FORTIFYING FAITH 

-How to protect Muslim youth from disenchantment from religious faith 

Maryam Sakeenah – 

Given the uninhibited freedom of the social media, ‘ex Muslims’ who openly profess their abandonment of Islam are now influencers with sizeable following in their dark, clandestine worlds.

The mainstreaming of Western post-Enlightenment thought with its secular-liberal ideas of individualism and permissive values has had a profound influence on the media and through education.

What are Muslim societies up against?

In most of the Muslim world, education is structured on an agenda of intellectual neo colonization, instilling quintessentially Western values into vulnerable young minds.

The evolution of the feminist movement into its contemporary radical, libertarian wave and its enthusiastic espousal of the LGBTQ rights movement has defiantly crashed into the very fundamental premises on which religion rests.

Vulnerable, exposed and defenseless against these raging winds of a disfiguring change, Muslim youth are widely questioning Islam, and tragically even abandoning it by droves.

Muslim societies face an unprecedented crisis of faith and a Herculean challenge in dealing with these raging tides. It is a crisis that requires entirely new, thoughtful and creative ways to save the faith of young Muslims.

Traditional Muslim clergy and academia is as of yet scantily equipped to grapple with this, often letting young people feel there are no answers to their questions, or that there are no avenues for them to raise their questions and be understood.

Islamic scholars have with them treasuries of scholarly work- discourses addressing some of the intellectual challenges to Islamic philosophy and theology. Yet this precious resource is completely inaccessible to young people seeking answers, because of its sheer archaic style, format and language. It no longer resonates with contemporary youth.

Is there a way out?

1. Access to content of scholars addressing youth issues exclusively

Serious effort therefore needs to be invested into tailoring and adapting these works to make them easier to navigate for young minds raised on digital technology. New content also needs to be generated to address specific, burning questions of the day.

It is only fair to acknowledge some Muslim groups already working on these lines with some success: the Yaqeen Institute in the US by Imam Omar Suleiman has proven to be a breakthrough, bringing together academics and researchers equipped to address contemporary issues with religious insight and provide clarity and guidance to young people in a language they understand. Crisp infographics on controversial aspects, short video-based clips addressing common modern dilemmas and questions as well as research work of quality are its trademark, enabling many Muslim educators and truth-seekers to benefit.

Closer to home, the Youth Club has effectively used social media to provide simple, clear guidance on issues of the youth as well as controversial debates over different aspects of religion.

2. Religious groups abound in Pakistani universities, but need direction and grounding

These need to be de-politicized and de-radicalized, and finally revived on the patterns of the MSAs (Muslim Students Associations) in Western universities. MSAs in the West have been extremely resilient as umbrellas of faith-based solidarity in hostile environments.

3. Parents have to understand and train themselves on dealing with youth issues

Muslim parents are often unaware of the severity of challenges faced by young people, as a result of which there is an absence of vital communication. Young people find themselves braving the storms alone, growing distant from parents who do not understand the struggle.

Parents need to keep themselves abreast of social trends and phenomena that affect their young ones. It is effort well spent. They also need to demonstrate a lot more empathetic understanding of their struggles.

4. Empathetic listening should be cultivated

This is mainly the job of parents and also teachers of teens and young adults. This means not passing moral judgments on their conduct, but showing support and providing reassurance as they try to navigate their difficult journeys in increasingly complex times.

5. Open and tolerant communication needed in religious families

Religious families tend to over-discipline in their anxiety to compel children to keep to the straight. Imposing of too many rules and engaging in moral policing and judgment are counter productive. Excessive criticism, suspicion and unnecessary restrictions on young people make them feel mistrusted and disrespected for who they are, making it easy for them to betray that trust.  Such parenting often ends up reducing religion to a set of prohibitions to be irrationally imposed.

Instead, parents must focus on planting the seed of recognition and love for Allah (swt) and the Prophet (sa) from the earliest ages, and setting a personal example of living passionately by faith, relishing its peace and deep inner contentment. Once the seed of love is planted in there, it will work its wonders, casting its light on their path.

Parents should also be ever ready to talk about difficult, taboo subjects with young people. They should be ready to hear young people express doubt, ask difficult questions, share their inner struggles. Just to let them know that they are understood and taken seriously.

A group of young boys at an Islamic school were asked about their spiritual struggles for this article. They shared how they are put down and asked to stay quiet, or rebuked for being disrespectful if they raise any question about religion.

As a result of this, they had stopped asking, and labored alone under the weight of those questions, not knowing who to ask, or whether there even is an answer.

It is not possible to insulate and protect young people from the influences and ideas that challenge the fundamental premises of religion. However, we can help them hold on to faith in spite of this, by assuring them that there are answers, and helping them look for these in the right places.

6. Take it from the experts

If parents feel ill equipped to talk about these issues, they should seek help from experts. There is a lot of content available online from Islamic organizations based mostly in the West, responding to rising Atheism.

Muslim Debate Initiative, IERA (Islamic Education and Research Academy) in the UK, and the Yaqeen Institute in the US provide access to such content. Speakers like Mohammed Hijab and Hamza Andreas Tzortzis possess expertise in the subject.

Parents of young people must also protect them from the negative influence of peer pressure by providing them with opportunities to be part of religious communities in the area. Maintaining ties with other Muslim parents with kids the same age, frequenting Masaajid in the area and organizing spiritual and social activities for young people will help them develop a support group helping them stay connected to faith. Bonding with a community provides positive reinforcement, affirmation and hence confidence in one’s identity and values that are shared by the group.

7. Walk the talk

The talk with young boys from religious households also revealed something deeply shocking and painful- they shared how while growing up they witnessed that the values taught to them by their parents were contradicted by the parents themselves in their own lives.

This seemed to suggest that these values that were imposed and shoved down throats by elders were impossible to be upheld and practiced, and had only been there as a means of exercising control over children.

