Honton ko si kar dekhiye pachtaiye ga aap
Hangame jaag uthte hain aksar ghuttan ke baad
Any anodyne effect this sher might have had on me was lost forever when my neo-Trotskyite friend decided to give me his interpretation of it. I didn’t ask for it, but there it was. A multi-headed hydra called “having coffee” – where the conversation starts off polite, turns to prittle-prattle , turns to poetry, turns to politics, turns to polemics, turns to punches. Lucky for me, he hits like a girl.
“Religious extremism is the new communism,”
he hissed, spraying spittle in all directions. I laughed. He carried on, unperturbed but passionate:
“The poor man has found his outlet – the injustice, the exploitation, the degradation, the desperation he’s suffered has found its expression. Islam, like communism, is based on egalitarian principles and promises them justice and equality. You think religious extremism has got anything to do with religion? It is nothing but the collective voice of a people who’ve been wronged their whole lives.”
Somehow this gave me goose bumps and I quickly gulped down the latte in hope of thawing the chill his words left. It didn’t work and I got to thinking about Pakistan and Pakistanis everywhere.
Religious extremists in Pakistan can come from all walks of life but a sizeable chunk belongs to the poorer section of the society. Pakistani immigrants and expatriates living in the West also make up a significant portion. Why are these two groups more prone to religious extremism and terrorism? Was it that, time and again, they were discriminated against and shunted to silence? Did the exclusion leave such bitterness that it got bottled up inside for so long – so long that it is now, quite literally, exploding?
In Pakistan’s context, the implication that religious extremism is connected to poverty and disfranchisement has been made not with a bang but a whimper (pun unintended). I think this concept needs to be forced to the fore. Many in the corridors of power are finding it convenient to ignore the ‘real’ reasons leading to Islamic radicalism, as that may point the j’accuse finger in their direction. But let’s briefly look at why a 19 year old Pakistani boy picks up a Kalashnikov or why a 37 year old father of three straps explosives around his waist.
It’s no secret that democratic institutions in Pakistan are in a frail state, if at all alive.
And then there is no Left or not much left of it. (The Communist Party of India could arguably be a good example of the importance of such a “balance of power” – on the domestic front at least.) In Pakistan very few avenues are open to the poor in need of some succour or just in need of voicing their distress. So, what happens? Under a dictatorship, and with no diversity of political parties to choose from, the poor, frustrated man turns to the radical Right – the Mullahs and their might.
Pakistani religious extremists living in the West dance to a slightly different tune. Feeling discriminated, displaced, alienated or plain confused – they crave to cling to a core, something that will anchor their sense of identity. Often times this comes in the form of religion. Sometimes its taken to an extreme. So, the religious radical turns to radicalism not out of a love for religion, but a deep hatred for those elements that he felt were unjust towards him (or his brethren.) Anti-Western sentiments do not transpire from Koranic verses, instead they’re born of the experiences one had in/of the West and the bitter taste that can leave in one’s mouth… body and soul.
This is important. Scholars like Nichole Argo have accentuated the point: emotional and social ties precede the acquisition of ideology. Either our social situation has to be in the doldrums or our emotional condition so wounded that we take a religious ideology to an extreme. The media almost always portrays the religious extremist or terrorist as a gun-slinging gung-ho Islamist with a medieval mind and beard to boot. He is a dangerous, diehard jihadi on a mission to kill or be martyred trying. Such a description is like a donut-truth; the truth, the whole truth, with a hole in the truth (I forget what film this line is from). That hole is the real reasons people are pushed to accept a radicalised Islam, and these reason need to be better understood if we sincerely hope to curb extremism. Half-measures – like madrassa reformation – being implemented by our marginal-satisfiers might prove productive in that they’re broadening the narrow teachings of many religious seminaries. But they’re not preventing extremism. People, especially the poor and alienated, will continue to feel helpless in the face of a system they despise but can’t do anything to change. In fact, they may feel, and most do, that the measures being taken to tackle extremism are the spawn of the West, the very demon they wish to slay. So, they will continue feeling dejected and cheated. This inadvertently leads to the shift in their psyche that paves way for an extremist view.
Some extremists may genuinely be harbouring a twisted interpretation of religion, and others may just be twisted by nature. But I believe that for most the acquisition of a radical religious ideology is triggered from a more fundamental feeling of victimisation, of feeling wronged, and/or being part of a harshly unjust system. In such cases religion offers unction, and a bandwagon-effect ensues whereby millions of disempowered and discriminated find a mouthpiece and meaning in the Right. Ironically, the factors thrusting them to the extreme right is born of leftist logic; an anti-establishment egalitarian cry for equal rights for the common citizen.
