I received a number of emails on my last blog, Reform Now. Most of the people who wrote to me asked whether I could comment more on the list of reforms that I suggested in the second part of the blog.
Well, here is a sincere attempt.
I would like to acknowledge eminent scholars and authors such as Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, Ziauddin Sardar, Muhammad Akhund, Ali Shariati, Irshad Manji, Dr. Fazalur Rehman, Musa Al-Sadr, and Abdullah Chakralawi, whose published work helped me construct this modest attempt.
_____________________________
While formulating Islamic laws, a rationalist and contextual approach to Islamic sources should be taken, keeping in mind Islam’s core values i.e., justice and mercy.
Islamic rules should always meet the following criteria: Compatibility with reason and compatibility with the requirements of (modern) times and people’s preferences.
How is that possible, wouldn’t the traditionalists protest?
Well, let’s take the example of Quranic verses dealing with slavery. Understandably, the institution of slavery was perceived as perfectly acceptable in the seventh century. But from eighteenth century onwards, through a widespread civil consensus between various world civilisations (including the Muslims), slavery was abolished as being an inhuman act.
Just imagine what the state of the Muslims would have been had they insisted on retaining slavery. The so-called Muslim ummah would have stood completely isolated with millions of Muslims preferring to adopt a more accommodating religion.
So my point is that when traditionalists demand that the Quran be understood literally and laws should then be based on this literalist reading, they are actually undermining the evolutionary spirit of the Holy book and relegating its status to being a document frozen in the social, political and cultural ethos of a distant past.
Islam and Islamic law should be understood and implied by each generation according to its own conditions.
_____________________________
We should define Islam in such a way that it does not undermine its global standing. For this we need educated, pragmatic and rational political and cultural spokespersons. Obviously, people like the Al Qaeda and the Taliban are the worst poster boys for Islam in the modern world.
But so are sectarian and communal hate-mongers found on TV screens these days across the Muslim world, and the many Muslim preachers doing the same in mosques in the West – ironically cursing and abusing anything to do with the West while at the same time gleefully benefiting from their adopted countries’ democratic and generous welfare systems.
And what about Muslims in the West who are fighting a little battle to wear the hijab and burqas in Paris, Zurich and London? Whenever a Pakistani protests at a western government’s take on the hijab and burqa, I usually agree with him. But at the same time, if the protester thinks that the French and the Swiss are being close-minded and intolerant, this does not mean we are any better. Harassment of women not wearing a hijab or a burqa is rampant in various parts of Pakistan.
Religion does not play such a major role in the lives of most Europeans. But they do take their secular values as seriously as Pakistanis do their religious principles. If we would like them to respect this side of ours, then we should be fully prepared to understand their values too – especially when we live among them in countries run by their ideals, beliefs and rules.
Most current Islamic rules regarding women’s rights do not meet the criteria of either justice or rationality. Most of these rules were devised by ancient jurists who were all men. Even in this day and age, it is the men who decide what is good or bad for Muslim women. A woman’s right to decide and make her own decisions decreed by the Quran is blatantly ignored, and hard-to-authenticate hadiths are often used to hit home the conservative male’s point of view on the matter.
But then, sadly, there are some Muslim women who inexplicably defend the conservative male point of view regarding Muslim women. Recently one saw a member of the PML-Q on a Pakistani television channel doing exactly that.
She had every right to air her stance, but think about it; what a disaster she might have been to the struggle of thousands of Muslim women in Pakistan who are doing a remarkable job in trying to assert their rights given to them not only by democracy, but by the Quran itself.
Can a woman who adorns a hijab and explains it as a liberating act, may as well be submitting to the historical male-driven tradition of claiming control over women?
Purda or wearing the hijab is an outcome of laws and social mores constructed over the last many centuries by judges, ulema and lawmakers who were all male. The Holy Book addresses the faithful women, who are told to shield their private parts and not to display their adornment ‘except what is apparent of it.’ Scholarly disputes in the Muslim world revolve around what this last phrase means.