This is a damning verdict from young people on our own inadequacies as we compel them to follow a religion we do not live by ourselves. The strongest and most effective argument for faith is living by faith passionately and resolutely, and sharing how one’s faith is one’s most treasured asset, compass, healing and refuge. Embodying and personifying this understanding is the strongest influence on our children.

When our lives become living contradictions of the values we preach, our young ones are repelled and driven away from the faith we reduce to an empty shell or a baton for enforcing control and exercising power.

A Secular State for Muslim Societies?

THE CASE FOR THE SECULAR STATE

Maryam Sakeenah

In a country plagued by violence in the name of religion and sect and infested with decadent religio-political outfits, secularism as a pillar of statehood comes to be seen as an ideal. The typical response by the religious to the eulogization of secularism in Muslim societies is to warn their followers that secularism is equivalent to unbelief and is a great evil against religion.

In understanding the secular state to be an ideal polity free of the tyranny of religious politics and based on pluralism and egalitarianism, we gloss over both its nuanced history and its practice in the present. On the other hand, viewing secularism as unbelief and as hostile to religious belief is not only inaccurate but also ignorant of the great ravages religious politics is capable of and has often unleashed, especially in European history.

More accurately, a secular state ideally entails the dissociation of religion from the state, guaranteeing religious liberties to all groups without prejudice and discrimination on religious grounds. It does not mean the elimination of religion, but its privatization.

In the European experience, the achievement of the secular state was indeed a liberation from the religious oppression of the Church throughout much of what is described as the Dark Ages. In pre Enlightenment Europe, religious politics were indeed unregulated and unaccountable, exploiting with impunity under the ‘Divine Right of Kings.’

Having said that, the universalization of the European secular experiment is a mistake we often fall into making, given the well entrenched Eurocentrism of education in postcolonial societies. Non Eurpoean societies had radically different approaches to and experiences with the question of religion and state.

Even a cursory glance at Muslim history makes it clear that the religious state was not always an instrument of corruption and abuse. It is difficult to contest the progressive and prosperous character of religious rule in the earliest history of Islam before the monarchical takeover of the Caliphate.  There is evidence attesting to how rights and privileges were accorded justly, the supremacy of law held high and protections extended to non Muslims.

In most of Islam’s history, involvement of religious scholars and religious leaders in politics checked, regulated and held governments accountable. In fact, religious leaders- specifically the great Imams of both the Shiite and Sunni tradition often became active forces of resistance to political excesses and abuse of religion. The example of Hussain R.A and the Imams of the Ahl ul Bayt as well as other Companions and Tabiyeen is a powerful legacy. 

The example of Al Andalusia under Islamic rule shines through history as a model of pluralism as well as intellectual, cultural and social progress. This is why the thesis that the secular values of egalitarianism and pluralism can in fact be accommodated within the ideal Muslim state exists. What needs to be understood here is that given this history, Muslims are entitled to conclude that the achievement of what are understood as secular ideals does not require the liberation of the state from religion. In other words, while standing as a refreshing exception, Andalusia shows that the achievement of a progressive, diverse and tolerant civilization is possible and has been achieved without going through the separation of church and state- unlike in the European experience.

In the Middle East, quite contrary to Europe, one finds that secularism has been a foreign implant and secular regimes have been backed by Western states with their own neocolonialist agendas. Such secular regimes in the Middle East have often been brutal and oppressive, corrupt, high-handed and even undemocratic. They have never really represented the popular will. This reality of secularism in the Muslim world is far from the ideal of secularism that fires our imaginations.

In fact the reality of secularism even in the West is anything but. It has assumed the character of a totalitarian ‘ism’ aggressively fanatical in its intolerance of religious belief.  According to Phillip Bond and Adrian Pabst writing for the International Herald Tribune, "European societies enshrine the primacy of secular law over and against religious principles. Far from ensuring neutrality and tolerance, the secular European state arrogates to itself the right to control and legislate all spheres of life; state constraints apply especially to religion and its civic influence.”

Karen Armstrong, referring to the concepts of ‘dharma’ in Hinduism and ‘deen’ in Islam asserts how secularism is a radical modern innovation as religion was always understood by human beings as a way of life without the public/private schism. She writes, ‘Questions like social justice or rights have always had sacred import.’

Whether we believe in the establishment of secular states in Muslim societies or not, we must accept that the case for secular states in Muslim societies is not only ahistorical, it is stridently Eurocentric at best, and neocolonialist at worst.  

OF MOB LYNCHINGS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE

ROOTS OF RAGE

Maryam Sakeenah

How does one move on with all this deep, searing pain over the mob lynching of a body that bore a beautiful heart and a precious mind? And with our senses still reeling, we hear of at least two more horror stories of blasphemy related violence. Grueling as it is, one has to navigate a path out of the all-consuming despair, shock and horror.

Self righteous anger over suspicions of irreligion are all too familiar here. But the roots of the rage go deep; into histories, ideologies, politics and lawmaking. The roots are hard to extricate, but understanding can prevent us from consciously or unconsciously watering and nurturing this poison tree with our words and actions. And so, with this terrible burden of shame to bear as a Pakistani and Muslim, I attempt an understanding.

It is unquestionable that a number of violent crimes are driven by religious zealotry. Desperate attempts to deny that, supposing that this would ‘save’ Islam’s image are pathetically delusional.  In doing what the students of Mardan university did in the name of religion, they lynched their own professed faith; and when we take the bait and draw all the wrong conclusions- either haplessly proving that ‘religion has nothing to do with it’, or directly blaming faith and religious doctrine itself for the atrocity, we fuel the blind hate further, becoming the lynch mobsters sinning against a faith that has equal potential for beauty, peace and healing.

While the mobsters let themselves be swayed and drunken by righteous anger, deep within somewhere, there was an uncomfortable knowledge that this was a sacrilege, an atrocity that no religion, no god, no prophet can condone. But mobs don’t pause and reflect; they veer into madness. While the zeal was religiously driven, it was not inspired or guided in any direct way by religious doctrine. That distinction is important to make.