(How corrupt leaders exploit this feeling in the masses to further their own political interests is another matter. Also I would like to advise everyone to not turn this into a debate about Islam. It is about how the basic wrongs in society which cause an individual to adopt an extremist view, and how it is these wrongs that need to be focused if we wish to break free from the vicious cycle of militancy and dictatorship.)
Photo Credits: Flickr.com
Well, Qandeel, Extremism certainly is NOT a single category – that of religious kind.
But extremism certainly creeps in when God’s Words and Teaching are no longer preserved. Tamil Tigers is a Marxist – a completely secular group.
We see that many of what you call “Western-wannabe’s” have gone from the extremism of “pleasure-is-sin ascetism to the “sin-is-in” liberalism. In these wanderings from one extreme to another, the extremist tendencies produced unprecedented social upheaval at home and unprecedented exploitation and injustices abroad.
The central fact is that overwhelmingly extremist acts are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective. It is a demand-driven phenomenon. Similarly, some extremist follows a violent path that target society to put pressure on its government to change policy.
In some cases, our own government and Agencies have supported and/or created such bogeymen for strategic reasons that have put us in a mess. And as Dr Ayesha Siddiqa correctly noted: “This confusion needs to be shed. If Islamabad has to pursue, as it did once, policies that relied on rightwing extremists, then it should also be prepared to put up with the penetration of such elements into its body politic. It cannot sow the wind and then refuse to reap the whirlwind.”
Well, Abid, WHAT is/are the key variable/s then? Why run-of-the-mill reproof without any solid argument of your own? Do not shirk from having a dialogue; my article is obviously not conclusive, its open to feedback and discussion. So kindly do not just disagree, but give me reasons WHY and perhaps your own counter-theory if you have one.
Ibrahim:
Since you brought up the issue of Ijtehad – I wrote on this site that Ijtihad denoted interpretation and in this century the process as held by Allama Iqbal required re-interpretation of earlier jurisprudence. And let me also remind you that there are conflicitng definitions and despite my request you did not provide a definition that will be in sync with your eminently ‘knowledgable’ standpoint.
I quoted Iqbal’s famous lecture and let me quote him again:
‘The prophetic method of teaching, according to Shah Waliullah, is that, generally speaking, the law revealed by a prophet takes especial notice of the habits, ways, and peculiarities to whom he is specially sent. The Prophet who aims at all-embracing principles, however, can neither reveal different principles for different peoples, nor leaves them to work out their own rules of conduct. His method is to train one particular people, and to use them as a nucleus for the building up of a universal Shariat. In doing so he accentuates the principles underlying the social life of all mankind in the light of the specific habits of the people immediately before him. The Shariat values (Ahkam) resulting from this application (e.g. rules relating to penalties for crimes) are in a sense specific to that people; and since their observance is not an end in itself they cannot be strictly enforced in the case of future generations’ (The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, lecture 6) - by the way these lectures are banned in Saudi Arabia!
After all your comments and citing Tableeghi Jamaat ‘harmless’ etc., you want a definition of radical and extremist. You want to declare me as “ignorant”, of Islam and “very dangerous”, and SCRUTINIZE my every post, hence labeling my thought and faith itself as “suspect”, on the simple reason that I don’t agree with your interpretation of Islam or am not schooled in a manner that is acceptable to you?
So the small groups howsoever ‘harmless’ they appear to be, if appropriate the hegemony to define, interpret and implement Islam then this IS, akin to “extremism”.
The “Cricket Team”: Pakistan being a Muslim majority state, how many times have you seen people raise hue and cry on any one growing a beard, praying, or fasting? No one does. The criticism comes, when senior and influential members of team who are in position of controlling the careers of other players form a cult. The cult of the same mentality that ONLY accepts Tableeghi jamat’s version of Islam.
The newspapers reported: “ Dr Ashraf has also told the cricketers that there should be no pressure on players who don’t pray regularly: “I have told Inzamam there should be no perception among players that if they don’t pray, they will not be in the team”. Inzamam is supposed to have told him that there was no such pressure on anyone…”
On Muhammad Yousaf’s conversion from Christianity it is said that he was inspired by the collective prayers of the team: he probably did not want to be left out. A newspaper also report the Pakistan ‘s popular Christian singer, A Nayyar with some ‘evidence’ of coercion. I don’t know what’s truth but it did leave many question marks.
And PJ Mir, the media manager when aired his objection to team members over-doing their TJ beliefs was chided and a fatwa was issued against him. Subsequently he left the country.
