ulema and, of course, the Jamat Islami, as a way to deflect, deflate and denounce any other form of Islamic reformism. It actually eschewed tolerance. [17]
A number of politico-religious forces in Pakistan, as well as many television anchormen, print journalists and publications, are both directly and indirectly influenced by Maududi.
That’s why one is not surprised to watch most of them dutifully derailing any idea that looks inwards at the present state of Islam as a cause for the violence perpetuated in its name.
These gentlemen and publications continue to offer hyperbolic Maududist tracts pointing at ‘western powers’ and faith-based ‘distortions’ for all the ills befalling religion and society in Pakistan.
Outdated Maududist thoughts are being aired in a reality where Communism, Cold War tussles, ‘secret societies,’ and ‘distorted sects’ are not the ‘problem’ anymore. On the contrary, most of the present crises are clearly stemming from a violent, psychopathic and totalitarian version of the faith. Thus, the socio-political disconnect in these gentlemen’s otherwise widely published and televised arguments is now starker than ever.
The fact is, Maududism in the post-9/11 Pakistan stands to be little more than an outdated relic of the Cold War, offering what now sound like rhetorical and hyperbolic clichés.
What’s more, Maududi’s ideas are also being used to make a veneered defense of the actions of anarchic militants in the North (as heard from politicians like JI’s Munawar Hussain and Qazi Hussain Ahmed; PTI’s Imran Khan, and even from some PML-N leaders who were once part of JI’s student-wing, the IJT. [18]
It is interesting to imagine how Maududi himself would have reacted in the current scenario. However, there is no doubt that the way his thoughts and ideas have evolved, they have been at least one reason why the current trends of reformism in Islam have failed to find any valid expression in Pakistan.
The backlash
The present-day reformist inclinations in Islam include two variations. One is being led by staunch secularists and the other by ‘progressive Muslims.’
Both may disagree with one another but their aim and goal seem to be common: To expunge Islam as we know it from laws and exegeses that, though man-made, have been handed down through the centuries as being ‘divine’ and thus unalterable. [19]
One of the many examples in this context is the law of stoning adulterous men and women that is practiced in some Islamic societies as ‘God’s law,’ but it is actually not found in the Qu’ran – (the law was formed in the 8th century from a hadith whose credibility many scholars have questioned). [20]
Another is the literalist way the hudd or Hudood laws have been interpreted. Even though most Islamic countries (through the process of ijtihad/collective consensus), have avoided enacting ‘Hudood Laws’ due to these laws’ incompatibility with changing times and circumstances, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (until 2007) were the only two countries having these laws as part of their respective legal cannons.
Nevertheless, the Hudood Ordinances (enacted by the Zia dictatorship in 1979 in Pakistan), were finally scrapped by the Musharraf regime in 2007.
This was one of the foremost acts by the state of Pakistan directly challenging the ‘Islamisation’ milieu left behind by Zia who had been a staunch ‘Maududist.’ [21]
Yet another example suggesting a gradual backlash against the Maududist politico-theological model was the recent unprecedented verdict by the Federal Shariat Court that declared drinking alcohol as a comparatively minor crime in Islam, and changed the punishment (of drunkenness) from 80 lashes (from a whip) to light strokes from a stick (made from a date tree leave). [22]
Alcohol had always remained a largely tolerated indulgence in Muslim societies across the centuries. Many scholars maintain that though the Qu’ran has ‘advised’ Muslims to stay away from wine (as opposed to forbidding it like it does pork, carrion meat, blood and idolatry), it does not prescribe any punishment for its usage. [23].
In Pakistan too, alcohol was freely sold and consumed until 1977, when first (under pressure from the Jamat Islami), the secular government of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto banned its sale, and then the reactionary dictatorship of Gen. Zia turned its consumption and sale (by Muslims) as a crime punishable under his controversial Hudood Ordinances.
Ironically, Zia’s ban on alcohol gave birth to a thriving bootlegging mafia- even though cities like Karachi have licensed liquor stores that have successfully checked the bootleggers’ influence in this city.
Zia’s ban on alcohol also triggered the widespread usage of addictive drugs like heroin.
For example, until 1979, Pakistan literally had just a single reported case of heroin addiction. But by 1985, it had the second largest population of heroin addicts! [24]
Though no Pakistani has been flogged for the offence of consuming and selling alcohol ever since 1981, the Shariat Court’s verdict must have come as a blow to the architects of Zia’s Islamisation process that was largely based on Maududi’s politico-religious thesis of an ‘Islamic state.’ A state whose blueprint, many Islamic scholars opposed to Maududi-ism maintain, does not exist in the Qu’ran and is only a generation of Maududi’s imagination.
Waiting for reason
There are a number of progressive Muslim scholars, especially in Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Algeria and Indonesia, who seem to be making deeper inroads in the 21st century Islamic reformist psyche. In Pakistan Javed Ahmed Ghamdi, the London-based Ziauddin Sardar and respected intellectual, Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy can be named.
In their work on Islam they have taken a scientific and a strictly academic approach, and are not immune to openly question the historicity of the Laws of Islam that have been handed down to us from the 8th century onwards; or a history and versions of the Shariah that started to appear almost two centuries after the demise of the Prophet.
To them the Muslims need to have an interpretative relationship with the Holy text. According to Sardar, for example, we have been relying on an age-old interpretation of the Qu’ran, one that is ice-capped in history. The context of this interpretation is of the 8th and 9th century Muslim societies. It needs to be radically updated through ijtihad.
Most current Islamic reformists are also concerned about the retrogressive tendency in some recent so-called modern Islamists to determine ‘scientific miracles in the Qu’ran.’
According to Dr. Hoodbhoy, by doing this they undermine all the hard work undertaken by early Islamic scientists and philosophers and that this practice in a way also suggests that present-day Muslims should stop getting their hands dirty in labs and universities, thinking they know everything. [25]; [26].
Respected Muslim scholars like Prof. Sardar, and monumental Algerian scholar, Muhamad Arkun, have been particularly harsh on French writer, Maurice Bucaille’s controversial book, The Bible, Qu’ran & Science and how this book (financed by the Saudi government), has given birth to a navel-gazing cottage industry of half-baked ‘experts’ distracting Muslims from learning real science. They say the Qu’ran encourages the acquiring of science, instead of creating a pseudoscience by reading wrongly into the meanings of certain surahs of the Holy Book. [27]
Turkish pseudo-scientist Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar) – who has recently gained fresh new following among Pakistani TV news anchors like Shahid Masood and so-called ‘security analysts’ and TV personalities like Zaid Hamid – too has come under the hammer of neo-Islamic rationalists and secularists alike.
The rationalists have accused Yahya of encouraging Muslims to shun secular sciences as if this act of shunning was ordained by God. [28]
Interestingly, unknown to most of his Pakistani followers, Yahya has been a constant receptor of police arrests for various drug and sex related scandals. [29].
Many critics of this trend have described such men as ‘Islamic quacks’ who are discouraging a rational and scientific mindset in present-day Muslims.
Today’s reformists also insist that there never was just one correct way to be a Muslim. As Sardar suggests, the propagation by any group of the single correct way is a totalitarian act. It will eschew plurality, democracy and tolerance, leading the ummah towards a totalitarian situation.
That’s why to modern Islamic scholars like Muhammad Arkun, it is of vital importance that Islamic history and law be critiqued and thoroughly explored in the light of reason and current times. [30]; [31].
According to Arkun, it is only then that reason in Islam can be liberated from man-made dogmatic constructs – constructs that have played the foremost role in derailing Islam from its early philosophical and rational path, landing its fate in the clutches of biased power politics and, eventually, in the gun barrels of the fascistic and irrational mutations of the faith (such as the Taleban and Al-Qaeda).
_____________________________
References
[1] The Forgotten Swamp – Navigating Political Islam: Guilain Denoeux
(http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol9/denoeux.pdf)
[2] Islam & Modernity: Fazalur Rahman Malik
(http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=FJcyIeHeeZwC&dq=Islam+%26+Modernity+fazlur+rahman&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=gelbRTMzKz&sig=SnwIHjyOPXOJ9Z2CVK9E5cXQ-CU&hl=en&ei=-aksSoyeIpeIkQW8yqjoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1)
[3] Encyclopedia of the Middle-East: (Entry)
(http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/abul-ala-maududi.htm)
[4] Revisiting Fazalur Rahman’s Ordeal: (Non-Skeptical Essays)
(http://hangingodes.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/revisiting-fazlur-rahmans-ordeal/).