To modern Muslim thinkers, Muslim women enjoyed great autonomy in public and private life during the time of the Prophet — an autonomy they say, which later Muslim rulers and ulema took away. The issue of hijab is often used by conservative Muslims as a weapon against the struggle of Muslim women who want to understand the autonomy that was given to them during the Prophet’s time. These struggling women want to undo what came afterwards in the shape of various gender-biased laws and social practices aimed at subduing and controlling women.
The patriarchal notions of women’s rights and laws among Islamists have their roots in ancient pre-Islamic Arab culture and prejudices and not in Islam. No religious principal should be imposed by force, because Islam has declared that there is no compulsion in faith.
There is nothing wrong in asking a person to pray, adorn the hijab or grow a beard, just as there is no harm if that person does not pray, wear a hijab or grow a beard. It’s a matter between him/her and God. And if he/she does not believe in a God, then it’s a matter that does not concern you, as long as he/she is not imposing his lack of faith.
Quran is a book of guidance. So the state, government or any political group or lobby cannot force people to observe rules intended as guidance, because judgement, punishment and reward in this respect belongs to God.
_____________________________
Democracy (in Muslim countries) is the best system at this point in time.
The many reformist regimes in the Muslim world which once proudly implemented various modernist economic and political ideas failed to revitalise their societies. Industrial development and modern education were attempted but without also allowing a vibrant democratic culture to prevail.
Democracy is vital to sustain economic, social and political development. Without it one is only implementing Modernism without modernity. The result, as we have seen in various modern Muslim states, is the emergence of dictatorships and societies that were always venerable to becoming myopic and intransigent at the first sign of economic and political failure.
Islam has neither proscribed nor prescribed a particular form of government.
No matter what Syed Qutb or Abul Ala Mauddudi wanted us to believe, Islam in the light of the Quran only wants to ensure that governments, whatever their form, are based on justice. The whole idea of a so-called ‘Islamic State’ is a twentieth century concoction.
Islam should not be identified with politics because ‘political Islam’ (that pursues to create an ‘Islamic State’) has led to repression and encouraging the religion’s abuse for individual and group advantage.
_____________________________
The usage of hadith in legislation should be handled carefully and critically because most are difficult to authenticate.
A government or an individual using a hadith as a pretext for any action does not mean that action has divine approval. It usually means that that government and individual is simply exploiting religion to forward their own version of the faith. Or maybe the issue is entirely non-religious, but a hadith is being used to give it a religious colour. Who is to say which hadith is authentic or not?
All administrative and political matters are human affairs and hence, not subject to religious rules.
_____________________________
Shariah is man-made. It needs to be updated, refreshed and revitalised through ijtihad (rational/open debate), and according to the needs of the time.
The Shariah was formulated according to conditions of a particular time and place (medieval Arabia). Power of Islamic legislation should flow back to the people through democracy.
The spirit and body of Islam is represented by the people and not by religious organisations or the clergy because Muslims commune directly with God.
By discouraging democracy, looking for scapegoats for ones own failings, and turning religion into a hollow ritualistic and rhetorical fest has drained the spirit of Islam of some of it most imperative ingredients: justice, progress, reason and mercy.
_____________________________
There is no official clergy in Islam. In fact, a lack of official clergy in the religion makes it most compatible with secularism. Yet, we are always going against this by constructing pillars of political and spiritual officialdom that trap us within their narrow confines, leaving us cut-off from our true potentials to play an open and intellectually robust role in world affairs.
Islam provides the ethical basis of a society, while government is based on rational premises. Thus, there is no need for the caliphate as a model for the exercise of power.
The call for a modern caliphate is nothing more than yet another synthetic and fanciful pillar of religious-political officialdom.
The state/government has political functions while religious functions belong to the people according to their own will, need and consensus. To avoid dictatorship, repression, state coercion and stagnation, Muslim political systems must not rest on theological foundations.
Everything under the unity of God is plural. There is only one God, but many kinds and types of Muslims. Rather, all types of men and women, Muslim or otherwise. Nobody but God can determine exactly who or what a real or true Muslim is, and/or who or what a kafir, or an infidel, is.
There are two telling verses in the Quran:
“To you your religion, to me my religion.” (Sura 109, Verse 6).
