Guest Post by Omer Alvie
[This satirical account is inspired by the real-life drama about the Ajoka play Burqavaganza in the Pakistan capital; See The News Editorial; Gulf News op-ed; a Daily Times report on the original play, and other press coverage.]
So this is how it all happened. Ajoka, a non-commercial theatre group committed to the cause of social change in Pakistan, unveiled its new play Burqavaganza last month in Lahore. The satirical play, written by Shahid Nadeem, addresses the issue of the burqa (veil) and highlights the double-standards and hypocrisy of the feudal/tribal mindset. The aim was to use humour and satire to challenge the cultural status quo and to provoke people to think for themselves.
The audience thoroughly enjoyed the show and the play received positive reviews in the press. But the most surprising response to the play came from a rather astute group of individuals belonging to the MMA (more popularly known as Mullah Military Alliance). Inspired by the success of the Burqavaganza, five extremely talented MNAs decided to perform their own impromptu over-the-top ‘drama‘ in the National Assembly. The play imaginatively titled Fanativaganza (by yours truly), was a staged rebuttal to the Ajoka group’s play.
Substituting the use of satire, the inspired MNAs opted for provocative language and violent hand gestures to ridicule the writer of Burqvaganza and the Director of the Ajoka theatre group. Apparently, to these five highly sensitive and pious individuals, the Burqavaganza play was clearly un-Islamic, enough to be classified as blasphemous. Although, it has to be clarified that these days, any critique, criticism, aspersion, censure, swipe or nitpicking of the norms and practices of these religious extremists will likely lead to a blasphemy charge, even if it is a comment regarding the general unruliness of their beards.
One minor clarification here, they cannot be called religious fundamentalists. This is because they fail to grasp the fundamentals of the religion they claim to be following. ‘Nutters’ is more appropriate and generally my preference.
The MNA performed drama did not get a positive response from the public or the press, but it did manage to get a standing ovation from the Minister of Culture, who subsequently announced a government ban on the Burqavaganza play to show his appreciation for the drama queens of the national assembly. He was so moved by the MMA performance that he additionally promised further government actions against the key members of the Ajoka Theatre group. I have to admit, as a Pakistani citizen, hearing this news brought a lump to my throat. It wasn’t that I was emotional, it just happened to be part of the process of me regurgitating my last meal, as I got sick to my stomach.
It is clear now that the government’s attempt at promoting ‘enlightened moderation’ in reference to religion has not been very successful. Actually, that is an understatement; it has been an unquestionable, resounding failure. I do admit though that they have managed to create an era of (religious) ‘moderated enlightenment’. When your faith is judged by the size of your beard or measured by the length of your veil, you are in serious, serious trouble!
Omer Alvie is a Pakistani residing in the UAE and writes, often satirically, on his blog The Olive Ream. He also writes about the Pakistani blog scene at Global Voices. This post was first published at The Olive Ream.
Jitna nuqsaan apnon se pauhncha hai kisi aur se nahi pauhncha…
Adnan you are right. In fact they have created a religion called secularism. And they are the clergy of this religion. If they have doubts, they should check their behavior. I think calling it religion is not fair. Cult is the right word. So these cult followers live in their own artificial reality. And the funny thing is, they backtrack on every issue they make a fuss about. For example they demand democracy, but when religious powers get the votes, they backtrack and support dictatorship. Nothing but breathtaking hypocrisy.
Jabir, the problem is that these pusedo liberals and enlightened people are more conservative and narrow minded than any conservative. They don’t think beyond the boundaries. For them rejecting a faith is liberalism and enlightment while real enlightment is that you do accept what other party think about. They reject others just by labeling them backwards or mullahs. The articles regarding recent Turkey elections just revealed the utter narrow-mindness of so called secularist. The world witnessed how backward these people are in their thinking. Their all enlightment is associated with clothes. If someone wears niqab or have beared, call em Mullah or backward. If some woman is in sleeveless or in shorts, she’s their role model. The equation of liberalism is very simple. Their liberalism is inversely proptional to somene’s dressing that is less clothes,more enlightened and liberal. If that’s the case that our friends in jungle are more enlightened and liberal than these wannabe liberals ;)
One of my programmer friend in US says right:
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
And I do experience this all the time on this forum of Adil Najam.
[quote post="712"]Obvious sign of defeat.[/quote]
Never argue with a fool, he will lower you to his level and then beat you with experience
yes my little friend, you just defeated me *grin*
I also recall what Imam Shafa’i[RA] said once after getting engaged with some “so called educated” of his time
I debated a scholar and beat him. Then I debated a layman and that layman beat me - he had no knowledge of the principles and texts. I had nothing to say
Have a nice sunday *grin*
@Nasir, you are confusing maslak as something tribal loyalty. You should hear or read Dr Zakir Naik. He explained very well that these maslaks came into being for explanation of different problems that needed elaboration in its time frame. Call them school of thought. And like in many disciplines i.e economics, there are schools of thoughts. If you adhere to one of them, it does not negate the other. So a professor of economics will be called economist whether he is inclination towards capitalism or socialism or communism. And all of these consult each other as the need arises. It means they are not in perfect agreement or disagreement but a mix of both.
This is exactly what Dr Zakir said: Call yourself a Muslim, no matter what is your school of thought it (read maslak).
This is highly appreciable of Adnan if he is referring to another school of thought. Well done. But your attack posts seem like you are trying to confine him somewhat.
Now tell me on one hand you call Muslims bad names for their divisions. And when someone shows he is beyond the boundaries of these divisions, you instead of appreciating this fact, start insulting him. Is this fair? Isn’t this hypocrisy?
[quote post="712"] i can think of Farhat Hashmi[/quote]
I think you’re wrong here. Farhat Hashmi in Parliment? I don’t think so. I think you’re referring Samia Raheel Qazi, daughter of Qazi Hussain of JI. Despite of rejecting philosphy of JI and her dad’s politics, I do appreciate the efforts that pathan lady made to get higher education, not only in Pakistan but in US as well. Her interview was published around a month back in Jang magazine and she replied all answers with honesty and with brain.
[quote]Several times Prophet[saw] asked His companions to verify some older event from Jews and Christians of Arab[/quote]
You are mixing different things. We are looking for genuine scholars of Islam. Jews and Christians were consulted only as an exception when no other venue was available; otherwise it is forbidden to follow Christians and Jews – read your Quran. The reason for your circus here is again that you are avoiding the original question.
[quote]Where on earth has written that one can’t consider people of other community respected enough?[/quote]
Your aain, baain, shain aside you have not come up with a single scholar’s name whose maslak you stand by. Shias and brelvis are water and oil…nothing less. Who are you kidding?
A good 70-80% of Muslim population is from Brelvi maslak, should not be difficult to bring at least a few hundred names. So why would you avoid your own larger community and bring example from a smaller (and kafir to some brelvis) community? Why are you embarrassed to bring any scholars from your own maslak? Kuch to hai jis kee parada daree hai…. :)
Run away if you must but this question remains unanswered…who do you consider scholars, people whose maslak you will stand by,…not just names that you use as a political stunt and have little in common with their faith and in another time would consider them almost outside Islam.
Rests of what you said are just personal attacks that Mullahs do when they are stuck for answer. Obvious sign of defeat.