[5] Islamic Extremism in Pakistan: Khaled Ahmed
(http://www.southasianmedia.net/Magazine/Journal/islamicextremism_pakistan.htm)
[6] Hanafi Madhub: Shaikh Siddiqui
(http://islamawareness.net/Madhab/Hanafi/hanafi_intro.html)
[7] Berelvi Islam: (Entry)
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-barelvi.htm)
(http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/sufi.html?200622)
[8] Maududi & Islamic Revivalism (Pages : 122-125) : Syd Vali Reza Nasr
(http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=I07ykFUoKTUC&dq=Mawdudi+and+the+making+of+Islamic+revivalism&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=Kb4sSvvuFYrm6gO7-rSDCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5)
[9] The Sufi Movement & Pakistan : (Entry)
(http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/sufi.html?200622)
[10] Pakistan’s Pluralist Traditions: Lisa Curtis
(http://www.heritage.org/research/asiaandthepacific/bg2268.cfm)
[11] Syed Abul Ala Maududi : Prof. Ziauddin Sardar
(http://www.newstatesman.com/200307140017)
[12] Tajeed O Aya-e-Deen: Abul Ala Maududi
(http://www.scribd.com/doc/6800776/Rasayl-Wa-Masayl-4)
[13] How Islam sees itself: Warren Larson
(http://www.ciu.edu/library/document/HOW_ISLAM_SEES_ITSELF.pdf)
[14] Radical Islam’s Missing Link: John Shaffer
(http://www.pwhce.org/maududi.html)
[15] Munir Report on 1953 Riots: Javaid Aslam.
(http://www.civilservice.org.pk/DMGArticles/65_MunirRptRelevance.pdf)
[16] The Vanguard of the Islamic Revolution (Pages: : Syed Vali Reza
(http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft9j49p32d&chunk.id=ch3&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ch3&brand=eschol;query=IJT#1)
[17] Towards a Fundamentalist State: Bjarne Skov
(http://folk.uio.no/bjarnes/urdu/Skov-Zia-ul-haq-04052005.pdf)
[18] Split on the Taliban: Dr. Hassan Askari (Daily Times)
(http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C05%5C24%5Cstory_24-5-2009_pg3_2)
[19] Rethinking Islam: Prof. Ziauddin Sardar
(http://www.islamfortoday.com/sardar01.htm)
[20] FAQ about stoning: (Entry)
(http://stop-stoning.org/node/9)
[21] Musharraf Signs Bill: (Dawn).
(http://www.dawn.com/2006/12/02/top7.htm)
[22] A Good Decision: (Daily Times Editorial)
(http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009/05/30/story_30-5-2009_pg3_1)
[23] Islam, Its Laws & Society (Page:38): Jamila Hussain
(http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=_IdBJ0m53n8C&dq=Islam+its+law+and+society+By+Jamila+Hussain&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=Bc1FtPN8gM&sig=euE1E3Xmge43wa586b08dKMrQl0&hl=en&ei=7_AsSuzMLKbm6gOG8PGBCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1).
[24] Heroin, Taliban & Pakistan: B. Raman
(http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers3%5Cpaper288.html)
[25] Science and Islamic Philosophy: Ziauddin Sardar
(http://www.cgcu.net/imase/islam_science_philosophy.htm)
[26] A Review of Pervez Hoodbhoy’s Islam & Science: Dr. Ahmed Shafaar
(http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/hoodbhoy/book_review_islam_science.htm)
[27] Weird Science: Ziauddin Sardar
(http://bearsite.info/Articles/Science/Weird%20science.pdf)
[28] Harun Yahya & Islamic Creationism: Francois Tremblay
(http://www2.truman.edu/~edis/writings/articles/hyahya.html)
[29] Police cracks down on obscure sect: (Turkish Hurriyat)
(http://web.archive.org/web/20010217142739/www.turkeyupdate.com/adnan.htm)
[30] Islam-To Subvert or Reform: Muhammad Arkun
(http://www.libertybooks.com/books/current-affairs-politics/islam-to-reform-or-to-subvert.html).
[31] Philosophers of Arab: (Entry)
(http://www.arabphilosophers.com/English/philosophers/contemporary/contemporary-names/Muhammad_Arakoun/English_Article_Arakoun/English_Article_Arakoun.htm).
99 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
DAWN.COM- ‘Black Day’ observed to mark Nov 3 emergency November 3, 2009
- MQM hails govt decision on NRO November 3, 2009
- Most Pakistanis back war against militants: poll November 3, 2009
- Forty suspects arrested in Rawalpindi November 3, 2009
- Sararogha secured; 21 militants killed November 3, 2009
- We are committed to the Charter of Democracy: Gilani November 3, 2009
- Waziristan war zone conditions worry aid workers November 2, 2009
- PML-Q leadership asks MPs to vote against NRO November 2, 2009
- Proof of India’s involvement in militancy found November 2, 2009
- Altaf’s ‘sacrifice’ plea to Zardari November 2, 2009
October 12th, 2009 at 13:46
critics should be made with the aim of beneficiary.we Muslims are already facing so much hatred from outer world,need of hour is to collect good things out of scholars literature and follow quran and hadith to full and focus on unity of Islamic Millet.ponder upon pl z
June 19th, 2009 at 15:48
It is indeed a very relevant and important article and has started to generate a lot of debate and curiosity.Thanks to NFP for bringing the scholarly touch to blogosphere.
June 18th, 2009 at 11:17
I feel the faith was full of rules, in politics there were none. politics was meant to protect and achieve power. faith was meant to create beleivers. how will they go together! thats the design defect of political islam.
June 18th, 2009 at 11:11
a relevant piece of article in todays context. hats off to writer. hope this will generate intellectual discussions among masses in pakistan and india.
i am an indian and hindu. and i have very little scriptural knowledge about ISLAM. i am a researcher in a leading university in india and fortunately my PhD superviser is a professor (lady ) who follows islam. i never had an instance in my interaction of more than 10 years with her that our different religious denominations conflict in analysing any context.
what i feel that intelligentia class no more take the scriptural words as final, but the not so educated common man takes it, he doesnot have properly developed power of objective assessment.
so its your secular education which helps
we in india and pakistan need to provide high quality education to our masses and develop scientific temper…..that can only be the panacea for ills plaguing our societies.
June 18th, 2009 at 9:36
Excellent article. Clear, upfront and above all, objective – a lot better than the rants we usually get on so many sites.
Your knowledge of the subject of Political Islam is sound and I totally agree with your thesis that it is Political Islam that holds the roots of militant terrorism in Pakistan and the kind of reactions Pakistanis are faced with in society, with conspiracy theorists and what not.
This is an important work you have come up with and very timely.
Thanks.
June 17th, 2009 at 16:42
I am an Indian Hindu. This article and the open debate through the comments is very educative and reflects very well on Pakistani community.
I do not have much knowledge of Islam but I feel Religion is a personal matter and one should interpret centuries old religious text in modern context.
The educated Pakistanis have a big role to play in guiding Pakistani masses to focus their efforts on improving their economic condition and modern education, instead of extremism.
I wish you all well.
June 16th, 2009 at 21:56
In the Middle Ages, European monks furiously debated amongst themselves as to how many angels could fit on the head of a pin.
Islam, in my view, is undergoing a similar pointless debate to determine ‘true Islam’. Meanwhile, Muslim countries continue to lag behind the rest of the world in almost every measure of human rights, scientific achievement, economic vitality, and standard of living.
While the rest of the world is finding cures for cancer and planning missions to Mars, we are debating the lagality of stoning women to death. At some point we need to realize that ancient Arab tribal customs (like women’s veils, stoning and lashes) suited to the deserts of 7th century Arabia have no place in a modern world. We need to distinguish between the timeless teachings of the Quran and the anachronistic 7th century Arabian tribal customs.
In Pakistan, we will never climb out of our 62 year old morass until we realize that religion should be a private matter, to be practised in one’s home. Political Islam is a recipe for disaster in a modern multicultural society. We already have simmering ethnic conflicts within Pakistan. The last thing we need is to create more divides based on who is and is not a ‘true’ Muslim. Not to mention the Christians, Parsis, Hindus and other non-Muslim Pakistanis who are made to feel like outcasts in their own country because of our eternal obsession with political Islam. We already persecuted, alienated and lost our Bengali brothers in East Pakistan. Will we never learn to live and let live?