And:
“To each among you, have We prescribed a Law and
an Open Way. And if God had enforced His
Will, He would have made of you all one
people.” (Sura 5, Verse 46)
Hence it is quite clear that hostile and discriminatory forms of inter-religious relations have nothing to do with Islam.
Belief in God must mean a faith in humanity, justice, mercy, reason, tolerance and spiritual and material well-being. Going against these (especially in the name of faith) is an exhibition of arrogance and bigotry, and of passing judgment on matters that God alone has the wisdom and power to adjudicate.
Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn Newspaper and Dawn.com.
Photo illustration by Eefa Khalid/Dawn.com
The views expressed by this blogger and in the following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.
Few weeks ago, NFP wrote an article in sunday’s dawn where he was critical of scholars who explain science in light of holy scriptures eg.big bang etc. You are doing the same thing. Religion has nothing to do with science and maths.
I think there is deep relationship between Quran and science, it depends upon our understanding and knowledge, there are many books written in this regard, softwares developed showing the close relationship between Quran and science, there are several scientific Revelations that were not known to human centuries but Quran revealed them.
you can explore the net
How can there be anything common between science and qura’an. science has been created by human beings to explain nature. qura’an is the word of Allah. there is nothing common between Khaliq and makhlooq, except, of course, if you believe the sufis, the only thing common between Allah and bandah is LOVE.
Science is a way to find the truth about natural environment we live in hence is important should be studied by all humans. Quran is just a book of guidance for human arabs in particular.
Plus the fact that science keeps changing its findings and is open about it.
Science change its findings? Science discovers errors in its findings and adjusts its concept of the universe to fit the newly discovered facts. This is the strength of science and that is how it advances giving us the wonders of the modern technology and our insights into the working of the world (including the findings of why people have religious feelings). Religious concepts (findings) are written in stone and tends to keep us in the stone age.
Regards
The scholars who explain the holy Qur’an in the light of modern science may be going overboard at times,but there is a lot of truth in what they say.I personally will not discard their views until and unless I see them getting refuted.A few years ago,Dr. William Campbell of Answering Islam had debated with Dr.Zakir Naik on this issue and I feel Dr.Naik did exceptionally well to refute the allegations against people like him.NFP should live in present era and learn something from it before making cliched allegations against Islamic students.Actually I wanted to comment as soon as I read that article,but I don’t know NFP’s e-mail ID.
Please visit http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4194681489694162440#.
@ analytical engine.
God sent holy books upon Prophets,not upon scientists.Prophets got information through divine sources while scientists conduct experiments,do research.Science sees everything through prism of matter and energy while religion specially islam says that everything came into existence by command of Allah.
Naseer, you are absolutely right. Shariah also includes the laws of Allah ( or path to Allah) that previals in the universe that the learned scientists are learning through scientific research. Allama Iqbal said “Sitaroon sey agey jahan aur bhi hain. Abhi Ishq key imtehan aur bhi hain. Meaning……..there are world beyond the stars and there are many tests (examinations) to prove the love of Allah. Iqbal knew what our Moulvis, Maulanas and Mullahs probably do not know that science tells us the mechanisms and processes created by Allah and it is the duty of Muslims to learn science. The Holy Quran is not a book of science yet there are references in the Holy Quran about many scientific things including Big Bang sauch as this:
BIG BANG…………..
The Expansion Of The Universe….. The Universe has been expanding since its creation. Hubbell, an astronomer made this great discovery, in the early part of this century. It was also predicted by Einstein’s theory of “General Relativity.” The expansion of the universe is clearly mentioned in the following Quranic verses: Chapter: 51, Verse: 47 The heavens, We have built with power and, We are expanding it…..
There is no relationship between science and Quran. Do not go deep just look at the definition of science and compare that with our first Kalima. Our first kalima says there is no god but Allah, where is the proof of that. Science needs proofs. Do not confuse the two.
@Shaz.If at all one actually bothers to read the Qur’an,they’ll find plenty of proof and good logic employed by Allah to explain Monotheism.Allah has given many Aayat(signs) in various chapters of the Qur’an for a person to logically come to the conclusion that there can be only 1 All-Powerful God,not more.As I said,I’ll not stop believing in people like Zakir Naik until and unless I see them getting soundly refuted.
