Featured Post

National Narrative Against Terrorism دہشت گردی کے خلاف قومی بیانیہ تاریخی فتویٰ ’’پیغام پاکستان‘‘

National Narrative Against Terrorism دہشت گردی کے خلاف قومی بیانیہ تاریخی فتویٰ ’’پیغام پاکستان‘‘ تمام مسالک ک...

Showing posts with label Power politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Power politics. Show all posts

Thursday, February 1, 2024

ظالم فاسق فاجر حکمران کے خلاف خروج , جنگ ؟ علماء اور مسلمانوں کا رویہ/ د فاسد مسلمان واکمن پر وړاندې فتنې او فساد روا نه دی / Rebellion against Oppressor, Sinner Muslim rulers

فاسق مسلمان حکمران کے خلاف خروج فتنہ و فساد جائز نہیں:
فاسق مسلمان حکمران کے خلاف تو خروج جائز نہیں ہے لیکن ظالم یا بے نماز مسلمان حکمران کے خلاف خروج کا جواز چند شرائط کے ساتھ مشروط ہے لیکن فی زمانہ ان شرائط کا حصول مفقود ہونے کی وجہ سے ظالم اور بے نماز مسلمان حکمران کے خلاف خروج بھی جائز نہیں ہے۔ جو حضرات انقلاب فرانس ، روس وغیرہ سے متاثر ہیں وہ فیصلہ کر لیں کہ مسلمان کو رسول کے احکام پر عمل کرنا ہے یا مغربی نظریات پر؟ 

ایسے حکمرانوں کو وعظ و نصیحت اور امر بالمعروف و نہی عن المنکر واجب ہے لیکن ا للہ کے رسول ۖ کے فرامین کے مطابق کسی فاسق و فاجرمسلمان حکمران کے خلاف خروج حرام ہے کیونکہ اس میں مسلمانوں کا اجتماعی ضرر اور فتنہ و فساد ہے۔ ہاں اگر کسی پر امن طریقے مثلاً احتجاجی سیاست وغیرہ سے ان حکمرانوں کی معزولی اوران کی جگہ اہل عدل کی تقرری ممکن ہو تو پھر ان کی معزولی اور امامت کے اہل افراد کی اس منصب پر تقرری بھی اُمت مسلمہ کا ایک فریضہ ہو گی-فاسق و فاجرحکمرانوں کے خلاف خروج کی حرمت کے دلائل درج ذیل ہیں۔ آپ کا ارشاد ہے:١) ''ألا من ولی علیہ وال فرآہ یأتی شیئاً من معصیة اللہ فلیکرہ ما یأتی من معصیة اللہ ولا ینزعن یدا من طاعة.'' (صحیح مسلم' کتاب الامارة' باب خیار الأئمة و شرارھم)
''خبردار! جس پر بھی کوئی امیر مقررہوا اور وہ اس امیر میں اللہ کی معصیت پر مبنی کوئی کام دیکھے تو وہ امیر کے گناہ کو تو ناپسند کرے لیکن اس کی اطاعت سے ہاتھ نہ کھینچے۔''٢) ''من کرہ من أمیرہ شیئا فلیصبر علیہ فنہ لیس من أحد من الناس یخرج من السلطان شبرا فمات علیہ لا مات میتة جاھلیة.''(صحیح مسلم' کتاب الامارة' وجوب ملازمة جماعة المسلمین عند ظھور الفتن ؛ صحیح بخاری' کتاب الفتن' قول النبی سترون بعدی أمورا تنکرونھا)

Sunday, January 3, 2016

Reading Maududi in dystopia

         
Abul Ala Maududi (d.1979), is considered to be one of the most influential Islamic scholars of the 20th century. He is praised for being a highly pro-lific and insightful intellectual and author who creatively contextualised the political role of Islam in the last century, and consequently gave birth to what became known as `Political Islam.
Image result for maududi quotes

Simultaneously, his large body of work was also severely critiqued as being contradictory and for being an inspiration to those bent on committing violence in the name of faith.Interestingly, Maududi`s theories and commentaries received negative criticism not only from those on the left and liberal sides of the divide, but from some of his immediate religious contemporaries as well.
[Article By Nadeem F Paacha, Dawn.com]

Nevertheless, his thesis on the state, politics and Islam, managed to influence a number of movements within and outside of Pakistan.