On the matter of blaming foreign operatives for terrorism within Pakistan, that strawman argument is easily answered. Even if foriegn powers are orchestrating all this terrorism within Pakistan, why are they not able to do the same in other countries? Why not in North Korea or Iran? What is it about Pakistan that makes this evil plot work here only? The answer, of course, is that it is our Frankenstein Taliban that is coming back to bite us. In this matter we should learn from India. India hatched and initially supported the LTTE terrorists in Sri Lanka. But when the LTTE got ambitious and started supporting Tamil separatist movements within India itself, the Indians turned 100% against their Frankenstein LTTE. They made it clear to the LTTE that any subversive activities within India would NOT be tolerated.
Finally, as a footnote, I would respectfully suggest that you really need to ease up on the thesaurus. The haphazard peppering of overly obtuse words does not ring true with the otherwise mediocre quality of English prose in your articles. By using simpler language, your articles would be accessible to a wider audience.
June 16th, 2009 at 14:30
The creation of Pakistan was a miracle but with the passage of time the objective of a peace and progressive nation could not be achieved. We have lack of understanding about the real essence of Islam which teaches compasion, harmony and humanity. We are using Islam as a tool to make people frighten. We as Pakistanis have lost credibility in the eyes of other nations and have defamed the name of our religion. This is a BIG question mark as why our conciousness is not pricking us to wake and shun the differences and start thinking positively for the progress of our nation so that Pakistan could be able to restore its good image in the comity of nations. We need to ponder over this situation to save the future of our new generation.
June 16th, 2009 at 14:05
i will try to be objective,because that is the way i want everybody to think about such issues.overnight replacement of democracy, parliament and other systems of government by another system is difficult and not pragmatic.what is required is a preparing of a mindset.this is slow but can be both steady and sure.proper knowledge of a religion with the right translation, good religious education to promote thorough understanding of it, and equal opportunity to both genders to acquire religious knowledge is a must.they all must have a sound political representation, in the present form of government, only then will they be heard.they will not gain if their actions amount to mutineering.cd shops must not be blasted off their business.anybody belonging to the school of thought that opposes a cd shop, must not allow any of his folk to go to the cd shops.
senseless blasts, suiciding, disrupting civic life, destroying property and life, frightening “china” and other foreign nationals-will only create momentary sensation, it will not solve problems.
June 16th, 2009 at 1:20
In his article, NFP has unsuccessfully tried to link today’s happenings to Maulana Maududi’s teachings, totally oblivious of the fact that while doing so, he has tarnished the image of one of the most venerable Muslim thinkers of the 20th century, not only in Pakistan but all over the world.
Maulana Maududi’s major intellectual contributions include his first major book at the age of 23, “Al-Jihad-fil-Islam”, a masterly treatise on the Islamic law of war and peace & his monumental exegesis of the Quran in Urdu namely “Tafhim-ul-Quran”, a work he took thirty years to complete. Throughout his life, Maulana Maududi has written over 120 books and pamphlets and made over a 1000 speeches and press statements of which about 700 are available on record.
The influence of Maulana Maududi is not confined to those associated with the Jamaat-e-Islami. His influence transcends the boundaries of parties and organizations. Maulana Maududi is very much like a fatherly-figure for Muslims all over the world. As a scholar and writer, he is the most widely read Muslim writers of our time. His books have been translated into most of the major languages of the world and are now increasingly becoming available in many more of the Asian, African and European languages. Some even say that Maulana Maududi’s thoughts were the impetus for the Iranian revolution.
As far as the scholars NFP has mentioned in his article are concerned, I would like to say that before mentioning the sources, I would appreciate if he could verify the authenticity and their conformance to the religious beliefs of the masses.
And last but not the least, Maulana’s saying regarding Capitalism and Communism is like truth written on the wall.
“The time will come when Communism will be under stress for its survival in Moscow itself and capitalistic democracy will be in a desperate plight to defend itself in Washington and New York even. Materialistic atheism will find its position untenable even in the universities of London and Paris. Racialism and nationalism will find no devotees even among the Brahmins and the Germans”. (30th December, 1946)
June 15th, 2009 at 17:31
An eye opener for me all the way. Awsome and interesting are the words coming out of my mouth. It makes me wanna read more and more. Great piece of business.
June 14th, 2009 at 22:30
Furthermore the author’s division of thinkers into merely secularists and progressives is highly crude. Muslim thinker in my view are perhaps divided into more complex division depending on which aspect of their theoretical frameworks of thought you analyse.
To maintain a homogeneous category is counter-productive. I would say instead of whole sale labels on thought and philosophy we should adopt tendencies in different areas of thought such as fiqh, theology, ethical philosophy and so on.
Regardless of the shortcomings of the article, more voices such as these are needed for some refreshing debate in the midst of chaos and madness. So in this account the article was a pleasure to read.
June 14th, 2009 at 22:26
As a British Pakistani Muslim, the new traditions and directions of Islamic thought are of pertinent interest to me, however the author I feel is too simplistic in his anaylsis of modern Islamic Thought.
May I also suggest that in order to grasp the modern compleixites of the new and growing Islamic traditions and discourse to consult the writings of:
Tariq Ramadan
AbdolKarim Soroush
Mohammad Hashim Kamali
Khaled Abou El Fadl
Seyyed Nasr Hossein
Dr. Taha Jabir Al Alalwani
Dr. Jasser Auda
Abdullah An Naim
Fetullah Gulen
Yusuf Al Qaradawi
Mohsen Kadivar
Fazlur Rahman (as the author rightly mentions)
I feel Muslims in the Muslim majority countries need to give attention to the new wave of Muslim thinkers in the West.
Can I also suggest for future articles that more analysis be given to all voices of new Islamic directions in the contemporary discourse.
June 14th, 2009 at 20:01
samiha says:
“I believe that among all these Muslim scholars, Mr Yahya is very different. He is one of a kind!”
He is one of kind all right! C’mon this is the man who has the audacity to deny the Holocaust and in the next sentence says “I have nothing against the Jews”. What is this obsession of sorts with the Muslims of denying a simple closure for the Jew of a most horrific episode of brutality inflicted on people based on faith? I had the honor of visiting Dachau during a recent visit to Munich and it was the single most sobering experience not to mention one that send a chill down the spine.
June 13th, 2009 at 18:29
Roxy_88 says: “darwinism is the key of every bloody savages and ideologies”
—–
Oh, really? Was Timur “the Sword of Darwin”?
Tsk, tsk.
June 12th, 2009 at 18:10
I believe that among all these Muslim scholars, Mr Yahya is very different. I have never seen anyone that sincere, who speaks that clearly,who comments scientific facts that logically and who really counts on scientific findings.If he says something I certainly see it’s proof in the Qur’an,supported by the scientific proofs.It’s amazing. I visit his website every day and watch his interviews on harunyahya.tv in english.I’ve been told by some Turkish collegues that Turkish people really love him..He is one of a kind!
June 12th, 2009 at 15:52
Paracha must be appreciated that he brings a critical analysis on a very famous scholor of our history- Abul Ala Maudodi. Altogether I dont agree with the columnist, specifically when he got mix the political situations with ideological discussions.
Bieng an ex Jamiat member for 6 years, I received a number of opportunities to learn Maulana Maudodi’s ideas through study circles, literature, and ijtamaat. I found him true Pakistani, who presented balanced view of Islam, always argued positively to his opponents (both leftist & rightists).
June 12th, 2009 at 15:36
Miranda writes:
“He has been the direct target of masons, freemasons and other darwinist atheist groups for over 30 years”
Oh, please, enough of this freemasons out to get innocent Muslims thing! Harun Bhai has a history of arrests and scandels.
June 12th, 2009 at 15:28
I would like to state that, the references you have used about Harun Yahya and his works are totally biased and wrong. I’m a molecular biologist in Turkey and we generally follow his scientific works in Turkey. I’m sorry but, someone really deceived you about the truth. Harun Yahya initiates (especially teenagers) scientific researches and writes books about universe and nature. He has written more than 300 books. When it comes to the accuses, his innocence has been proven a while ago.. I strongly recommend you to read his life and all details from his website, http://www.harunyahya.com
June 12th, 2009 at 15:18
Harun Yahya is the biggest writer and thinker of our time.
June 12th, 2009 at 15:18
Harun Yahya’s key topic has been to prove that Darwin’s theory of evolution is seriously flawed.