Shaz, do you know what is the knowledge of science?. The answer is it is the knowledge that tells us the systems, mechanisms and processes in the universe including human and animal body. Every physician in the world has to learn science to treat a patient. How can you say “There is no relationship between science and Quran” when the Holy Quran says “Allah is the Creator of Universe” and this also means all the systems, mechanisms and processes in the universe are created by Allah.
Then can you tell me why the vast majority of scientific discoveries were made by western scientists and not by muslims? Why is it that the whole muslim world is a desert in terms of scientific research?
There was a time when Europe was dark and Muslim scientists, specially Arabs introduced science to Europe. The plight of Muslims today is not their fault. It is because they have allowed themselves to be ruled (politically and religiously) by those who believe they can rule Muslims effectively when they are uneducated or under-educated. Look at the literacy rate in Pakistan. It is less than 50%.
@Zubair. My only reply is :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_science. If Muslims are lagging behind,its because they take things for granted.Many landmark discoveries in various scientific fields like astronony,botany,human physiology,etc. have been carried out by medieval Muslim scientists.Imam Ja’far Sadiq was a well known scientist of his time.Please do more research of Muslim history.Thanks!
@ analytical engine
how many muslim scientists have acknowledged that they got ideas for their theories or inventions from religion.A person maybe religious and a scientist,this doesn’t imply that he uses his religion for science. A good example is of galileo whose work challenged Bible and time proved him right.
Why do Muslims obsess about Islamic science? We never hear of Christians obsessing about Christian science, Hindus about Hindu science, or Jews about Jewish science. Science has no religion.
regards
Very well written, I hope many in India also read it. Some time we all feel that whole Pakistan is like Taliban due to bad media. We also have good scholers/writers like M.A.Akbar butit is only minority reads them. Wish many regional languages including Urdu publish the article. I myself was carried away thinking that Sharia law is prescribed in Holy Quran.
Mr. Parcha
You are one of the few sane voices in Pakistan. Your message needs to be broadcast in Urdu newspapers and in the Pakistani TV, barring which, you will be preaching to the converted.
Please take good care of yourself. You are rattling the cage, rocking the boat and upsettig the apple cart, all at the same time. It is perhaps a good thing that most hatemongers in Pakistan read only papers in the local language, thus ensuring your continued safety.
Thank you for a balanced and sensible piece of journalism
Nicely written article.. I heartly congratulate to brother NFP for all the nice thoughts you shared with us… I recommend you to publish this article in your local newspaper also.
Great work NFP! But should have been out much earlier. Reformation or reconstruction of religious thought is comparatively less repulsive alternative to those who only know traditional interpretations of Islam than secularism which is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be anti-religion. Therefore, while targeting the inadequacy of traditional religious interpretation, it would be much useful to refer to reformation rather than secularism as an option. And lesser chances of alienating those groups from your own sphere. This is something I felt missing in your earlier writings.
Mr Zafar, You are absolutely right; there is urgent need of reformation to tackle the challenges faced by Muslims all over the world. On the contrary, secularism by definition focuses on this worldliness excluding any consideration for the hereafter. So a vast majority of Muslims might be alienated if goal is to bring about secularism. I agree with you 100%
Mr. Farooq, you said “”secularism by definition focuses on this worldliness excluding any consideration for the hereafter”. Sorry wrong definition. A secular state means one where laws, parliament judiciary do not differentiate between people of different religions. It does not mean everyone is an atheist. So in secular India, the Muslims still believe in Allah and Quran, Hindus in their Gita and Christians in Christ and Bible.
Muhammad Farooq you wrote: “…So a vast majority of Muslims might be alienated if goal is to bring about secularism. I agree with you 100%”
Why should they be alienated? The vast majority of Muslims in India and other non-Islamic nations are happy with secularism. And they are not alienated from either Islam or (wonder of wonders) from their non-Muslim neighbours. But most Muslims in Islamic nations are against secularism. Have you pondered why?
regards
Extremely well-written article.