For example, the original ideologues of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood organisation (that eventually spread across the Arab world), were directly influenced by Maududi`s writings.

Maududi`s writings also influenced the rise of `Islamic` regimes in Sudan in the 1980s, and more importantly, the same writings were recycled by the Ziaul Haq dictatorship (1977-88), to indoctrinate the initial batches of Afghan insurgents (the `mujahideen`), fighting against Soviet troops stationed in Afghanistan.

In the last century, the modern Islamic Utopia that Maududi was conceptualising had become the main motivation behind several political and ideological experiments in various Muslim countries.

Image result for maududi quotes

However, 21st century polities (in the Muslim world) is not according to the kind enthusiastic reception that Maududi`s ideas received in the second half of the 20th century.By the early 2000s, almost all experiments based on Maududi`s ideas seemed to have collapsed under their own weight. The imagined Utopia turned into a living dystopia, torn apart by mass level violence (perpetrated in the name of faith) and the gradual retardation of social and economic evolution in a number of Muslim countries,including Pakistan.

This is ironic. Because when compared to the ultimate mindset that his ideas seemed to have ended up planting within various mainstream regimes and clandestine groups, Maududi himself sounds rather broad-minded.

Born in 1903 in Aurangabad, India, Maududi`s intellectual evolution is a fascinating story of a man who, after facing bouts of existential crises, chose to interpret Islam as a political theory to address his own spiritual and ideological impasses.

He did not come raging out of a madressah, swinging a fist at the vulgarities of the modern world. On the contrary, he was born into a family that had relations with the enlightened 19th century Muslim reformist and scholar, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.

Maududi received his early education at home through private tutors who taught him the Quran, Hadith, Arabic and Persian. At age 12, Maududi was sent to the Oriental High School whose curriculum had been arranged by famous Islamic scholar, Shibli Nomani.

Maududi was studying at a collegelevel Islamic institution, the Darul Aloom, when he had to rush to Bhopal to look after his ailing father. In Bhopal, he befriended the rebellious Urdu poet and writer, Niaz Fatehpuri.

Fatehpuri`s writings and poetry werehighly critical of the orthodox Muslim clergy. This had left him fighting polemical battles with the ulema.

Inspired by Fatchpuri, Maududi too decided to become a writer. In 1919, the then 17-year-old Maududi moved to Delhi, where for the f`irst time he began to study the works of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan in l`ull. This, in turn, led Maududi to study the major works of philosophy, sociology, history and politics authored by leading European thinkers and writers.

In 1929, after resurfacing from his vigorous study of`Western philosophical and political thought, Maududi published his f`irst major book, Al-Jihad FilIslam. The book is largely a lament on the state of`Muslim society in India and in it he attacked the British, modernist Muslims and the orthodox clergy for combining to keep Indian Muslims subdued and weak.

Writing in flowing, rhetorical Urdu, Maududi criticised the Muslim clergy for keeping Muslims away from the study of Western philosophy and science.

Maududi suggested that it were these that were at the heart of Western political and economic supremacy and needed to be studied so they could then be effectively dismantled and replaced by an `Islamic society` In 1941 Maududi formed the Jamaat-iIslami (JI). The outfit was shaped on the Leninist model of forming a `party of a select group of committed and knowl-edgeable vanguards` who would attempt to grab state power through revolution.

In an essay that was later republished (in 1980) in a compilation of his writings, Come let us Change This World, Maududi castigated the ulema for `being stuck in the past` and thus halting the emergence of new research and thinking in the field of Islamic scholarship.

He was equally critical of modernist Muslims (including Mohammad Ali Jinnah). In the same essay he lambasted them for understanding Islam through concepts constructed by the West and for believing that religion was a private matter.

Though an opponent of Jinnah and the creation of Pakistan (because he theorised that an `Islamic State` could not be enacted by `Westernised Muslims`), Maududi did migrate to the new Muslim-majority country once it came into being in 1947.