Mr. Oktar stated that: ”There is no materialism without Darwinism, and no communism, fascism, savage capitalism or terror without materialism. But Muslims are in general unable to see that. They see that they are up against a terrible scourge, but they do not look into the cause behind it. The fact is that Muslims have been attacked from behind, but they can only see straight in front of them. What lies behind these events? What lies behind such strife and evil? They do not look to see that. Why do people attack religious commandments, Islam? They do not investigate that. They just say “It stems from irreligiousness, from lack of faith” and leave it at that. But they do not ask why those people have turned out like this. When one looks, one is confronted by just one thing – the superstitious religion of Darwinism. So long as the false religion survives they remain loyal to it. The invalidity of that religion must first be proved. What I am doing is to explain to people that this terrible corruption, this terrible lie, is all a deliberate ruse.”
so he pointed that darwinism is the key of every bloody savages and ideologies. what should we do now, learn more about darwinism and teach people the true blief, lies of darwinism.
thanks mr. oktar
June 12th, 2009 at 15:03
Harun Yahya (Adnan OKTAR) was cleared of all charges against him for several times.All court files are shared on BAV’s web site. He has been the direct target of masons, freemasons and other darwinist atheist groups for over 30 years, because of his sincere and courageous fight agains Darwinism and materialism, which brought upon the world bloody social ideologies of fascism,communism and like. He is a true believer and a sincere Muslim for all I see. One should read his books and articles for first hand information.
June 12th, 2009 at 14:57
“Objecting to the references to Dr Hoodhboy is obviously a ploy to distract from the main argument of the paper.”
Bulls-eye!! Well put, sir.
These guys will do anything to dodge a constructive debate that might expose what they hold dear.
June 12th, 2009 at 14:41
Overall, Nadeem Paracha’s article does well to highlight that the Pakistani establishment has consistently failed to represent the mainstream Muslim masses since independence.
However, he then errs by mentioning ‘Muslim Scholars’ who do not represent the majority population.
Attention should also be drawn to the fact, that the Pakistan movement was founded by middle class Indian Muslims, who were of a secular, liberal and democratic mind. When the idea started coming to fruition, all sorts of opportunists joined the bandwagon including the landed elite and the religious extremists.
The Barelvi influenced masses, were held in contempt by atheistic liberals and Muslim fascists alike, so that Jamaat Islami, Deobandis and Wahhabis, all joined hands to systematically exclude them from the state machinery.
Furthermore, Nadeem Paracha, should not absolve outside interferences by dismissing them as ’secret societies’ and ‘conspiracy theories’. Read Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam (American Empire Project): Robert Dreyfuss, and one will appreciate the complexities.
Thankfully, President Obama has acknowledged the role of proxy Muslim Governments in the geopolitics of the cold war. Moreover, he specifically mentioned the role of the US in the downfall of the democratically elected Mossadeq government in Iran in 1956.
More such admissions need to be made so that an atmosphere of truth and reconciliation prevails.
There needs to be a campaign both in Pakistan and the Muslim world at large, for hearts and minds, that establishes ‘Muslims for Secular Liberal Democracy.
June 12th, 2009 at 14:24
Too bad most supporters of liberalism are bothered about trivial things like whether alcohol is halal or not, and those of extremists are busy engaging in violence.
June 12th, 2009 at 14:08
Outside view:
Islam is going thru a period akin to dark ages in europe. The renaisance happened due to opening up to outside influence.
Same would need to happen here. Solution is not possible in closed set of ‘Islam’. It needs to broaden to bring entire humanity as inside ‘AS IS’.
A good begining would be to start by embracing Dr. Abdus Salem, Taxila, Mohen-jo-daro, Gandhar, Bamiyan budhdha.
June 12th, 2009 at 14:05
Very good article serving its purpose of trying to confuse people.
June 12th, 2009 at 13:44
Dr Piracha’s paper is a welcome contribution to the study of society in the Indian sub-continent. I agree entirely with his analysis and conclusion. The paper should be translated in Urdu and published widely for the masses.
Incidentally, objecting to the references to Dr Hoodhboy is obviously a ploy to distract from the main argument of the paper.
June 12th, 2009 at 13:31
Dear All
Is any of us practicing Islam and call ourselves competent to comment on Islam, which means peace and harmoney. Islam is a straight path that leads to one’s rise to highest pinnacles of spirituality. The spirit is immortal and shall always recall its bodily actions in small span of life, be ashamed of his sins, be happy for good action done for the pleasure of his Creator and live in eternal bliss. Can this be achieved by entering in controversies and not acting as commanded?
June 12th, 2009 at 13:27
Mr Paracha, Congrat. on this rational work . I have great respect for Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy but he is not a religious scholar He is a professor of Physics and a liberal critic.
June 12th, 2009 at 12:43
According to one of the references [26], Pervaz Hoodhboy book “Islam and Science: Religious Orthodoxy and Battle for Rationality” contain a lot of inaccuracies regarding Islam and history. The references define him as another extremist, but on other side. One of the commenter already noted about this references.
Also NFP point out according to some of the scholar, Quran has “only advised us to stay away from wine” as opposed to forbidding it. I looked at references; it does not seemed t have contained such thing. I wonder if someone or NFP could point to the name of scholar
June 12th, 2009 at 11:49
Vast economic disparity and feudal system keeping the vast masses in permanent downtrodden, where power and wealth is concentrated in the hands of few elite, where rule of law does not exists but muscle power exists- all these factors brew a volcano among the masses which eventually erupts. This is the situation of whole South Asia.
In India and Nepal leftist movements and caste based politics provide some outlet for the oppressed class. However in Pakistan state fed the opium of religion to keep mass of population down to serve self interest.
More than intellectuals, the state fighting foriegn wars for past decades is responsible for multiplying Maudidi’s children.
June 12th, 2009 at 11:44
Interpretation of Islam in different Schools of thought or sects have been varying for a long, we can say from their origin. It can confuse some but in the other way it would be providing a source for learing more about Islam. We don’t assume these minor differences as a hardle between sects; it is a beauty of the religion that it has so many beautiful faces.
But! If we (followers) started to compare with each other; we do so! than it could shape an ugly face; which one is presenting “Taliban”! Unfortunately we don’t have a common school of thought to represent the real and most beautiful version of Islam! Any religion in the planet is not good or bad, the best practice its followers reflect it in a true sense! Here we should not indulge in the issue like what is acceptable or not acceptable, we sould respect each others practices and beliefs.
School of thought or a Scholar can educate the Ummah by practicing what he is saying. We should try to be a practical Muslim . Any way, Mr. Paracha has been doing in right direction to educate people and giving a chance to comment on the article. Good work Sir!
June 12th, 2009 at 11:35
AOA;
Well researched article positing an obvious need of the hour, a modern interpretation of the Holy Quran.The Holy Quran is meant for all the ages; from the time of ignorance to the contemporary scientific age. If you want to acquire some real and meaningful interpretation of Islam and Holy Quran, kindly do read unprejudicly the one presented by Jammat e Ahmadiya.
June 12th, 2009 at 11:33
Your respected scholar Hoodbhoy is against Pakistan’s nuclear power. His beliefs are in conflict with those of majority people.
June 12th, 2009 at 11:06
Dear brother,
Wonderful homework! you are a genius. We need like this positive thinking and interpretations. Very good and keep it up!
June 12th, 2009 at 10:36
Mr. Sadr Khan says: “Was the situation of Muslims any better before or will it become any better if we follow Ghamdi and Hoodbhoy? How and how close will it be to true Islam?”
While Mr. javed Akhtar asks: “What is real Islam? You claim it to be what is propogated by Hoodbhoy, Ghamdi, Zia Sardar and others. If so, why they hardly have any public following.”
First of all, yes what on Earth is “true Islam?” (That’s for Sadr). What you may consider to be true Islam, I may disagree and call it something else.
Secondly, Mr. Akthar, none of the intellectuals mentioned (Ghamdi, Sardar, Hoodhoy), have ever claimed to propagate “true Islam.” And as is apparent by Paracha’s many writings on the subject, neither does he ever propose any version of Islam he deems “true.”
Journos and writers like Paracha, Hoodbhoy, Sardar, Najam Sethi, Ayaz Amir, Fasi Zaka and Hussan Nisar – Pakistani media men who’ve been the most critical of social, political and media-related extremism – all they’ve been doing is appealing for reason and a rationalist approach in matters of faith. None of them have ever claimed to be following or leading a life based on “true Islam.”