Fantastic! Love it! You are so “right-on”…. hope my family in SWAT reads it…
I liked the whole article except i have to condradict on this point “All administrative and political matters are human affairs and hence, not subject to religious rules” because I think the basis of our religion Islam is human affairs. And I think Islam has provided the whole frame work on how to handle political and administrative affairs but the writer has completed omitted religion. For example while dealing with all the adminstrative and political matters don’t you think that there is always a question of morality and ethics? Either its between individuals or between individual and GOD. Everyone is invited for a healthy discussion on this point.
This is an enlightening piece barring a few syntactical errors. One of the main planks of Islam is the emphasis on direct compact between the individual and his maker. Imams were simply to lead the congregation at prayers and had no authority to do any thing else. Yet we see Mullahs having taken over and issuing decrees that truly have no scriptural authority. Religion has been hijacked completely by the uneducated and the illiterate mullahas who are preaching absolute hatred rather than brotherly love.
I cannot agree more. There is no other way to Islam out of its Dark Age than to eliminate the mullah-fatwa regime that has taken over the religion. Christianity saw the light of day when the Papacy was put in its place. Can Islam free itself from the iron grip of mulladom?
regards
True,Well said
Rahmat, you are absolutely right. There is a saying in Farsi “Neem Hakeem khatra-e jaan. neem mullah khatra-e eemaan. Meaning: A half learned physician is a danger to life and a half learned Mullah is danger to faith (Islam) and it is a fact that the entire Muslim world follows Neem Mullahs and this is the cause of downfall of Muslims. Who gives final blessings to suicide bombers who kill innocent Muslims and promises them the doors of heaven are wide open for them? Do Mullahs tell them Allah forbids killing of innocent humans as in the following verse in the Holy Quran:
“If any one killed a person … it would be as if he killed all mankind; and if any one saved the life of a person, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind.” (Quran V: 32).
Let Islamic laws of Pakistan be practiced as liked by Ulema or Mullahs. The laws cannot be secular or close to being secular as most of the people in Pak is blinded by Mulahs, and who cannot understand what is in this article.
People must be taught. A general conscious must be created. At least Author is trying that. And he is not just taking about Pakistan but the Islam as a whole. So don’t discourage who is trying something good. I am too Hindu of India and I would say keep it up to author. Really appreciate your effort NFP.
”Religion is worth the name only so long as it is in consonance with reason. If it fails to satisfy that requisite, if it has to make up for its discomfiture in argument by handling the sword, it needs no other argument for its falsification. The sword it wields cuts its own throat before reaching others.” – Mirza Ghulam Ahamad (1835-1908)
Once again Great work Nadeem…!!! Bravo
You have cleared lots of misconception and developed my understanding following you for last 3 years, Thanks!
You are doing great job Keep it up!!
We need people like you in large numbers!
Dear comrade Paracha ,you are always doing excellent ,rational and fair work . Unfortunately this message in the English press is always limited , i would like to suggest in the larger interest of the public so that there narrowed visions of Islam get some rational nutrition ,needs to be take by several Urdu and regional press .
The mullah know ,it very well ,that the way they have hijacked Islam ,serves their vested interests and at this point they even pose to be more wise and judicious on Islamic matters than Allah him self or his prophet , Mohammad sahib .
Please keep it u .
NFP, I wait for you blogs. Can’t you write a little more frequently? I love your writing and you are a brave soul. Keep on writing, there are people who share your ideas and don’t be upset by the irrational criticism of the irrational fanatics. (however, that doesn’t mean that anyone who criticizes you is a fanatic or irrational, but what i have found is that the fanatics have the most bizarre and irrational comments in their arsenal.)