In a string of books, mainly Khilafato-Malukiyat, Deen-i-Ilag, Islamic Law and Constitution and Economic System of fslam, Maududi laid out his precepts of the modern-day `Islamic State` He was adamant about the need to gain state power to impose his principles of an Islamic State, but cautioned that the society first needed to be Islamised from below (through evangelical action), for such a state to begin imposing Islamic Laws.

In these books he was the first Islamic scholar to use the term `Islamic ideolo-gy` (in a political context). The term was later rephrased as `Political Islam` by the western scholarship on the subject.

In 1977 when Maududi agreed to support the Ziaul Haq dictatorship, he was criticised for attempting to grab state power through a Machiavellian military dictator.

Maududi`s decision sparked an intense critique of his ideas by the modernist Islamic scholar, Dr Fazal Rehman Malik. In his book, Islam and Modernity, Dr Malik described Maududi as a populist journalist, rather than a scholar. Malik suggested that Maududi`s writings were `shallow` and crafted only to bag the attention of muddled young men craving for an imagined faith-driven Utopia.

Maududi`s body of work is remarkable in its proficiency and creativity. And indeed, it is also contradictory. He used Western political concepts of the state to explain the modern idea of the Islamic State; and yet he accused modernist Muslims of understanding Islam throughWestern constructs. He saw no space for monarchies in Islam, yet was entirely uncritical of conservative Arab monarchies. He would often prefix the word Islam in front of various Western economic and political ideas (IslamicEconomics, Islamic-Banking and Islamic-Constitution) and yet he reacted aggressively towards the idea of `Islamic-Socialism` that came from his leftist opponents in the 1960s.

Writing in the Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, Political Anthropologist, Professor Irfan Ahmed, suggested that there was not one Maududi, but many.

He wrote that elements of Leninism, Hegel`s dualism, Jalaluddin Afghani`s Pan-Islamism and various other modern political theories can be found in Maududi`s thesis.

Perhaps this is why Maududi`s ideas managed to appeal to various sections of the urban Muslim middle-classes; modern conservative Muslim movements; and all the way to the more anarchic and reactionary forces.

But the question is, had Maududi been alive today, which one of the many Maududis would he have been most comfortable with in a Muslim world now crammed with raging dystopias? 
[Article By Nadeem F Paacha, Dawn.com]