But equally important is the need to address why our mass behavior descends into mob zealotry and fanatical violence driven by and in the name of religion? The reasons go very deep.

While allegations of blasphemy in the Mashal Khan case are far from proven, it is clear that he professed progressive views, a critical and questioning mind. The local mass religious mindset, however, does not allow questions and cannot withstand intellectual challenge. This is in large part because the religious discourse in our society is largely anti intellectual to the extent that even an intellectual approach to religion is sneered at as deviant, threatening and disrespectful. This simplistic, anti intellectual discourse is asserted by wielding power and instilling fear by religious leaders, and the use of threat and violence by those who lack the privilege of authority.

This decadence of religious discourse in this part of the world is rooted in the colonial past when the prestigious madrassah was systematically  marginalized and disempowered as part of the colonial education policy of ‘schooling the world.’ The cornered madrassah took refuge behind a defensive, protectionist, insecure religious discourse, trying to hold on in a rapidly changing milieu. In an attempt at self preservation, this defensive discourse refused to engage and became airtight and obscurantist. This still characterizes the madrassah and those who emerge from the system: a stubborn refusal to intellectually engage with alternative discourses that the modern world is teeming with. But we cannot insulate our youth from the tide of intellectual assault from modern ideas and new patterns of thinking. There will be questions raised, and our refusal to engage or even bother with articulating responses will alienate thinking minds.

 At the other end of the spectrum, this anti intellectualism teaches conservative minds to take an intellectual challenge as an audacious affront- hence violence becomes the only ‘language’ to respond with.

In more open societies in the West, Muslim communities have no option but to engage and adapt, hence one sees an increasing realization of the need to come up with an intellectually robust spirituality that does not cave in or go berserk on encounter with difference.

Religious scholars as well as secular voices need to realize that this is not just about having or not having the blasphemy law. It is about the need to develop a new religious discourse that addresses and accommodates the genuine questions that the modern mind is full of- a discourse that arms itself with reason, not fear and violence.

The many passionate condemnations of the incident by religious leaders and action against hate speech as well as public demonstrations in solidarity with the victim family are welcome developments that help to restore one's faith in ourselves despite this awareness of the terrible darkness engulfing us. But a deeper and more farsighted approach for religious leaders and educators would be to guide a new discourse on religion that contends with alternative perspectives and intellectual challenges with maturity, wisdom and openness; a discourse that accommodates diversity and makes respectful space for difference.

Another more personal lesson for me is to remind myself that while self righteous consciousness of professed faith charges mobs to blind rage, a deeper rooted faith also inspires some like Ibn Ali Miller- or closer to home, that nameless Imam from Chitral- to stand in the midst of the storm of hate and violence to save, make peace and heal. It is up to us to make the choice. In our capacities and within our spheres, those who still value faith must  resolve to passionately impart compassion, empathy, tolerance and respect for difference as part of and through faith- otherwise, our proclaimed belief cannot prevent us from committing excesses and injustices in religion’s name. 

On the Women Protection Bill in Pakistan...

A MIMETIC RELIGIOSITY

Maryam Sakeenah

The refusal of the Pakistani religious right to allow the criminalization of domestic violence does not just reflect misogyny and a sense of insecurity over a perceived loss of patriarchal control. On a deeper level, it shows a mindset that reduces religion to a mere mimetic replication of the first Islamic society of Arabia over fourteen centuries ago.

One of the major justifications given by clerics for opposing the Women Protection Bill prescribing punishments for domestic violence is that such a law is essentially ‘against the Shariah’, as it innovates laws not hitherto specified by the primary sources of religion.

This mindset has surfaced elsewhere too- one of its starkest manifestations is ISIS’s revival of institutionalized slavery as an ‘Islamic’ practice, as slavery had not been explicitly criminalized by Islam.

The problem with this thesis is that it is literalist in interpretation and mimetic in implementation. This literalism and mimesis vindicate and endorse as ‘Islamic’ many an authoritatian and misogynistic practices dating from the time and place in which Islam was first set, unacceptable today in the light of the fundamental rights and principles over which humanity has achieved a quiet, universal consensus.

But what needs to be examined is whether Islam actually calls for an exclusively literalist reading of its sources and a mimetic replication of seventh century Arabia everywhere and at all times?

The Quran and even its elaboration in hadith stipulate few legislations, especially for phenomena characteristic of modern society. There is a wisdom in this silence- it understands the essential condition of human society- flux. This means that as societies evolve and grow over time, their needs change, and for a law system to be relevant, it must be flexible and adaptive to novel situations and conditions as they arise. Hence there is a deliberate purpose in this silence- to allow space for lawmaking relevant to the time and place. Yet the sources of Islam are complete in themselves- because they leave pointers, guidelines and suggestions that must inspire and lead such lawmaking in the right direction.

This understanding was not lost on the earliest generation after the Prophet (PBUH) who made Ijtihad a vital institution for progressive juristic innovation, such as Umar (R.A)’s innovations in the divorce laws to cater to the trends in his time.

Secondly, the purpose of law is to safeguard values which are at the core of Islam. The legal aspect of the shariah exists to protect the ‘maqasid ul shariah’- the core values. At times such law is explicitly laid down by the sources. Often, it is not. The scholars of Islam are in agreement that to ensure the achievement of the maqasid, juridical innovation may be made within the parameters defined by Islamic sources. Hence, Ijtihad.