I appreciate what you wrote. To supplement your thoughts, I would like to add the following: The campaign that Prophet Mohammad started was a totally new and very modern idea. Prophet and Quran both are extremely progressive. Let me explain how. Take it more in terms of a graphical way (mathematics). X-axis is time and y-axis is yes or no or in-between. Before Islam eating dead animals or pig was not common in Arab culture. Therefore, Quran in one ayat nullify this.On the other hand drinking was very common in that society. Therefore, three ayats were sent with time to make the slope of drinking negative and then bring it down to zero. There were no women rights in the entire world at that time let alone Arabs. Quran gave a positive slope and gave some rights, meaning that with time it has to bring it to equal rights with time on the principle of “Masaawat”. Very same thing was slavary. Quran told the best way to free them, if not then treat them equally, feed them whatever you eat, give them to wear whatever you wear. So a negative slope was created so that slavary should be abolished with time. Now if you plot all such examples on the scale of zero to one on Y-axis with time on X-axis, you will find that whatever was encouraged in Quran should reach one on Y-axis with time, and whatever was discouraged in Quran must reach zero on Y-axis with time. This is a hard core evidence that Islam is a 100% progressive religion and is based on Justice, Masawat, mercy, reason, tolerance etc.
Syed Sameen Zaidi you write:
“Very same thing was slavary. Quran told the best way to free them, if not then treat them equally, feed them whatever you eat, give them to wear whatever you wear.” But have you read this verse:
Quran 030.028 YUSUFALI: He does propound to you a similitude from your own (experience): do ye have partners among those whom your right hands possess, to share as equals in the wealth We have bestowed on you? Do ye fear them as ye fear each other? Thus do we explain the Signs in detail to a people that understand.
regards
You have answered yourself by presenting this Ayat. There is no question about the treatment of slaves before Islam. But think with whom you can share your property… your immediate family members. Islam theoretically made slaves equal to your relatives. In fact “mehram” relative. What a progressive thought in Quran. I love it. Let me reiterate that Islam is a very progressive religion, very dynamic ,and constantly working for the betterment of society.
Syed Sameen Zaidi writes:
“There were no women rights in the entire world at that time let alone Arabs. Quran gave a positive slope and gave some rights, meaning that with time it has to bring it to equal rights with time on the principle of “Masaawat”. ”
If there were no women’s rights in Arabia how come Khadeeja and Abu Sufyan’s wife Hind were leading business persons of the time? Women took part in debates and poetry readings along with men at Okaz. There were women rulers of several tribes in pre-Islamic Arabia too.
regards
Mr. Mohammad, those ladies were few in number who enjoyed the liberty of making decisions on their own. I am talking about the rights of women as a whole population. Before Quran, there is no written legislation in the history of humankind which describes some basic rights of women. Quran is the first book which in-writing describes openly and vividly how to behave with others and what is the starting point to give them rights. This is my understanding. If you are aware of any such rights, especially women before Islam, in the written history in humankind, I would definitely ponder on that. Unfortunately, experts are unable to dig written history for more than 5000 years. Even that history is available in bits and pieces.
I would have thought that this is because all Arabic history before Islam was destroyed and we only hear about it from Islamic sources (.:. biased).
An excellent way of illustration through Math model. I love it. It shows the forward looking approach of Islam.
good analysis Sameen Zaidi.
Bravo: Mr. Nadeem Piracha. Although semi-literate population would be offended but let them weep and cry, this is needed to be said. Allama Iqbal did say in many ways. Conservative and extreme conservative group would undoubtedly oppose such thought process. What we need to do is to create THINk TANKS among youngster groups and we also need media support to largely portray the truth and save Islam from the hands of CONTRACTORS who have hijacked Islam. You are true, the lives of people during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) consisted of a liberal society. Sarah Nussebeh, a muslim professor of Philosophy who wrote a book entitled “One Upon a Time” belongs to Palestine. He mentions in his book that the Respected Lady Nussebeh was the companion of the Prophet and she was given the award by Hazrat Umar to go to Jerussalem, the key of the Jerusalem Church remained with their forefahers. His father was a Governor Of Jordan. He mentioned truly the real true pattern society during the Holy Prophet’s life.
The rigid and conservative look to the religion was given by Monarchs and Kings to safeguard their own interests. It was fabricated by them. We must be thankful to the saints and sages of those times who developed islamic jurisprudence according to the circumstances and social fabric of the Arab Society, we have to REVISIT ISLAM….FOR GOD SAKE REVISIT Islam. Your efforts to write this article can prove to be an eye opener for pseudo legislators, and truthful intellectuals to facilitate further growth of this message. Thanks NFP….May Almight God give u the perseverance and strength to continue writing. You spoke our heart and our souls are with you in prayers. Long Live NFP.