As for Sardar and Hoodbhoy not having mass public following, I think this proves their rational credentials, doesn’t it?
They don’t shout, sweat, concoct fantastical conspiracy theories and distort Pakistan and Islam’s history for cheap popularity.
So what thing to say, Akhtar. It’s not a numbers contest.
June 12th, 2009 at 10:31
In my opinion Maududi was an ‘Islamo-fascist’ who took the religion out of Islam and replaced it with God’s dictatorship — making HIMSELF the chief apparatchik of the God’s ‘will’– projecting a tolerant, accommodating, consensus seeking democratic religion – into a spiritually sterile politically servile ideologically infantile — militant version — of the gentle real thing.
June 12th, 2009 at 10:23
Does it matter who wins a debating point in this theological debate? Is this relevant to Pakistan, to a country–poor, backward, with sub-standard education in sub-standard schools; no science and women reduced to obedience like animals. All this in a post-industrial, post-Renissance and post-Reformation World. Wouldn’t that be better to worry less about the sanctity of Islam and more about the condition of Pakistan?
June 12th, 2009 at 10:00
I wonder why people are calling it a great article. The article only highlights the lack of depth and study on part of the author. The author has used very weak sources e.g. blogs and websites (anybody can put up a blog and website these days) and done a poor analysis of maudoodi’s thoughts and his following. I can only laugh at his idea of calling Dr. Hoodbhoy a religious reformist. The author needs to do a lot of study of Mr. Maudoodi and other religious texts before issuing his englightened fatwas. Additionally the author should use serious academic references rather than unauthentic internet posts and blogs before beginning to form thoughts on serious issues. Poor article and poor analysis!
June 12th, 2009 at 9:40
I don’t agree that the current situation in Pakistan is the result of Maududism. It is true that unlike Maududi the insurgents waging atrocities believe that the necessity to struggle against injustices is an obligation that Muslims cannot ignore. That is so whether injustice is manifest through the actions of unbelievers who occupy portions of the Islamic homeland or through rulers who pretend to be good Muslims. For most of these terrorist groups, violence and terrorism become unavoidable operations when the given political, economical, and social conditions have been imposed by a foreign oppressive power or by their local agents. When they feel constrained by impotence, they spur to shatter the shell of powerlessness for the sake of liberty. Those who recognize the value of liberty achieved by the bands of irregulars in the French and American Revolutions cannot miss the reflection of this view point, how in extreme circumstances, people find themselves justified to rise up against an oppressive or illegitimate authority imposed upon them by any method or technique available to them. The procedural requirements for jihad—for example, that it be conducted only at the behest of an established political or religious authority—cannot be applied in the traditional manner. According to their belief, implanted by the political theology of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, even the established authority’s right to conduct war comes from Allah which in extreme situation He assigns this right to ordinary Muslims.
The teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, combined with other factors such as globalization, unemployment, and the United States’ military presence in Muslim World, further disseminated hatred against the West. Today, this hatred is not only directed against the West, but also in all those Muslim states where the ruling junta is friendly and faithful to the West. It is interesting to note that the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, supported by the British and French, had helped the Saudis to dismantle the Ottoman Empire and create a new political entity. Same strategy of joining hands with the protagonists of Abd al-Wahhab’s radical Islam was applied once more by the Western powers to defeat communism and disintegrate the Soviet Union.
The roots of terrorism in Islam have been engrained by the Wahhabi theology, a form of Islam that hates ostentatious spirituality, which emerged less than two centuries ago and is intolerant. Today we see that all Taliban suicide bombers belong to Wahhabi cult. In the year 1866 in the sub-continent of India, under British rule, Darul Uloom Deoband was founded to promote the pristine form of Islam professed by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Today thousands of Deobandi madrasahs are scattered in the regions of Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. In the Darul Uloom Haqaniya Akora Khattak near Peshawar in Pakistan, which promotes a Deobandi school of thought, Mullah Muhammad Omar and several other leaders of the Taliban were educated and coupled with the concept of jihad. Encouraged by the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan and the collapse of Communism and Marxist ideology, these mujahideen were seduced by the charisma of invincibility, and they started dreaming of an Islamic Utopia in the region. For them mere political gain was not the end of jihad, but was something yet to be fulfilled. They failed to develop the coherent ideology of jihad because they lacked the knowledge of political Islam (not even the one propounded by Maududi) and the basis of political unity emanating from the concept of jihad introduced by the Prophet of Islam.
Today all Pakistanis are confronted with the intriguing question of whether the Western powers have supported the radical Islam of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, first in bringing the downfall of the Ottoman Empire, and second, in fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, is again using the same strategy for a greater purpose in Pakistan. Pakistanis are in a state of confusion, whether their war against the Talibans is in their interest or in the best interest of the Western Powers. If we sift the pages of history Wahhabism has always played a role that has benefitted the West. I would not assign Maududism a clear cut role as defined by Mr. Piracha in creating current situation except that Gen. Zia was Maududi’s follower and that also for his own benefit.
June 12th, 2009 at 9:35
Clearly researched substantially but religion is not science.
Religion is not open to questioning, critical reasoning, factual analysis and so on.
As long as we call ourselves “Islamic” and think that the road to enlightenment, awareness, education and so on will come via “Islam” – if only we selectively read some books and authors and not others – we are simply deluding ourselves.
Religion is religion and science is science and NEVER the twain shall meet.
June 12th, 2009 at 9:17
It is hard to know where to even begin a criticism of this article, so misinformed is NFP on this subject. The people that he quotes as scholars- their mostly aberrant and occasionally fatuous interpretations of Islam are best ignored. Mr Maududi he misrepresents entirely, painting him as a confused pluralist rather then the single-minded reformist he was.
June 12th, 2009 at 8:36
I feel this is an excellent scholarly article that proposes that Maududi was/is the main reason behind troubles that Pakistan is facing today. I live in the US for the last 36 years and I am not completely familiar with current and near past situation in Pakistan but I have read Maududi extensively. The reason that people in Pakistan have great degree of tolerance and understanding of different Madhubs or sects is mainly due to Maududi. He was a great scholar and had a deep understanding of Islam. He also had a gift of articulating the true Islam. Of course, he was a man and like all human beings he was not beyond mistakes. But, blaming the religious problems on Maududi is, I believe, unfair and based on faulty logic and misplaced interpretations. Where will we be without the great scholarship of Maududi today? I believe the main reasons of trouble Pakistan is facing are due to corruption that is rampant at all levels of society. In addition, Wahabism has poisoned the Muslim minds! This narrow interpretation of Islam and open hatred towards other Madhabs that are not “Salafi” is the reason that we are in the midst of civil war.
June 12th, 2009 at 7:45
Ref: Nadeem F Paracha’s article on Maududi’s children
It is to note that much has been said in press about the religious extremism in Pakistan and the Muslim world at large. Muslims are facing a dilemma of how to remain true Muslims and cope with the modern sensibilities simultaneously. A religious overhauling is suggested time and again by the scholarly mind of the persons born in this religion. Their concern is evident because they are born in it and have to have something to lift their face in such testing times as that of ours.
The only remedy for it is to let the people decide for themselves as to what is right and what is wrong as far as the religious requirements are concerned. Religion belongs to our hearts and souls more than it belongs to our reasoning minds.
As long as the coercion of any kind is allowed to play with the sincere hearts and souls of the people, the question of coming close to any viable solution does not arise.
What religion has contributed to the making of humanity is the moral and responsible social sense that is essential to every society and is to be abided by every individual living in it. This sense has already been inculcated in each sensible person of the world and being inculcated naturally/socially in the newborns by the parents and teachers throughout the world without even making much mention of it.
To drag religion in petty things like law and regulations is to undermine the very sanctity of the lofty ideal named religion.
Thanks for reading.
June 12th, 2009 at 7:16
Makes a lot of sense and I am happy you wrote it for me to share. U.S.A.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:59
Great piece of work here Nadeem. congratulations to uncover the truth boldly. I just want to mention that these are not just extremists who used Modoodi Ideology to justify their offensive tactics of imposing “their” Islam onto others. There is huge list of Western Orientalists & Christian Scholars who used Excerpts of Modoodi’s Books to portray Islam as an extremist religion which according to them and Modoodi was spread Only by means of sword and was imposed on others. I still remember during Zia regime Govt; Officially promoted Modoodi ideology and Moddodi literature in our society and more importantly in Army. Simply because it served the purpose of preparing those twisted minds who were going to be used against “atheists”. One of the greatest book ever written against this Modoodi Ideology, Murder In The Name Of Allah, can be read online here
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/mna/foreword.html
June 12th, 2009 at 5:57
Layman has offered the classic circular logic argument used by traditionalists anytime a Muslim with a non-mullah background critiques traditional beliefs.