One of these core values is human dignity and sanctity of one’s personal integrity. When a woman goes through domestic abuse and violence, it violates her dignity and respect as a human being and her fundamental rights as a partner in marriage. There is absolutely no equivocation in Islamic sources about this being condemnable behavior. The acceptability of domestic violence as the husband’s prerogative in Arabia predated Islam. Nor is the absence in the Quran and sunnah of a fixed penal law regarding it a bar to formulating such a law. There is no equivocation in the sources of Islam regarding the reprehensibility of domestic violence. By making gentle physical admonition exclusively tolerable in extreme cases of ‘nushuz’ (rebellion/defiance as in the case of unabashed disloyalty) and only after exhausting all other preferred strategies, Islam actually rejects domestic violence as the man’s prerogative to have his way with his spouse. The strictest conditions are laid down to ensure that neither pain is inflicted nor a mark left. Islam does not really require of men to put this exceptional permissibility to action in any situation at all. Simultaneously, the Prophetic conduct shows this never really has to be done, and there are better ways to resolve marital discord. He said, "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then be intimate with her?” (Bukhari, vol. 8, Hadith 68)  

The Quran says that spouses are to ‘dwell in tranquility with each other’ (Ar-Rum 21). It instructs husbands to ‘Live with them on a footing of kindness and equity.’ (An-Nisaa 19) 

In a society where honour killings, acid throwing, domestic and sexual violence are far too common, legislating in order to curb these horrendous practices works well to fulfill the maqasid of the shariah. Any legislation to ensure the provision and protection of the human rights recognized by Islam is commendable, just like the Prophet (PBUH)’s praise for the pre Islamic peacemaking document ‘Half ul Fuzul’ which laid down rights.

While the Women Protection Bill needs to be examined and modified to rule out its misuse and there can be a healthy debate around it, there can be no doubt that in its objective it fulfills the demand Islam makes on us_ to deter violence against the vulnerable and provide access to justice.

While constructive criticism and suggestion should be welcomed, the tirade from the religious against the law is tragic in that it seems to imply that Islam stands on the side of the male abuser and slights the issue of domestic violence. That is a dangerous and ugly untruth which ought to have been dispelled by those who claim to stand for Islam’s defence.      

Addressing the issue of the revival of slavery as ‘Islamic’, Michael Perez writes, ‘…we must refuse the position that limits our contemporary ethical horizons. To do so, we can take the Prophet’s statements against slavery as our contemporary responsibility… Such a perspective is critical today… Muslims have a role to play in the elaboration of Islam, and push forth a future in which slavery is no longer a question.’

Those who insist on an uncreative mimetic religiosity need to remember what Iqbal had meant when he wrote, ‘The movers have gone ahead… the unmoving ones have been crushed.’

On the Legalization of Homosexual Marriage in the United States

RAINBOW TINTED LENSES AND BLACK N WHITE UNIVERSES

Maryam Sakeenah

An interesting clash ensued in the wake of the US Supreme Court’s ruling legalizing homosexual marriage. While the supporters of the cause celebrated having finally broken free from the bondage to regressive conservatism, there was on the other end of the spectrum, anger and bitterness over the mainstreaming of what is seen as a violation of God’s law and the ‘natural’ order of things.

Pakistan’s vibrant social media also reflected these divergent trends with a furious melee between those sporting rainbow coloured profiles and those invoking the wrath of God over the supporters of the new law.

The anger on both sides is quite misplaced and irrational. The clash between secular liberalism and conservative religion is inevitable and there to stay. The verdict coming from secular USA which prides itself in its liberal values is not surprising or outrageous. It is also understandable that those who subscribe to traditional religious faith would have a different opinion. It is all a matter of what one believes and how one looks at society and the wider world.

The problem, however, is with the attitude of moral superiority by the secular liberals. The twitter hashtag ‘#Lovewins’ for the sexual equality movement reeks of it, among other things. As if those who hold a different opinion do so out of hate; as if believing in traditional values and holding on to religious convictions is anti-love and against all that is humane and compassionate and egalitarian.

This presumption of moral superiority by the secular liberals at home and abroad is based on the idea that the conservative dissenters merely hold on with blind and ignorant stubbornness to outmoded and archaic religious convictions that pull humanity back from its path to progress laid out by the liberal reformist programme. This presumption is based on the widespread inability (even among Muslims) to understand the rationality of religious sexual ethics.

Parallels with the animal kingdom in which sporadic homosexual behaviour can be observed is often invoked to prove that homosexuality occurs in nature hence the religious idea that it is a violation of God’s order is incorrect. This comparison with the animal kingdom fails to understand the fundamental premise of religion: that human existence has a Divinely ordained purpose and goal, and that human civilization is to be ordered on values and principles to facilitate the individual and collective pursuit of the purpose of human life. A number of patterns exist in the animal kingdom which, if mainstreamed in human society on the pretext that they are ‘natural’ in the jungle, can lead to chaos and perhaps extermination of human civilization.

According to the religious understanding, man has been endowed with the sexual instinct for several purposes- the most obvious is of course procreation and the continuation of the human race. However, it is also the sexual instinct that forms the most basic of human relationships which is the foundation of the human family. The family unit is the fundamental building block of human society, the oldest and most universal pattern of the human community; it is a means to engender and socialize individuals, a support system and a natural means to provide a number of vital social functions. Daniel Haqiqatjou writes, “Before modernity, family organization was the primary communal structure upon which people relied. Everything went through the extended family, e.g., business and one’s livelihood, education, health care, dispute mediation, and much more. Today, all these areas of life fall under the purview of the nation state and its corporate extensions, so we lose this sense of the importance of family cohesion and, correspondingly, how dangerous and disruptive a violation of it really is and was for past societies.” 

The human family is sustained on the concept of masculine and feminine complementarity. This means that the individual characteristics, roles and responsibilities of the male and the female gel together the marital bond and become the basis for the family to flourish. As parents, both men and women have clearly defined roles and responsibilities and the children they give birth to, benefit from both in specific ways.