Excellent article, hundred percent agreed with you. Hope, allah show light to TTP and its supporters, and Ossama and its supporters, so they stop fighting with government of Pakistan. Allah protect Pakistan from narrow minded Ullamas and their blind followers.
I am afraid I may not agree to the writer on all issues that he mentioned in this post. From extremist conservative we cannot take extremist liberal position. Our salvation lies in the middle of the road approach. For instance, I don’t have a beard myself and want to have it as it is the way of the Holy Prophet. So it cannot be left optional. If we leave one sunnah optional then we may dare to ignore many others. I agree there are many sayings of the prophet that need authentication, anything that goes against the text of the Quran, cannot be accpetable because the Quran is the source of teachings of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him).I don’t agree to author’s views about Caliphate, the author needs to study this subject in some more detail.
The doors of ijtehad should be opened for a breath of fresh air, for bringing Islamic code of conduct in line with the contemporary world. The author has rightly pointed out that Islam is not a static model, it is dynamic and adaptable to changing times and conditions. Women have been exploited in the name of Islam. Domination over women dates back to pre-Islam Arab era coupled with a thousand years of south Asian Muslims living in India that had a custom like Siti that was outlawed by the Britishers in 1829. Similar custom prevailed in some other countries – this and so many other customs are all intended to oppress women and give the male a upper hand right or wrong.
Dear Muhammad,
This piece is the finest example of taking a middle path.
Exactly what to you is a midde path?
If one takes your narrative as a middle path, then dear Muhammad, that path unfortunately leads to the various extremes that we are suffering.
Kindly do not try to define a literalist reading of the holy book as a middle path.
Dear Ali thanks for your reply/comment on what i wrote.
Do you think that by adopting an extreme liberal path you will not be deterred from going to various extreme liberal paths that for example allow you to do anything in name of personal liberty, personal choice, human rights. I don’t even want to mention those evil practices here. Please remember in all matters we have to draw a line and where do we draw that line is important. A line that balances this life and the hereafter. We all have drawn our lines already; what we are discussing here is to arrive at a consensus as a Muslim body so that those who have been led astray due to their extremist positions (liberal and conservatives both) should be brought back to where they belong. It will not be proper to ask an extreme conservative to become liberal (middle of the path as i said) and let the extreme liberal slide to that liberal side more and more. As in that case we shall lose that segment of Islamic society sooner or later. Nadeem A. Paracha has started this serious discussion. I hope it does not remain confined to the blog section of the Dawn and it is taken to the next level; involving the public, politicians, educators, opinion leaders etc. A change is a crying need of the time.
Muhammad you wrote: “Do you think that by adopting an extreme liberal path you will not be deterred from going to various extreme liberal paths that for example allow you to do anything in name of personal liberty, personal choice, human rights. I don’t even want to mention those evil practices here.”
Your satement makes one feel that extreme liberal paths lead to evil. So what are the evil practices you cannot even mention here you find in liberal societies and which do not exist in Islamic countries?
regards
Great article due. Unfortunately those need this insight won’t/ can’t read it.
Great job done again Nadeem.
Indeed a remarkable effort; I totally agree with the first part of the ‘criteria’ for Islamic rules but could not digest the second one…as we cannot always mold rules/sharia to whatever is the preference of the people or society is!! For ease fo reading I am quoting the lines below from the article above..
”
Islamic rules should always meet the following criteria: Compatibility with reason and compatibility with the requirements of (modern) times and people’s preferences.
”
When it comes to people preference, won’t we face the same problem that current christian church is facing, where just because ‘people preference’ is to allow gay marriages, the chuurch is being forced to compel & abide by the preference of the people in the name of flexibility in the religion.
No religious principal should be enforced by brain washing, pressure or violence because Islam has expressed that there is no coercion in faith. No doubt, it’s a matter between him/her and Allah if he/she doesn’t pray, wear a headscarf or grow a beard. But we as Muslims shouldn’t forget the saying of Prophet (pbuh) regarding hijab, pray and grow beard. As an Islamic tradition we always devised our children to offer salah five times in a day at the age of seven and later on when he/she reaches the age of twelve we forced him/her to pray other wise we should slap on him/her back to pray, similarly with hijab then what’s wrong in it.