What are his “Islamic credentials” you ask? Who said he needed any?
Let me guess, unless he is associated with one of the traditional Islamic schools of thought you will argue that he lacks the required “credentials”. In other words unless one is a traditionalist you cannot critique traditional belief.
Did it occur to you that this is precisely why intellectual thought has died in Islam?
June 12th, 2009 at 5:55
My only critique of the article is that it reduces the stature of a religious scholar of the caliber of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi to that of Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy who is a physcist par excellence but comes across as having little to no knowledge of Islam.
By the way, Ghamidi sahib remained associated with Maudoodi sahib for quite a long period of time before voicing his differences. In a recent TV program, he paid tribute to Maudoodi sahib:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2936893381700709564&ei=s5kxSrumNpLIqALv-NiVAg&q=ghamidi
June 12th, 2009 at 5:03
There were some good points in this post (I especially liked the Harun Yahya one), but there were also some inconsistencies.
“It is of vital importance that Islamic history and law be critiqued and thoroughly explored in the light of reason and current times”.
Well that is exactly what Mawdudi did. In fact the Hanafi and Barelvi critics of Mawdudi, as mentioned by NFP, actually criticized Mawdudi because he was too active in his interpretation of the Quran and Islamic history.
I do not agree that the problems Pakistan is facing today are due to Political Islam alone. True Mawdudi played a role against the Ahmedis, but I feel that Mawdudi and the Jamaat Islami are maligned more than is fair to them. We should not blame the Jamaat, a medium-sized political party that has never won more than 10% of NA’s seats, for Zia’s faults, even if they were allies. It was primarily Zia who got a lot of things wrong. But, and I disagree with NFP here too, Zia’s greatest mistake was not the Islamization of Pakistan, rather it was his role in the Afghan War. The War created immense problems for Pakistan. It led to the creation of militias which bred on Jihadist ideology, the strengthening of the intelligence agencies, and the availability of drugs and weapons in our cities. These are the root problems Pakistan faces today.
Also I think that NFP’s criticism of Zia on the alcohol issue is unfair. “Zia’s ban on alcohol also triggered the widespread usage of addictive drugs like heroin.” Well this is not true. The Afghan War and the subsequent opening of the Pakistan-Afghan border led to an increase in drug addiction, not Zia’s ban on alcohol. I think that not only is the ban justified, it is one of the few things that are ‘right’ with Pakistan. Just visit any Western city on a Friday night and people would understand what I mean.
June 12th, 2009 at 4:59
Dear NFP,
Your group of self proclaimed literates suffer from a very toxic combination of Tunnel vision and Myopia.
Maududi was a scholar par excellence. He was the editor of the Newspaper ‘Taj’ at the age of 17 and ‘The Muslim’ at the age of 18. He wrote over 120 books, some of these have been translated in over 18 languages. It took him 30 years to write Tafhim Al-Quran (Meaning of the Quran). The book is a masterpiece by any standard.
His book ‘Towards understanding Islam’ is probably the most widely read book on religion in the world today and has been translated in over 32 languages.
Also please get your facts right. Maududi was imprisoned in 1953 and Not in 1974. The poor fellow was suffering from kidney failure in 1974.
Best,
Zain I. Syed
June 12th, 2009 at 4:39
Amazing piece of information needs to be widely publicized in this hour of need when lots of ignorant muslims are being exploited in many countries world over.
June 12th, 2009 at 4:16
Too much religious leads extremism, what we are facing now. Lack of education and proper training leads misconcepts and mis utilization of means. We need to educate our masses with international literature as to live along with. Global village image require to accept all and bear patience. Dont put our massess in groups and sectarians, it will destroy. Forward one Nation image first. Call PAKISTAN FIRST. It is need of the time.
June 12th, 2009 at 3:26
I agree with BGOOD, the english of this blog and many other blogs on Dawn is too tough. Please try some simple and easy style.
June 12th, 2009 at 3:20
The hunt for the “true Islam” is a hunt for the holy-grail. It must be conducted, in one’s heart, not at the political stage, where it turns into circus.
How can an “ism” not be political? If Islam is considered as not just a religion but a way of life, then it is an “ism”. The rules then needs to be properly and clearly specified, which is not easy, as such specifications invariably lead to extrapolations due to a limited set of base specifications (in the original written version or spoken version). Any new aspect of life that was not covered in the original base context requires extrapolations – thereby needing interpretations that can lead to conflicting camps.
If Islam is not an “ism”, and restricted to an individual’s life (and not across a whole society), then there are less opportunities for conflict, and conflicts if any are likely to be within a human heart / mind.
Good beginning by NFP.
June 12th, 2009 at 2:43
Good article no doubt. I just could not understand why a leading daily newspaper as well as the people (mainly in pakistan) are so much bothered and get bogged down into the religious stuff. It seems religion and the mixing of religion and state is the root cause of the problem. Are muslims victim of political islam/islam? I do not know. I get confused. Too complicated.
Thanks.
Dr.D. M.
June 12th, 2009 at 1:43
i earlier commended u on what a great article. however, on closer examination, you have regarded dr hoodbhoy as an islamic scholar whereas he is a professor of (nuclear) physics i believe…
June 12th, 2009 at 1:40
If the Pakistan government does not forcefully and unequivocally decide upon a “true Islam” that is rationally connected with survival of the multicultural self-denominated republic, then the country will dissolve, one way or another, amid even worse violence. Fight fire not only with fire, but also by means of a penal code with sharp teeth — teeth that are used and feared.
June 12th, 2009 at 1:33
wow great work. you even have your sources quoted to make it harder for nay-sayers to discredit you.
keep it up…
June 12th, 2009 at 1:05
I would like to congratulate Mr. Paracha on a rather minor part of his article which he touched in passing. That is, the kind of addiction some of our TV anchors are providing to the public.
It has been bothering me for a long time the way these anchors do analysis and draw inference. I am happy that now they are being identified by their name.
Open media in any society is supposed to be a good thing, but in ours, it has become a mafia. These TV channels would sell anything that can attract audience and eventually bring profits.
May be NFP should do a full article on this topic sometime.
June 12th, 2009 at 0:37
Paracha’s idea for progressive Islam is where Law of God is expunged form it.
Islam is an inherently progressive religion. The only way a follower of Islam can claim to be progressive is to conform to it.
We learn Islam from Islamic scholars. Not form those who claim to expunge Law from it.
June 12th, 2009 at 0:28
Thank you for this wonderful Article. But i keep my previous stance, Pakistan must be a staunchly secular state if it wishes to survive through it’s current and future ordeals.
June 12th, 2009 at 0:22
Well researched article.
Please translate it into Urdu.
And have it read on the local TV and radio.
Religion is always a minor component of laws and state from practical standpoint.
No matter what religious leaders in any country of the world wish it to be.
June 12th, 2009 at 0:07
Another thing, mentioning Ghamdi and Hoodbhoy in one breadth is a great injustice to Ghamdi who is truly a great scholar of our time with extensive study of Quran, Hadith, Fiqh etc. You might disagree with him, but no one can doubt his knowledge and understanding about what he is concluding.
June 12th, 2009 at 0:03
Hoodbhoy is an Islamic Scholar ????? Nadeem you are so detached from reality. Mr. Hoodhbhoy might be a respectful secular thinker, but not an Islamic Scholar perse. Your problem is that you are looking at everything from your own tunnel vision. Anyway I respect your point of view while strongly disagreeing with most of the premises (and as a result conclusions).
June 11th, 2009 at 23:50
Paracha is an ex-Marxist, and a very staunch one he was at the Karachi University in the late 1980s, but in the last few years that he has been writing on the culture of Islamic extremism in Pakistan, it is a delight to notice that he has remained well informed, objective and at the same time as passionate as ever.
This article/Thesis is a gigantic effort that if taken disspaionately, can go a long way in kick starting an important debate on the subject.