Homosexuality and adulterous heterosexuality do not fulfil any of these purposes why Allah has created the sexual impulse in human beings. This leaves only a single purpose behind such sexual behaviours: sexual expression, indulgence and adventurism. Islam does not recognize this as an unconditional human right to be freely carried out in society, because human beings are capable of functioning on a level higher than a mere pursuit of the carnal drives. Even heterosexuals cannot express their sexual instinct except in a relationship of marriage with all the responsibilities it entails. Islam envisions an ordered society in which moral behaviour is regulated for the well being of all. Homosexuality and all other sexual behaviour which does not fulfill the purpose why Allah has put the sexual instinct in us is therefore discouraged.

The problem with legalizing homosexual relationships is that such recognition and acceptance of this sexual practice facilitates and encourages it. The soaring rates of homosexuality in some societies are largely because social acceptance of this incites many to experiment with it and indulge in it.

If a human being is put in a trial by Allah through an abnormal sexual orientation or through absence of opportunity to establish a legitimate sexual relationship, they are required to be patient through finding strength in faith. Self restraint and self control of our animal drives is something Islam requires from all Muslims. Some people are tested harder with this, and homosexuals fall in that category. A believer who is faced with this must direct his focus to other aspects of human life and develop himself spiritually and otherwise to live a fulfilling, productive life. In order to make this easy for them, psychological counselling, rehabilitation and support should be provided in Islamic societies. However, those who refuse to restrain themselves and pursue their carnal instincts (hetero or homo sexual) go against the spirit and teachings of Islam. If such behaviour is indulged in openly and shamelessly without restraint, then it is punishable by Islamic law as well.

The ethics of sexuality in Islam prescribe limits even for heterosexual relationships within marriage. Not only do these conform to Islamic standards of hygiene, health, safety and physical well being, but also uphold human dignity and a minimal standard of modesty. As homosexuality is not the typical sexual behaviour for which the human body is designed, it often involves methods and means which fall short of Islamic sexual ethics and regulations. It is scientifically proven that homosexuality (just as promiscuity) is a primary cause of the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

Homosexuality being a natural urge to someone is no justification in Islam for permitting it. Sadism can be natural to some people; so can serial killing or kleptomania, and these urges can only be recognized as a basic human right to the detriment of human society.

True freedom entails mutual respect of divergent views, which is quite ironically, absent in the sneering condescension with which secular liberals view the religious position on homosexuality. Believers in religion in this day and age are challenged with holding on to their convictions in a secular milieu which betrays its own ideals of liberty and tolerance of difference. The challenge is to refuse to be part of the melee, accept that the difference exists and is there to stay and yet being firmly poised in a profound conviction in the ‘hikmah’ of the Divine scheme of things. 

 

   

On Vogue's #MyChoice Video

A MATTER OF CHOICE

Maryam Sakeenah

The debate around Vogue’s controversial ‘My Choice’ video goes deeper than those on either side of it would think. While I do not make much of critique from those who take anything feministic with a pinch of salt, I understand that for many who sympathise with the feminist cause like myself, the message of the video is disturbing for other reasons. The problem with some of the most controversial statements in the video is not that they are offensive to conventional patriarchal attitudes, but the problem is with regard to a deeper question of personal faith and values.

The question really is of individual choices and individual freedoms to make those choices. The idea of choice in the video is overweeningly individualistic- a choice of one’s own that refuses to take into consideration any factor outside of the self and its interest; a self-centred choice; a selfish choice. This message is disconcerting for reasons beyond the gender debate which the video is about.

In confining choice to the self and its narrow interests, it refuses to consider that choices are made in a broader milieu, and that our choices are inadvertently and inextricably interconnected to a host of other factors and elements outside of the self. This perspective on human choice clashes head-on with the faith-inspired sensibility.

In the Islamic understanding, a requisite to accepting faith is a voluntary stepping back from the self’s desires, obsessions ad impulses for a deeper personal liberation. Faith is an act of submission to another higher, more perfect, sublime being beyond the self. It sets one free from the crippling bondage to the base, carnal and selfish; the material and the merely temporal. This liberation, for the believer, lifts the spirit onto a higher plane of consciousness where one becomes capable of acting impersonally, and altruistic choices become gratifying and heartening; one becomes capable of living larger than life. This is why throughout human existence, some of the most extraordinary acts of selflessness and heroism have been inspired by some form of faith. At this level of consciousness, one becomes mindful of one’s relationship with one’s context, those we share the planet and our lives with, the realm of existence and the Giver of all life.

In Islam this individual consciousness attainable through faith has a communal dimension. It is the most basic element of a social order that aims at justice, equity and the sanctity of individual rights and freedoms intrinsic to all creation. To achieve this is the collective goal of the community and requires regulation of personal conduct and laying down of rights, duties and responsibilities towards oneself, the community and the Creator for a larger purpose that brings the greater good for all and in turn impacts individual well being. In this scheme of things, the exclusive pursuit of absolute and unrestrained individual liberty above all simply does not fit in.

This is why the message that the choice of sexual orientation and sexual behaviour within, outside, prior to or without marriage is offensive to the sensibility that is rooted in the ethic of faith-based submission. It refuses to consider that human choices operate in a context that is not isolated from other lives and that we are part of ordered communities based on and seeking to achieve universally accepted moral ideals- justice, public welfare, equity, rights and liberties, peace, prosperity, harmony. The message of complete and uncompromising personal autonomy in disregard to all other factors and considerations is actually a call to irresponsible action, moral chaos and anarchy.

On the other hand is the issue of the video’s message attempting to pit women against men- a crass and peevish brand of feminism which again flies in the face of the beautiful balance and the Islamic concept of the genders being complementary rather than competing. According to the Quran, Allah has created everything in pairs. Muslim blogger on women’s issues- Sameen Sadaf explains, ‘Pairs symbolize sharing, unity, togetherness, complementarity and completion. The nature of this universe thrives on the complementarity of pairs. It celebrates the interdependent nature of both genders that beautify each other and by working together can they complete the task assigned to them by their Creator. Men and women together weave the intricate web of society in which women are the binding force who strengthen the exquisite fabric of human relationships.’