Interpretation of Islam and the "Islamic State":
At least one critic (Charles Adams) argues that Maududi was "feared" and "disliked" by many Pakistanis because of the "rigidity" and "authoritarianism" his of view of Islam as a "vast monolithic ... integrated system" that Muslims must accept "in its entirety or not at all".
A general complaint of one critic (Youssef M. Choueiri) is that Maududi's theo-democracy is an
ideological state in which legislators do not legislate, citizens only vote to reaffirm the permanent applicability of God's laws, women rarely venture outside their homes lest social discipline be disrupted, and non-Muslims are tolerated as foreign elements required to express their loyalty by means of paying a financial levy.
Charles Adams criticized Maududi as overly concerned with theoretical principles, having a "utopian" belief in the power of virtue to tame the corruption and temptations of power,  and to solve whatever problems beset a society.Adams complained that Maududi never "enters into a detailed discussion of the precise limits of freedom in the Islamic state or explain how a state may both control everything and yet be limited in its power in certain respects."  While God's sovereignty is in the hands of the Muslim people in his theory, his plan for an Islamic state puts the power in the hands of the ruler. Maududi never provided an explanation as to how this would prevent the development of tyranny he sees in secular government. When his ideas were criticized for failure to solve the real day-to-day problems of building a functional government, he would reply by defending "the truth of Islam", implying his (Muslim) critics were criticizing Islam.
Adams also finds the "closeness and lack of friction" between ruler and legislature that Maududi envisioned in his state unrealistic. Ruler and legislature would be in agreement, and there would be no opposition to the ruler so long as he "did what was right", while "the entire parliament" would become the opposition party if the ruler deviated from the straight path. Maududi himself admitted the visionary and ideal nature of much of his Islamic state. More than once he spoke of characteristics that were "realizable only in the context of an ideal Islamic society which does not now exist."
Adams criticized the power Maududi puts in the virtue and vice, rather than political interests, expertise or other attributes. Whenever injustice and suffering exist in a society it is because the leadership prefers this state of affairs or doesn't care. They will be ended by a good, pious, moral Muslim man implementing sharia law, whatever the physical, social economic or other difficulties of a society.
Scholar Vali Nasr questions Maududi's idea that Muslims have not been following Islam for almost the entirety of Muslim history, but that "the history of Islam would resume, after a fourteen-century interlude", if Muslim follow Maududi's teachings and establish his Islamic state. Nasr also questioned how popular interests or the popular will would be translated into government policy without competition among political representatives for popular support or electioneering/campaigning for votes to connect leaders with concerns of the people.
On a more conceptual level, journalist and author Abdelwahab Meddeb questions the basis of Maududi's reasoning that the sovereignty of the truly Islamic state must be divine and not popular, saying "Maududi constructed a coherent political system, which follows wholly from a manipulation." The manipulation is of the Arabic word hukm, usually defined as to "exercise power as governing, to pronounce a sentence, to judge between two parties, to be knowledgeable (in medicine, in philosophy), to be wise, prudent, of a considered judgment." The Quran contains the phrase `Hukm is God's alone,` thus, according to Maududi, God – in the form of sharia law – must govern. But Meddeb argues that a full reading of the ayah where the phrase appears reveals that it refers to God's superiority over pagan idols, not His role in government.
Those whom you follow outside of Him are nothing but names that you and your fathers have given them. God has granted them no authority. Hukm is God's alone. He has commanded that you follow none but Him. Such is the right religion, but most people do not know. [Quran 12:40]
Quranic "commentators never forget to remind us that this verse is devoted to the powerlessness of the companion deities (pardras) that idolaters raise up next to God…" (Abdel Meddab's view is contradicted by Wahhabi Islamic scholars such as Saleh Al-Fawzan, who writes that: "He who accepts a law other than Allah's ascribes a partner to Allah. Whatever act of worship that is not legislated (hukam) by Allah and His Messenger is Bid‘ah, and every Bid'ah is a means of deviation." [From Wikipedia:]
Related :


    Sunday, March 1, 2015

    The madressa mix: Genesis and growth

    In the aftermath of the attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar, and the National Action Plan against terrorism that was put in place thereafter, focus seems to have turned on the individual: hate-spewing clerics needed to be arrested, for their venom was insulting to the memory of those who died on December 16, 2014 and counter-productive for any national resolve to fight off terror.

    But few are asking the fundamental question, which is if the real issue is the individual or the institution that he represents? Maulana Abdul Aziz can be arrested and removed from Lal Masjid, for example, but would that translate into removing his spirit and footprints from Jamia Hafsa? Can the two even be separated? How entrenched is the individual in the politics and practice of his institution? Is there a linear relationship between madressas and militancy? Is reform of madressas simply a lofty, unattainable ideal?

    Madressas in Pakistan have managed to historically construct a position of sanctity for themselves in society, many times aided and abetted by the state and government. This is partly due to a general confusion whether the madressa as an institution is generally harmless and benign or whether there is more to it. Today, madressas go beyond a single institute of learning: many madressas are now part of a network of institutions that are loosely connected with a mother organisation, and are sponsoring a particular ideology of a particular group.

    In truth, madressas are one of the biggest unregulated sectors in Pakistan, with scholars estimating 16,000 to 20,000 registered madressas operating in the country. Official sources, meanwhile, recently disclosed a figure of 25,000 registered madressas, while it is also believed that were unregistered madressas taken into account, the total would be around 40,000. A couple of years ago, a senior Sindh Police officer confided that there was a monthly expansion of two to three madressas in the province. The trend continues.

    In the first of a two-part series, we examine the evolution and scope of the madressa network phenomenon
    In Pakistan today, there are four kinds of madressas: large sized maktabs, mid-sized madressas, large elite madressas, and hybrid madressa schools. These are different from the historical institution of the madressa; in fact, the madressa is undergoing transformation even today, with the institution now also catering to the middle and upper-middle class.