June 11th, 2009 at 23:19
For a religion that revolutionized society and vehemently insists on ” there is no compulsion in religion” how can Maudoodi or his children be relevant anymore given today’s opportunities for human well being? My compliments on a well written article, but if we were to submit to the search of truth and a full critique of today’s Islam, can we possibly find even a fraction of relevance in the works of Maudoodi that benefits modern Islam? Being a source of confrontation, both ideological and political, Maudoodi is irrelevant to a modern Islam. Modern Islam is not about interpretation of dated jurisprudence or the insanity of brutal political opportunism. It must be about the beauty in a truly liberated human life, is it not? After all the religion’s very basis was to end the tyranny in the lives of the people of Makkah! It would a be a welcome effort for the author to go beyond the critique of faithful fascism to question and postulate the reasons for the absence of progressive Islam. An Islam that discovers consciously human freedom, enlightenmnet and empowerment, not for a select few but for all, muslims and non-muslims. That would be progress!
June 11th, 2009 at 23:16
Excellent Article! I had to use the dictionary several times and I beleive, there are easier and more appropriate replacement words that you could have used instead.
June 11th, 2009 at 23:11
But what of Moududi’s biological chidren? Did they stay with his movement or his philosophy? Did he affect his progeny’s morals or beliefs in any way? Or was his legacy only for others to adopt, distort or repudiate?
June 11th, 2009 at 22:18
Dear Nadim F. Paracha,
You have done a great job by exploring and diagnosing causes of indoctrination of extremism at the time when the country is in grip of handful violent Islamists and extremists. Undoubtedly, such handful extremist minority has always left no stone unturned to impose their obscurantist view on majority in the society.
I have found your research work meticulous and remarkable about indoctrination intellectually extremists in the country. At least, your thesis has made clear, intellectual background of the growing extremism, for those who have gone through it. But, it is extremely difficult that our intolerant religious mindsets could accept your laboured thesis based on cogent arguments, facts and credible references.
I extend my heartiest felicitation to your marvelous job you have done on intellectual grounds about extremism.
Regards
Your regular reader on Sunday Dawn
Elia Rehmatullah
Elia Rehmatullah
Quetta, Balochistan
June 11th, 2009 at 21:54
It was reading quite well until you note and then the clanger:
“For example, until 1979, Pakistan literally had just a single reported case of heroin addiction. But by 1985, it had the second largest population of heroin addicts! [24]”
This piece is neither opinion nor scholarly. However, it does have a ‘primer’ feel on the relevance and impact of literal-based interpretation and the politicization if Islam in Pakistan.
June 11th, 2009 at 21:34
Calling Dr. Hoodhbhoy an Islamic scholar is a bit of a stretch. Otherwise a great article.
June 11th, 2009 at 21:16
If your goal is to reach out to less than 1% of the population, may be you will achieve your goal, but if you like to convey your thoughts to majority of the people and make them understand the issues, than lay off from the language you are using, it will goes over the head of majority of the people, therefore, all your efforts are in vein.
Proper selection and use of word can take you much farther than trying to impress few.
Sincerely,
June 11th, 2009 at 21:11
Congratulations on writing such a great article, full of references to back your claim(s), a clear sign of erudition. I wish articles and books along modern lines were published in Urdu and other regional languages of Pakistan so that they can reach a wider audience.
To the readers, I would highly recommend Abdullah Saeed’s book: “Interpreting Quran toward a Contemporary Approach”, where the author argues for contextual understanding of Quran and practice of Quranic principles rather than going for rote memorizations and literal interpretations.
June 11th, 2009 at 19:46
Thank you for sharing this piece on a popular forum like Dawn. There is too much over-simplification in the discussion of political Islam’s evolution and its role in this country. Pakistanis need to be able to understand put these issues in context and discuss them in a rational manner, and this article helps towards that cause. Brava!
There is a major need for a rational, context based discussing of religion’s role in this country, and your articles are helping to fill this gap.
June 11th, 2009 at 19:31
Was Islam political durign the Prophet’s time and the time of the Khalifa’s and indeed after? If yes, are you suggesting that it should not be so now? If you are suggesting that yes it should be political but it should be similar to what prevailed before Maududi came on the scene. Was the situation of Muslims any better before or will it become any better if we follow Ghamdi and Hoodbhoy? How and how close will it be to true Islam?
June 11th, 2009 at 19:18
Your article fails to stand any test of logic. How can you claim something being wrong unless you provide an alternative and prove that only such alternative is the right course. What is real Islam? You claim it to be what is propogated by Hoodbhoy, Ghamdi, Zia Sardar and others. If so, why they hardly have any public following despite all the help they get from all secular forces and the people in power, and what guarantee that their thesis will not be discredited by the next generation. Explain why despite the governments being against Maududi and Hassanul Banna, their works continue to appeal the Muslim literate class? You truly need to investigate it!
June 11th, 2009 at 19:11
Idont agree with some of points but good article to read.
June 11th, 2009 at 19:05
Well researched and well written. Please continue to write more on this or similar subjects.
Can you get this translated in Urdu and publish it?
June 11th, 2009 at 18:55
Thank you for an impressive article the likes of which are few and far between. Just the references are a treasure for me to deepen my understanding.
You need to send it to the Atlantic Monthly or other similar publication. Ideally, with edits that allow the context to shift from a localized Pakistani view to a broader global view.
Reading some of the dissenting comments it seems that some of us are not able to differentiate between critique and criticism of ‘Maududism’. Other dissenting comments disparage your references, particularly Dr. Hoodbhoy on account of his formal qualification as a Physicist. I would argue that Dr. Noam Chomsky, a noted linguist from MIT, has commented on a wide variety of topics beyond linguistics and is widely considered a cross disciplinary intellectual. I would categorize Dr. Hoodbhoy in the same group.
Overall, the importance of a process for coming to a reasonable agreement on Islamic law has to be defined. This process should not include the use of the gun and suicide bombing, as elements of the discourse. It is critical for muslim societies to move this process from the streets to academia; from politically heated televised debates to a more sober analytical televised debate/commentary.
The need for a more tolerant approach both pragmatic and secular in its nature is becoming self-evident especially considering the level of violence we are witnessing. A muslim country like Pakistan, with a diverse sectarian muslim populace, is especially vulnerable when a highly polarizing set of edicts are accepted as law. The best path to a peaceful adherence to “true Islam”, where true is based on your personal belief, is possible only within a secular environment. The discourse of finding the “universally true Islam” can be setup at a venue other than the street where we know the not the biggest gun, but the best reasoned argument will win. If and when the intelligent discourse leads to a viable, shared consensus of an overwhelming majority of the populace, an Islamic theocracy can be envisioned. Until this consensus is reached we should consider the benefits of erring towards the secular as opposed to the uninformed theocratic society.
June 11th, 2009 at 18:54
Though I confess I cannot fully challenge NFP’s pieces such as this as I do not have the kind of knowledge he does, however, I do have a problem.
I’ve been reading his stuff on Islam and society in Pakistan and appreciate his work, but he seems a bit harsh on the Jamaat-e-Islami.
I have no qualms when he attacks taliban and media men who are sympathetic to the extremists, but his criticism of the Jamaat is not always welcoming.
Since he was a student leader of Peoples Students Federation and NSF, and staunchly against Jamaat’s student party, IJT, I think his bais against them comes out in his articles.
This is a solid look at JI’s Abul Ala Maduddi, but is NFP suggesting that extremism in Pakistan is an outcome of ONLY Maddudi’s philosophy? I’m sure there were others too.
June 11th, 2009 at 18:03
People like Hoodbhoy or even Ghamdi are so obsessed with their own idealogy about Islam, that they can go to any length in trying to hit the true spirit of this beautiful relelgion. I agree that we lack in modern education, science, technology & R&D etc., but its not because we have fallen into the old interpretation of Quran…or have confined ourselves to treat this greatest book just reading and getting “SAWAB”, but actually because we have distanced ourselves from it. We all know that muslim scientists from past and western scientists have taken lots of leads from this book and this only happened when they attached themseleves to this holy book. Islam has never changed and will never change as it is being protected by Almighty…now it up to the people that they put efforts and search & find the true Islam which our Prophet (pbuh) left for us or we take the convenient way of following what Messers Hood and Ghamdi etc has to offer.
June 11th, 2009 at 18:03
It is very sad that this nation-Pakistan couldnt yet get past the “religious” debate in order to concentrate on constructive things such how to improve Muslims’ and ultimately humanity’s lives. Why can’t we put this thing aside and get on with life. Pray 5 times a day and then work for the rest of hours. I am sorry, I dont see how this constant obsession with things religious are gonna get us anywhere in life!