For all that women suffer, the panacea is not asserting a mutinous, defiant individualism, but in living to the full our multifarious roles as women within our respective contexts in pursuit of common goals for the greater good and as active agents to promote values that subvert oppressive patriarchal structures and attitudes that keep the suffering of women going. The commercial media industry is one such oppressive structure that objectifies the woman’s body for commercial ends. It is ironical that the video has been sponsored by and features prominent members and components of the commercial media.

If the message of the video was against the unfair judgement on women, it has been recklessly presented with a dangerous ambiguity that makes it easy for the core message to be eclipsed. Perhaps this too was for creating a sensationalism stoking controversy that could sell- yet another mark of the commercial media that produced it.

The debate around the video borders on deeper fundamental questions on our choices and liberties and our deepest convictions. The makers and promoters of this sensationalist piece of work should stop pretending that it is a voice or choice of all or even most women, or that it ought to be. To take that message or reject it is also a matter of choice that comes out of deeply embedded personal convictions.    

Attacks on Churches and Mob Violence in Lahore

TRANSCENDING THE US VERSUS THEM PARADIGM

Maryam Sakeenah

My parents chose to send me to a Christian missionary school- a decision I have always been grateful to them for. The Convent’s ‘Character Building’ programme instilled in me values which, owing to the essential kinship of the Abrahamic faiths, facilitated my appreciation and practice of my own faith as a Muslim later in life.

Incidentally, all serving staff in my household happen to be Christians. In Ramazan they prepare the Iftar, and at Christmas and Easter we give them an extra something to partake of the family festivity. Through all my extensive and longstanding interaction with Christian friends, colleagues, subordinates, there is no unpleasant or uncomfortable memory I have. And I know I am no exception.

In fact, when I condoled with my Christian domestic help about the unfortunate recent events targeting churches in Lahore, I sensed in their comments the same sentiment I have gleaned from my experience as a Pakistani Muslim. ‘We have been brothers and sisters living together for decades- there was never a problem. And now some unknown enemies wanting this country’s destruction want to create hate. We have nothing against each other- Muslims too are under attack from the same people. We need to be together’, said my illiterate Christian kitchen helper- (translation my own).     

There was an understanding even within these unlettered members of a less privileged minority community that something had gone wrong in recent years; that violent religious hate was not the ethos of this land; and that there was a common enemy out there whose triumph was in sowing discord and hate between the two communities.

And yet ironically I find a complete absence of this simple understanding in the opinions of vociferous social media commentators both from the secular-liberal and conservative perspectives. In fact, the polarity in their views is striking whenever I browse through my newsfeed. While sadness over the attack on the churches was palpable among all shades of opinion, there was a callous lack of sympathy for the innocent Muslim victims of the post-bombing mob-lynching by Christians, and a brazen attempt to paint the ensuing violence by Christian mobsters as ‘but natural.’ This selective sympathy shows our own deeply rooted prejudices. On the other extreme there are outrageous calls for indiscriminate reprisal against the Christian community of Youhannabad where the lynchings happened.

The problem with the narrative that emerges from these polarized, clashing perspectives is that it sees the recent events through the blood-stained lens of ‘Us versus Them’; as a ‘Christian versus Muslim’ issue which is both inaccurate as well as dangerous. In fact, the terrible mob violence that occurred in the wake of the church bombing was also a tragic result of dangerously viewing the attack on the church as ‘Muslim’ violence against ‘Christian’ victims. More accurately, it was violence by an extremist militant minority group for whom all who do not share their violent ideology are potential targets.  This is why the anger was directed at Muslims who had been engaged in routine business in the Christian locality. The two innocents picked for the barbaric lynching were lighter skinned (a characteristic of the Pashtuns) and at least one of them bearded. The mob violence was hence fired by ethno-religious stereotyping and the blind hate born of such prejudices.

In response to the ensuing violence by the Youhannabad locals there is brewing anger amidst neighbouring Muslim communities which sets the stage for potential clashes waiting in the wing. In the climate of fear and anger many families in Youhannabad are planning to relocate or have done so already. This is the triumph of the real enemy as it fulfils the malevolent agenda perfectly. The victory of the enemy is when its victim turns into a savage perpetrator like itself, continuing the cycle of violence.

Violent incidents targeting the Christian community in Pakistan in the recent past certainly fuel the anger by creating genuine and understandable grievances. However, it has to be understood that such targeting of the Christian community has always been resented and rejected by the overwhelming majority of the Muslim population of this country; and that the extremists involved in terror attacks on Christians are a fringe element rejected by the mainstream public opinion. Terrorist outfits are all out to exact vengeance that spares none- mosque, imambargah, church- Muslim, Christian, Shiite- all are fellow sufferers in this great calamity that has gripped us as the terrible cost of owning the US’s Great War on Terror.

The Christian community of Pakistan never has been, is not and should never be an oppressed minority hated and targeted by Pakistan’s Muslim majority. Those trying to reinforce this idea- whether extreme rightwingers, conservatives or the secular liberals- are utterly wrong. This is a false picture that will fuel more rage and blind hate.

What is required in the wake of this frenzied violence is a communal introspection by both communities. The Christian community needs to examine why its young members descended into such rank savagery, and must take responsibility to curtail simmering violence that utterly betrays the Christian spirit of forbearance and compassion. The Muslim community must also engage in a serious endeavour to root out the ire and vengeful streak building up in its ranks in this charged atmosphere.       

The pulpit and the minbar both must take up their vital roles to defeat this false ‘Us versus Them’ narrative. Both religions contain voluminous and powerful content on tolerance and compassion which needs to resonate to drown this madness in the name of faith. Faith must be the healing, the mending and the force inspiring peacemaking. The Quran questions the validity of a faith that justifies and inspires evil. "Say: "Worst indeed is that which your faith enjoins on you- if you indeed are believers." (2:93) It reminds us with a vital message that has never been as relevant as it is today. “Let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety... Verily, Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do.”  (5:8)

In the midst of this senseless melee of wrathful hate, the words of Islam’s blessed Prophet (PBUH) for his Christian citizenry from Najran become a beautiful encore played to a deaf audience.