I called Tableeghi jamat benign in the sense that it at the outset does not preach violence or militancy. However, as I said earlier it is an organization with theological affiliation the Deobandi sect (that is by the way a minority sect in Pakistan). Many things which Deobandis preach as “Islam” is not the Islam understood by many others like the Baralevi majority of Pakistan. The hegemony that Tableeghi Jamat wants to exercise in Pakistan is disturbing to say the least.
Adnan wrote:
“The other misconception is tableeghis means students of madrassahs while in reality this is not true. Most of members of tableeghi parties belong to various field of life. from Engineer to Architect, all are free to join. madrassah students are rather busy in their schools and they can’t participate tableegh due to its mobility since most of their members are in journey most of the time”
Tableegi jamat is the “open-front” or popular face of Deobandi tehrik. It attempts to infiltrate into the centers of power. For instance the failed coup leaders in the 1990s, officers like General Mustansir Billah and others, were tableeghis and the government they wanted to make was also tableeghi jamat oriented clergy.
All the Sunni sectarian organizations have had links with Tableeghi jamat, until recently (when his outfit was banned) Moulana Masood Azhar used to have a camp at Raiwind ijtama, so did Haq Nawaz Jhangvi. The slogans were chanted “sur buland sur buland deoband deoband”. Every ex ISI chief becomes a Tableghi. What a co incidence!
Junaid Jamshed, had every right to do what he wants to do, but he HAD NO right to call Music haram and “satanic life style”. He is not the Pope, nor are Raiwind , Binori Town and Haqqania , Islam’s Vatican! This is extremism that you call Music “haram”, humiliating all those Sunni Muslims who revere saints who practiced music and qawalli.
Shoaib Mansoor did not go to Sindh High Court to force Junaid Jamshaid to play the guitar but Binori Town did go to Sindh High court to force Shoaib Mansoor from showing his movie, Khuda Ke Liye esp when it showed what Shoaib thought was a valid “Islamic Point of view”.
that is extremism!
How many Aga Khanis do we know who have started a petition to stop Raiwind Ijtima in Pakistan or to declare non Ismaili Muslims as “non Muslims?” But from Jamat e Islami to Binori town – the latter are another variant of TJ - have launched movement to declare Ismails non Muslims. That is extremism.
How many Bohris you know who have told you that if you don’t wear a cap you are not a true Muslim. I have been told by Tableeghi friends that if I don’t have a stereotypical appearance, I am not a true practising Muslim, even having a “collar” is haraam they told me once—-this is extremism!
When Al Huda preaches a system where covering face becomes most important part of Islamic identity , it is extremism because they fail to tell you that Abu Hanifa , the Imam of majority of Pakistani Muslims considered it to be “non essential” -
Even abroad (like the UK), the stalls outside the mosques where Tableeghis gather for weekly activity have literature that condemns Sufism as “Qabar parasti”, and declares Shias as non-muslims, every year in Raiwind ijtima Police confiscates loads of sectarian literature that is meant to flow freelu. Just scan the new papers and you will find small news items hidden in 3rd or 4rth page of news papers saying so.
I have disagreed with you both, I have given my point of view, my views but I have not called you ignorant, nor have suspected your faith, have not called my understanding of Islam as only “true” or correct version of Islam.
I hope you will know what is extremism - and difference of opinion!!!
It would be evident from the foregoing that some accusations against “practicing” Islamic community are based on spurious terms. Their perceptions of what constitute “extreme” behaviors or for that matter, what lead one towards extremism are off by a wide margin. It may come as a surprise, if they bother to seriously search for answers and truth – that the so-called “fundamentalism” is NOT even a key variable in violent acts. In fact, such behaviors are not driven by religion.
There are varieties of interests that are served by creating the Islamic bogeyman syndrome. It is therefore, not surprising that this brand has come to include any group or sect that does not kowtow to one’s format - tableeghi jamaat and even some members of our cricket team. While others speculate that the “poor” and the “Diasporas living in the West” or maybe the “middle class” or perhaps the “upper-middle-class” - are the ideal Islamic bogeyman material!
For far too long, we have been fed snapshots, buzz words and sound bites taken from western media to tell us in essence: Islam is violent. For far too long, we are putting up with biased and shallow arguments that religion be put on the back-burner – faith has no place in public-life.
Guess, for some folks extremism is just a single category – i.e. religious kind, all other form of extremism is kosher. With such worldview geared – extremism of all kind may actually thrive while human rights takes a back seat!
Meanwhile the dhammal goes on ….
The space of this forum has converted into occupied territory of two persons. And they are adding nothing new to the discussion by making the same argument again and again.
So what is next: a fatwa??….., I was often chided as being ‘gumraah’ who needed more “hidayat”.
No need for drama. Let’s talk facts, ask questions, present arguments. Allah knows and you know if you’re gumraah or not. I’ve never made that accusation, but igorant about Islamic knowledge…that you are in my view.
anything that does not align with your worldview is ’suspect’?