June 11th, 2009 at 18:02
“Maududi’s staunch stance against the non-puritanical strains of Islam was a counterproductive move.”
Maududi’s crtical stance was equally applicable on the Deobandi and the Barelvi versions of Islam, as these two are representative of the Ahle Sunnah wa Al Jamaat school of thought. Both claim to be followers of Hanafi school. Both have their association with Sufism. Infact he was equally condemned by the scholars of both for being critical of their time-held traditional approach of teaching religion. In which they promoted blind-followership, incompetant scholars of their own Madrassahs, uncertainty in religion by keeping them dependent on Mullahs etc.
It is also incorrect to state that he rejected the previous interpretations of Islam. Quite ironically, the opinions that he states in his Tafheemul Quran are mostly congruent to the opinions held by the traditionalists.
His contribution in religion was to make the understanding of religion more accessible to the common man. Infact that was the reason for envy of his counterparts. He tried to remove the uncertainty that was deliberately maintained to keep control of the followership.
So even now, the individuals influenced by Maududi, apart from the manipulated Jamaate Islami, are not the ones who have caused the disturbance in the North of Pakistan. The disturbance is caused by the blind-followers of the traditional scholars, who are unable to think crtically about the judgements of the “immortal” scholars.
June 11th, 2009 at 18:02
Excellent analysis.
June 11th, 2009 at 17:41
Use of Islam for Development and Stability.
Following the teaching of Islam is the only solution of the problems of Muslims,because they may be united only and only on this single point,otherwise they will never be united on the philosphy or ideas any other Ideology,because to convince to masses it will be simply impossible,in the same manner as secular and liberals people say that Mudressas should teach science to the students,while the performance of whole in the last 6 decades of these liberals people is this that they chronically failed to literate masses and make them able to learn A,B,C,D…. and literacy rate of Pakistan is still just 25%,while to Mudressahs these people are giving just advices.These liberals just depend on government funds while these religious schools are making all their efforts with their own hard work,Pakistani Children are ready to gain advantage of education from both liberals and religious peoples but liberals are most interested for money.Pakistani population is ready to accept any system which should creat law and order, fair justice,freedom of their religion and right to make laws as per their religion and freedom from blasphemy and freedom from insulting remarks about their religious leaders.
M.AKRAM NIAZI
akrumniazi@hotmail.com
June 11th, 2009 at 17:24
Ironic, isn’t it, that religious doctrines, which ascribe to themselves an immutability, evolve over time according to mechanisms that are every bit as Darwinian as industrial melanism.
Let us just pluck a few concepts from the present essay, and translate:
“historicity” (phylogeny)
“pluralistic alternative”
(adaptive generalization)
“puritanical” (narrowly over-specialized)
“irrational mutations” (auto-destructive dead-ends)
Darwin alluded to the latter thus: “How so many absurd rules of conduct, as well as so many absurd religious beliefs, have originated, we do not know; nor how it is that they have become, in all quarters of the world, so deeply impressed on the minds of men; but it is worthy of remark that a belief constantly inculcated during the early years of life, while the brain is impressionable, appears to acquire almost the nature of an instinct; and the very essence of an instinct is that it is followed independently of reason.”
Vox populi, vox Dei?
June 11th, 2009 at 17:20
A very well reasoned article, which presents some food for thought not only for our muslim brothers but for every on else too.
I was disturbed to read the contribution made by “Layman”.
Firstly he is not as layman as his name would suggest. He comes across as some one who has an alternative agneda to present.
He, like many others uses Iqbal to provide an alternative credibility to thier personal perspective.
Did Iqbal not say:
Tera dil to sanam ashna tujhe kya mile ga namaz mein.
Layman’s assertion “Islamic civilization, after its present ruin, will once again vibrate with life as an authentically Islamic civilization, not only overcoming some of its deep problems but also guiding humanity to a vastly better alternative to the existing world order.””
Sounds like fighting talk…I am sure he realises that to get to an alternative world order may have to be via a long and protracted war of civilisation, which no one can be sure of winning.
June 11th, 2009 at 17:16
Congrats for presenting a quite informative and analytical piece of writing.Your comments regarding searching the causes of violence practised in the name of Islam and the need for Ijtehad to keep pace with the rapid changes are really admirable.I also appreciate your introducing the work of progressive thinkers like Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy who have been trying to present the work of earliar progressive phiosophers adn scientists.You have very nicely compiled the whole debate about religious orthodoxy in Pakistan and its impact on print and electronic media.Unfortunately,people in Pakistan usually read anything about religion with pre-conceived notions and are not ready to listen views which may contradict their notions.The Holy Quran on the other contrary invites the human beings to creative thinking and logical views.In that context I like your quoting of Arkun that Islamic history and law need to to be critiqued in the light of reason and present needs in order to liberate it from man made dogmatic constructs.
I hope to read more articles by you on the same subject in future.
June 11th, 2009 at 15:41
Fantastic stuff, Mr. Paracha. Ghamidi, Hoodbhoy and Sardar are playing a vital role. And mind you, so are you.
You’ve been at this for the last many years, and I admire the way you’ve stuck to your guns.
This most certainly is one of your most in-depth articles on the issue of extremism.
I found your thesis about some scholars intellectualizing obscurantism and psuedo-sciences to be very valid and thought-provoking.
I agree with you. It’s easy to blame the uneducated mullah. It is more important to tackle the intellectual sides of extremism which is far more dangerous.
Once again, sir, kudos.
Yunus, Karachi
June 11th, 2009 at 15:33
Great to see this article. It presents the problems of islamic scholars and mullas and shunning of learning of sciences and their impacts. The result of not learning the modern day science and technology is that muslim countries are far behind in science and technologies and not one of these countries are in the top 20 modern, developed and learned countries of the world.
June 11th, 2009 at 15:05
exellent! You must also mention about great indian scholar Maulana wahiddudin and his critique of maududi.
Sabir Nazar
June 11th, 2009 at 14:38
BTW, what are the credentials of your “respecetd intellectual” Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy to comment on Islam. Everyone knows him a physicist with not even rudimentary education of Islam. Isnt it another sort of “Liberal Mullahism”. I visited the link you provided for his books review. and found this conclusion of the commentator Dr Ahmad Shaafat:
“”There is no substantial difference between the mentality Hoodbhoy manifests and those of the religious people whom he criticizes. He has simply replaced religion with his favored ideology. It seems fair to say that Hoodbhoy has become or is in the process of becoming a fundamentalist secularist-humanist.
IN CONCLUSION, Hoodbhoy’s perspective on “Islam and Science” comes from a lost faith and from a somewhat immature rationality. For this reason he cannot see what some other thinkers such as Allamah Iqbal could see: Secular humanism or any other similar set of ideas is not the “only way”. Islamic civilization, after its present ruin, will once again vibrate with life as an authentically Islamic civilization, not only overcoming some of its deep problems but also guiding humanity to a vastly better alternative to the existing world order.”"
June 11th, 2009 at 14:29
Amazing piece, should make its way to print as well I hope. The footnotes are a great new addition, people need to evaluate different sources for themselves as well. Bravo!
June 11th, 2009 at 14:27
A highly informative piece!! Keep up the good work NFP.
June 11th, 2009 at 14:13
Hey, your dry english is too tough on me. Looks like you are involved in some language circus show rather than handling the topic. Also you have said nothing of your own except by quoting others. By doing this you have made everything look so mixed up. Sorry about that but thats how I feel after reading what you wrote.
June 11th, 2009 at 14:08
Maududi lived for what he believed in – a true, imperative, practical Islam based on the Quran and Sunnah. His opponent mullahs accused him as a kafir because he termed Islam as a political institution. He and Hasanul Banna in Egypt were the revivalists of political Islam in the 20th century and are the pioneers of the awakening in the Muslim world.
June 11th, 2009 at 13:59
great piece. use of religion both by reformists and revolutionaries is dangerous. Religion in late 20th and early 21st century is not opium of masses any more rather it is the vitamin of the masses who are fast becoming modernized and in the process are faced with anomie and thus a sitting duck in the hands of power hungry clique of political Islamists.the myth must be debunked and NFP is the sole crusader in my knowledge doing this.
June 11th, 2009 at 13:25
Another brilliant piece, sir. This one’s monumental. A well-informed and researched critique of ‘Maududiism’, Political Islam and extremism in Pakistan.
Needs to be read carefully.