"This is a message from [Prophet] Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion [in religion] is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.
No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate...
...Their Churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.
No one of the nation (of Muslims) is to disobey this covenant till the Last Day (end of the world)." (Text of the Charter of Privileges, Treaty of Najran)

'HAPPY MUSLIMS': to be or not to be...

A CLASH OF FRENETIC HAPPINESSES

Maryam Sakeenah

While the ‘Happy British Muslims’ video would not have in itself elicited a response more than a fleeting bemused scepticism, it was impossible to get over it and move on, given the 2 million youtube views, the reams of commentary and discussion it generated. The short clip apparently became the biggest issue in the issue-ridden Muslim world, judging by social media ratings. Ardent supporters of the attempt to showcase Muslims in the West as adaptable and ‘happy’ people, as well as bitter opponents of such meaningless and inappropriate depiction of Muslims, all jumped into the fray- soon enough, there was a raging storm in a teacup.

It all signifies the contradictions, polarities, sensitivities and contentions rife in the Muslim world- like a bubbling, gurgling, steaming cauldron.

The video aims to present an image of Muslims in the West as flexible, creative, adaptable, well-integrated, cheerful and positive-minded, so as to dispel negative stereotypes that have dominated public imagination in the West since 9/11. Imam Johari Abdul Malik from the US comments on the video: ‘The narrative about Muslims is so often about being hungry and angry, people have started turning it around using the social media...’

Underlying this, however, there can also be sensed a desperate attempt to assure that ‘we are like you, too’- a desire to be accepted, owned and integrated into Western society. This desperation can be understood in the context of the consistently rising Islamophobia in these societies.

However, the problem with this appeasing, placatory attitude is not so much with Muslims as it is with Western societies. These societies seem to be growing increasingly ethnocentric, losing willingness to embrace diversity and to allow distinct ethnic, cultural and religious identities to survive and thrive without either being compelled to Westernize to be able to integrate, or being socially marginalized. This goes against the essence of the values of pluralism, tolerance and coexistence at the heart of Western liberal tradition that it prides itself in. It is ironical and interesting to note that while the ‘Happy British Muslims’ video was doing the rounds, Tony Blair reminded the leaders of the Western nations to ‘move the battle against Islamist extremism to the top of the political agenda.’ The same day that the video was released, the English Defence League held a demonstration outside London’s largest mosque against Islam in Britain. On this backdrop, given the very grave challenges that beset the Muslim world, attempts like the ‘Happy British Muslims’ video appear little more than pathetic. The efficacy of the video message as a response to a pervasive anti-Muslim campaign is highly questionable.

But that is not the only troubling thought. Equally disconcerting, if not more was the impulsive and inane, utterly dispensable video rejoinder to ‘Happy British Muslims’ video, made by some Islamic groups on the internet titled ‘Happy Muslims, HALAL version.’ This video removed the images of all women and re-released it as acceptable by Islamic standards- minus the laughing, clapping, singing females. This reflects a lopsided, immature and almost obsessive fixity on juristic intricacies of Muslim law without even a cursory understanding and appreciation of the spirit of Islam. Such fiqh-obsessed shallow-mindedness is often manifested in moral panics among Muslims over the visibility of Muslim women.

It is deplorable that the makers of the ‘Halal’ version who deservedly educed ridicule and censure utterly failed to grasp the idea of true happiness in Islam. For one, given the plethora of grave predicaments we are caught in, the despondency, frustration, defeatism, confusion and hurt, the cluelessness about the future, the directionlessness and leaderlessness, the wars, civil wars, socio-political crises and the rising monster of sectarianism- these aren’t the happiest of times for Muslims anywhere in the world. Empathy is an essential component of Islamic brotherhood- the fact that a Muslim must feel the pain of another Muslim (no matter how geographically distant) as his own. I wonder how I, as a Muslim, can clap and cheer my deep sadness away? Brecht writes,

‘Truly I live in dark times!...

A smooth forehead

 Points to insensitivity

He who laughs
Has not yet received
The terrible news

What times are these, in which
A conversation about trees is almost a crime
For in doing so we maintain our silence about so much wrongdoing!’

 The prospect of declining life and time and the impending oblivion of death, and the eventuality of accountability in the eternal life is the grave and inescapable truth one must confront. The Prophet (SAW) said, ‘If you knew what I know, you would laugh little and weep much.’

Happiness in Islam is not the be-all and end-all. It is not to be pursued, but in its deepest sense, it comes to those who discover and live out their purpose in life. Orwell writes, ‘Men can only be happy if they assume that the purpose of life is not happiness.’ Fun and entertainment as temporary relaxation have a place- and a significant one- but happiness in Islam is gained by tasting the sweetness of faith through complete self-surrender to God. It is attained by giving and selfless sacrifice. ‘By Time! Man is in Loss. Except those who believe and do righteous good deeds and exhort one another to the Truth and exhort one another to patience.’   (The Quran)

Imam Johari quoted earlier, was perturbed by the image of Muslims as ‘hungry and angry’, but one cannot wish that away or pretend that is not the case by cheering and smiling away into the camera. Yes, Muslims writhe in the throes of poverty, starvation and crippling oppression, but happiness is attainable to those who do their small bit to help alleviate some of that.

This idea was tried to be conveyed in another video rejoinder titled ‘Happy Muslims: Sunnah Version’. It is a brief, beautiful and simple message that reflects the Islamic ethos of happiness- it shows clips of Muslims rescuing and saving lives of the calamity-stricken, and ends with the line, ‘This, my friend, is happiness.’ However, this video was blurred and poorly made, and circulated briefly in a few closed Muslim circles. It never went viral. And here is the very heart of the problem: the voicelessness and disempowerment of the Muslim visionary, and that ‘the worst are filled with a passionate intensity.’ (Yeats)    

Waa Islaamah! (Alas, for my Islam!)