Your views are suspect because they are devoid of knowledge and don’t seem to have some sound principles (you at once call TJ extremist but ‘benign’ as well; then you don’t want people to be judging, but felt at east to judge and call very harmless people extremists; if I go back to your comments here and in other posts, I will find that you quote Quranic verses without having to reinterpret them but then later ask for ‘progressive re-interpretations’ of verses that don’t suite you (la ikraha fid deen is something I think you quote from time to time).
As one of many examples of mistakes/odd comments, need I remind you that you equated ijtihad with RE-interpretation and failed to support it. Rather, you said that it might be mis-representation or something. So you see, my dost, I’m basing my arguments on what you write, and I’m to the point and not vauge (at least I hope so). Return the favor if you can.
Too much else to say but not enough time and have to respect ATP’s policy (I hope!)
Raza Rumi wrote:Extremism as one definition (narrow and dictionary oriented) is “advocacy of extreme measures or views” and perhaps militancy would be implementation of such measures in the physical sense.
So, you say extremism is ‘advocacy of extreme measure…’! This is begging the question. So, let me ask then: What is a definition of an extreme measure here that makes you call al-Huda, for example, extremist? Please substantiate your claims.
No not at all. You have obviously misconstrued in your zeal to trash my comment :). Believing and practising religion is one thing; and propagating a particular sectarian (deobandi inspiration in most cases here) belief in the public domain is another
How did I miscontrue your comments? Didn’t I ask a question? And, ding, ding, ding, we have something here: To you it is extremism to preach even non-violently a ‘brand’ of Islam that you dislike! Because, most of the things you mentioned (al-Huda, TJ and the cricket team) are non-violent to the core. To name them in the same breath as Lal Masjid is guilt by association and creates confusion and you know it.
So, your definition of extremism is to be rejected because openly practicing and preaching according to Quran and Sunnah is not extremism at all. I will advice you to go back and skim through your comments…how shallow they are! So, it’s extremism to wear and advice others to wear proper hijab (’Saudi-style’ to you; BB-style dupetta is not a hijab), giving a religious-kalimaat laced talks and growing a beard (i.e. cricket team) is extremism to you; people asking you to come to mosque, etc. (TJ) is extremism as well. Think what you are saying.
When I said your comment should be brought up again and again, I meant that it should be referred to again and again to showcase where you are coming from when talking about Islam because it’s good to know where the blogger/author is coming from? Don’t you agree? How is that wrong? Now, if you retract your comments and I keep bringing it up…that would be wrong.
Also, you wrote: while Islam clearly mentions that only Allah has that role as He is the ultimate Judge of our beliefs and conduct?
Yes, Allah is the ultimate judge but again you take a completely wrong meaning of this. Why did Allah then give His prophets the ability to judge? Why did Islam asks for khalifa, Qazis, a shariah court system and reveals laws to judge by? You think the justice system in the countries is not judging? Didn’t Allah say yanha ‘an il-munkir? Didn’t He say to help each other (physical, mental, preaching, etc.) in al-Birr?
And, if you want to insist on not judging, then why did you judge the ‘brand’ of Islam of al-Huda, etc.? Why did you percieve them as not what Islam is about or term them as extremists? Why do you advocate turning away from them? If this is not judging, then enlighten us again about your definition of ‘judging’.
Qandeel wrote: Ibrahim, I don’t understand why you’re lambasting Raza when you’ve already pointed out that ‘extremism’ has not been defined. Perhaps I should have been explicit about my meaning from the outset. But as you and Abid have suggested (I think), it is not easy to define the term. “Extremism” can be quite subjective and context-specific.
Well, there was no lambasting and I asked Raza some questions because his comments are devoid of a definiton of extremism but he includes people from all walks of like, male players to female preachers, under the label of extremists! I wanted to know why because that sounded quite odd?
And, no, I didn’t suggest that extremism is hard to define or not. I asked you to define it since your whole post revolves around it. The purpose for asking was to see what you consider to be extremism. If you can’t define it, then why did you use so many generalities?
As for the second part of your question, it isn’t as relevant as I was trying to keep the focus on Pakistanis, not Saudis.
Ok, but answer to the first of this question was quite meek. This is like trying to invent some tensions that don’t actually exist. In other words, as others have pointed out, the reasons you list are not the actual or sole reasons for ‘extremism’…still wondering about exactly what you mean by it.
This article and discussion is not of much use if you fail to define your premise. If you mean violence by extremism, then looking back at history it’s clear that it’s not religion specific or class specific…dominant people people are prone to violence/extremism just as those who preceive some sort of injustice.