Adil Najam
The media is full of “Maulana” Sufi Mohammed and “Maulana” Fazlullah.
All the television news channels are falling over themselves inserting the “Maulana” honorific not only to these two, but to everyone in their coterie.
Makes me wonder, how do you become a “Maulana“?
I mean this as serious question. Is there a process? A certification agency? An exam of some sort? A public process? The coming together of popular sentiment? What? And, how?
We as a society take honorifics seriously. As we should. Visiting Pakistan, I still get unnerved being called “Professor Sahib” and “Daktor Saab.” (Even more so since I suspect that people think that the later is somehow more important than the former!)
I understand that honorifics are an important cultural recognition. I also realize that sometimes they are simply terms of endearment bestowed by one’s fans or supporters. But they can also be publicity stunts for attaining false public credence. In the case of Aamir Liaquat Hussain (Alim OnLine) and his fake degrees, we also know that the repeated use of fake titles can, in fact, sway public opinion.
I had always assumed that there was a sense of intellectual contribution, maybe even piety, being attributed by the title of “Maulana.” I think many Pakistanis still assume so. Yet, it does not seem that many who have adorned with the title recently can make a claim to either.
My honest question merely wishes to figure out how these religious titles are being bestowed today. I assume that for such a title, there must be some criteria or process. Or is it self-proclaimed or based on looks alone? If so, is it now OK to call all the cabin crew on PIA whose facial hair is being targetted as “Maulana”?
I wonder if by throwing the title of “Maulana” on everyone, our media is actually diluting the value of the title? Demeaning the achievements of those who actually deserve it? Most importantly are they not giving “Islam a bad name” to the world at large by turning every gun-totting bearded guy like Fazlullah into a “Maulana”!
(Interestingly, till the writing of this, Wikipedia – which must never be fully trusted – calls Fazlullah a “Maulana” but Sufi Mohammad is not one in the headline, although he is in the text. Yet another reason not to take Wikipedia seriously)!
Thanks PMA. Your post was very informative.
Dishing out of titles is perhaps part of our upbringing – I often wondered where were the competitions held that gave out titles such as the “Melody Queen”, “Queen and/or King of Music,” “King/Queen of emotions,” etc. and lately the title of “Shaheed.” These are local feel-good phenomenon not not much more…
Nice post. I am also sick and tired of these so-called Molvis and Maulanas. Who gave them the right to abuse such respectable titles?
To me, in order to be called “Molvi” or “Maulana” you have to have some kind of intellectual capabilities like Maulvi Abdul Haq:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maulvi_Abdul_Haq
Or Maulana Mohammad Ali Johar:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maulana_Muhammad_Ali_ Johar
Other than that, you should be fined and prosecuted if you use these titles with you name.
Here we go again! Seems like some kind of obsession with darhi walas
First of all, let me say that this site never ceases to amaze me.
It really is an unparralleled Pakistani treasure.
Not just for the original post and the simple and powerful question it asks. But even more for its readership and the excellent information and ideas and comments they have put in.
I had heard about the Munshi, Fazil, etc. system but had never all the details. Thank you so much to all the wonderful responses that have explained it in such detail and so clearly. This is what makes this site not just fun but truly educational. Thank you.
Also, then the responses point out clearly that even if there is such a system, certainly thugs and murderers like Fazlullah are NOT Maulanas and are in fact a blot and shame on real Maulanas.
Adil: Since you asked.
British had sanctioned and introduced two systems of public education and educational certification. Vernacular system and Anglican system. Under Anglican system, primary, middle, metric, F.A., B.A., and M.A. certificates, diplomas and degrees were awarded. That is the prevalent system of education and certification we are all familiar with and product of.
On parallel lines students were also allowed to take certification exams on six different levels. British government did not encourage or facilitate such schooling system. It was mostly done by the families and the communities themselves by hiring private teachers. Government only provided minimum stipend to the teachers often called Maulavi Sahab. The learning was done either at home, at teacher’s home or at madrassas. This system was maintained chiefly at the insistence of the Muslim communities that did not want to educate their children in English–the education of ‘kafirs’.
The six levels of certifications were Munshi Alam & Fazal, Adeeb Alam & Fazal, and Maulavi Alam and Fazal. In addition if one studied sharia law one could be called Qazi. A Qazi was not allowed to practice in government courts but could administer Muslim Family Law in cases such as marriage, divorce or other family disputes. Duly certified by the British government Vernacular graduates could use titles such as Munshi, Alam, Fazal, Maulavi and Qazi. These individuals were given their due respect by their society.
Few years after independence, due to drop in popularity Pakistan government stopped conducting these certification exams and the responsibility of Vernacular education and certification fell mostly upon madrassas alone. Other Muslim countries have baned or eliminated Vernacular systems altogether. Pakistan has not. Since public education is not a priority of Pakistan government, ‘private’ and ‘religious’ communities have filled in the gap.
Today Pakistan has no shortage of those poorly educated ‘graduates’ of both Vernacular as well as Anglican systems. Why to pick on poorly educated ‘moulavis’ of Vernacular ‘system’ alone?