IN THE HEART OF DARKNESS: ‘WAA ISLAMAH!’

Maryam Sakeenah

The rising death toll, the blood and the gore hurts_ but the searing, tearing hurt like a thorn lodged in the very heart which will outlast the last rotting corpse is when these and other enormities are committed in the name of the faith of Islam: a faith that declares the sanctity of innocent life to be greater than the sanctity of the Kaabah itself... And like the humiliated Muslim woman from Madina 1400 years ago disrobed in the marketplace had exclaimed in distress, the believer’s bloodied heart cries out, ‘Waa Islamah!’ (Alas, for my Islam!)

When indiscriminate violence uses religious beliefs and ideals to seek cover under, it viciously defaces those. A grotesque wrong has been committed against Islam by extremists and fanatics, and our collective inability to reject it in clear terms has had grave consequences. Responses to Islamist extremism from Islamic scholars have often been ambivalent and ‘politically correct’ rather than passionately censorious of this being done in Islam’s name. This is for two reasons: the clergy’s preoccupation with minutiae of fiqh, denomination and sect; and sympathy for the original motives of religious militants who launched a defensive struggle against unwarranted occupation and oppression against Muslims.

By all means, selfless sacrifice for a higher cause (justice and truth) is the most beautiful that the human being is capable of: Islam assents, through the doctrine of Jihad and the esteem in which those who undertake it are placed. But there is a lot of murkiness out there, especially on this side of the Durand Line. The original impetus for the defensive struggle has spiralled into no more than naked violence for an ideologized power struggle, and the damage done by fanatical groups in the name of Islam is irreparable in its psycho-social consequences.

It is these psycho-social consequences that are the gnawing, deep hurt. I struggle as a teacher on Islam, with confused young minds full of questions, confusions, bitterness. There is deep resentment and unease over the failure of Muslim religious leadership to provide clarity and answers. Among those still struggling to hang on to faith, there is a seething, muted anger over traditionalist scholars’ failure to rescue the narrative from politicized and ideologized contemporary Jihadism and Salafist fanaticism. There is today a clear trend of disenchantment towards religion in Pakistan’s middle and upper middle classes, the gravity of which is yet to be recognized, and to meet which we are utterly unprepared.

The media has often played the role of Agent Provocateur stoking controversy around serious subjects of Islamic jurisprudence. Sensationalist talk-shows deal in half-truths and untruths, relaying featherweight opinions on issues of gravity, by scatterbrained demagogues and con artists. Clarity remains elusive as young minds are confused over these matters of complexity. Given the fact that the source of all information for most these days is primarily if not solely the popular media, it is not surprising that many growing up post 9/11 have come to associate religion with regression, backwardness and even evil, thinking we would do better without it. When you pit a madrassah-graduate religious scholar against a squealing and irate Liberated English Speaking Woman giving him a couple of minutes to explain away the barrage of allegations of misogyny often born of a superficial understanding of religion and society, you make Islam seem incapable of withstanding the secular-liberal assault; you reinforce the idea that religion being a thing of the past, needs to be cast off for a progress that apes the Western model: Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's; Give unto God that which is God's.

The struggle is not entirely about the physical elimination of violent religious groups through military strategies. There is a greater and more formidable challenge to face: to undo the terrible damage that the religio-ideological underpinnings of extremist groups have done to Muslim societies, and to hearts and minds.

Our failure to rescue the religious discourse from its abusers who have the audacity to pose as its defenders  is a huge blemish on the pages of our history. History’s verdict shall be unrelenting and merciless against us.

Islam in this society faces an unprecedented crisis. And yet, hackneyed and simplistic as it may sound, in the heart of this darkness there is a flicker of hope. At the heart of crisis is often opportunity, if we learn the right lessons: that religious violence is a hydra we created with our silence towards grave injustices against our own people on the dictates of the Global Bully, thinking the unholy alliance would bring us boons. We then nurtured this hydra and owned it with our silence towards the crimes it committed against other innocents in the name of Islam. And now the genie cannot be bottled back up again. Two wrongs do not make a right. Two silences slowly kill us all, till all we hear is the haunting echo, 'Waa Islaamah!' 

A realization is slowly sinking in even though we took far too long to learn- that extremists use religious sources to justify their ideology, hence the responsibility on religious scholars to spearhead a progressive interpretation of Islam rooted in its sources is great, and that this has to come from the highest authorities on religion venerated by the generality of Muslims. Traditional Muslim scholars need to assert, as Sheikh Hamza Yusuf puts it, that indiscriminate violence in the name of Islam is‘neither from religion nor sanctioned in any reading from our pre-modern tradition. It is a modern phenomenon, and those practising it have learned it from nihilistic elements in Western tradition who innovated from Marxism and Asian philosophy like the kamikaze...’

The current crisis is also gradually bringing the realization that denomination and sectarian orientation are secondary when the attack is on the very soul of Islam, and that the reply has to be proclaimed with a single voice. It is helping us understand- though the cost of our unwillingness to learn has been too dear- that our condition cannot be traced down to an externalized enemy to give us a comforting sense of ‘We the good and true versus They the evil and false.’ Often it is more complex than that, the evil more insidious and closer to home.

The pulpit has to assume responsibility to set the record straight and disseminate the eclipsed tradition that has no equivocation regarding the rejection of fanaticism and violence against innocents, and the sanctity of human life. As the crescendo of the salvaging voice for Islam rises, the narrative will be rescued from the unworthy and undeserving. It has been a long, hard way but in Pakistan there is a clear shift in public opinion against the TTP and other religious hardliners. With their atrocious acts, these groups have dug up their own graves, as the human heart’s  innate moral criterion balks at such an inversion of basic morality in the name of religion. In the Heart of Darkness, holding on to hope is still possible.