I personally think that children should be able to decide for themselves matters of faith or no faith, you dont have to have religion to teach morals.
Define morals, please. In the West it is not immoral to dress down to a bikini (with all due respect to bikini dressers) but in Islam and most religions, I know of, it is considered immoral (for right or wrong reasons) Fundamentally, morals is relative, so some reference needs to taken to define it. Now, it is only a matter of which reference you or I choose. Since, children are raised within a set of values so again it becomes relevant invariably which frame of reference the children are raised in i.e., religious or irreligious?
Right! Emily from the UK. One does not need religion to teach morals or ethics. Beating a women, even, with a toothpick, because she is disobedient to the men in her life, is immoral and unethical because you are hurting her dignity which is the birthright of every member of the human race
Regards
You contradicted in your assertions once you say that “there is no coercion in faith” and on the other hand you say “when he/she reaches the age of twelve we forced him/her to pray other wise we should slap on him/her back to pray, similarly with hijab then what’s wrong in it”
Please first clear your own mind!
Wow what a remarkable article.. I completely agree with every single point..
Nadeem well done again.
Based on your views and interpretations, very much on the lines of Mao’s red book of revolution, can you publish these in a ‘pink’ book for every citizen to keep in his pocket and follow it diligently.
In the meantime, someone has to come up with an idea how to put a noose around the rogue ‘whatevers’ and give way to the more educated and refined leaders whose objective is to run the nation on modernized thinking and not obsessed with in faith one-up-manship.
A fine write up from a sensitive and gutsy Pakistani journalist. Kudos Nadeem!
You cannot bring an abrupt change in Muslim countries the way their different schools of thoughts are working but a step by step change can be possible and first step of this change would be to bring all the different sects in Islam together. First of all they have to learn not only how to tolerate each other views but there must be a mandatory subject in every religious school where they learn comparative studies of all sects and no religious school degree should be accepted until and unless their students pass examination of government boards this will broaden their views and in few years they will be able to acknowledge the views of other religions also.
Assalaamu’ Alaikum!
I have been reading NFP’s articles and largely they seem to address the most important and burning issues of Pakistan. His stance against the increasing extremism on the name of Islam is much appreciated. However, today I got very dissappointed when I saw Irshad Manji’s name in the list of the so called eminent scholars and authors devised by NFP. Irshad Manji has someone who has tried her best to malign Islam and Muslims in the western world in order to get cheap publicity and possibly monetary benefits too. I am a Canadian too and I must say that people like Irshad Manji and Tarek Fatah are disgrace for Muslims in Canada. May Allah (SWT) send them hidaya.
Well said, I am speechless…….
great article!!!!!!!!!!
Islam is the religion of Muhammad (PBUH), who claimed it to be the continuation of the religion of Ibraheem. The Islam which we have today is not the deen of Muhammad or Ibraheem (PBUH). It is the deen of Ahl-e-sunnat wal Jamaat which took some two and a half centuries to take its shape. Take an example, the definition of Imaan, contained in the two parts, Mufassal and Mujammal. Where did it come from? The Ulema came up with this beautiful thesis after lot of debate. If they could do it, defining some basic tenets of faith, we can also do the same, albeit keeping the mansha of Prophet (PBUH) in mind.
What I am trying to emphasize is this. We need to make Islam more inclusive without losing the soul of this beautiful faith. Currently, we have succeeded in excluding most of the humankind from the mercy of Allah Ta’ala, and this is the source of all strife.
Prophet (PBUH) was Rahmatul-lil-Aalimeen (mercy for the two worlds), whereas, Muslims are killing fellow Muslims and fellow human beings in the name of that prophet. This is a great tragedy. The merciful Prophet (PBUH) must be turning his grave looking at the farcical antics of his followers who have made a mockery of his sacred message. Thankfully, Allah took him away before he could see such a shameful spectacle.
I wish that Allah would not have taken Prophet (PBUH) so soon, hence helping Muslims to understand the religion more properly rather than being left to figure out themselves. Also helping them not to mix religion with politics.