    In rural areas, landlords set up madressas on their land and send their children to these for education and awareness about religion. In urban centres, larger madressas cater to the more affluent segments of society.

    The absence of an immediate alternative to madressas tends to make both the state and a burgeoning civil society shy away from actively engaging with the process of reforms. Perhaps, this should in fact be a starting point for discussions on madressas and militancy in Pakistan.

    Quantitative versus qualitative frameworks

    There are several figures for how big the madressa network/industry is. A study published in 2007 claimed that there were 16,000 madressas registered with the five wafaqs (boards), out of which 9,500 were Deobandi, 4,500 Barelvi, 1,000 run by Jamaat-i-Islami, 500 Ahl-i-Hadith, and 500 Ahl-i-Tashi.

    In another study, published in 2008 by Jaddon Park and Sarfaroz Niyozov, the number of madressas was put at 13,000. The authors also claimed that these institutions enrolled anything between 0.3 per cent to 33 per cent of children from the ages of five to 19 across Pakistan.

    The quantitative paradigm, however, is illusive, as it does not help capture the real essence of this phenomenon.

    A 2001 study by Tahir Andarabi for the World Bank dispelled the notion that the majority of Pakistani children went to madressas. His claim was that it was just one per cent of the total school going population. This argument challenged the popular perception that madressas produced militants, as they had done in the case of the Taliban, who were largely trained and indoctrinated in Pakistani seminaries.

    Some suggested that while not all seminaries were bad, those representing a certain ideology were more troublesome. Fingers were pointed at Deobandi seminaries in the country. But then some academics also challenged the linear link between militancy and madressas.

    Chaman, 2004: Activists of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal, an alliance of religious parties, attend a rally to protest raids on madressas—AFP file photo
    In her study based on 141 jihadis, American academic C. Christine Fair concluded that the majority of her sample was not “madressa trained”. In her sample, only 12 per cent were madressa trained — of these, 60 per cent were Deobandi, 22 per cent Jamaat-i-Islami, and six per cent Ahl-i-Hadith. As far as recruitment to militancy is concerned, 35 per cent were inducted through family and friends, 19 per cent through tableegh, a quarter from mosques, and only 13 per cent through the madressa channel.

    In Pakistan today, there are four kinds of madressas: large sized maktabs, mid-sized madressas, large elite madressas, and hybrid madressa schools. These are different from the historical institution; in fact, the madressa is undergoing transformation even today, with the institution now also catering to the middle and upper-middle class.
    In another study of 50 jihadis by Pakistani scholar Masooda Bano, it was claimed that 60 per cent of the sample was from relatively affluent social backgrounds and 30 per cent had even studied abroad.

    This led to the perception that perhaps there was more hype about religious seminaries than was deserved. The political leadership is divided on the issue, with many supporting the conclusion that since madressas are not linked with terrorism, they should not be examined or brought under any kind of accountability net.

    Lately, the madressa is considered as a necessity for the poor. Since the state has failed to provide education for everyone, particularly the poor, parents find it convenient to send their children to madressas. A senior officer of the Punjab police I spoke to even suggested that religious seminaries performed social welfare activity, i.e. they provide free food, shelter and activity for the dispossessed. A Pakistani academic even claimed that seminaries contribute positively to socioeconomic development.

    Such arguments are linear and static, and tend to not notice the structuraland intellectual dynamism of the madressa,. In the words of Tajik scholar Sarfaroz Niyozov: “…though Islamic teaching has remained static, institutions through which it is carried out has undergone dynamic change”.

    Madressas as manufacturing systems

    The best way to understand the madressa phenomenon is comparing it with the Japanese Kanban (Just-in-Time) manufacturing system, which comprises an extremely efficient supply chain to sustain production.

    Religious seminaries are not significant due to the number of jihadis they produce but are central to the production of the ideology that feeds the jihadi, even if said jihadi is in fact educated in public schools and universities. The madressa denotes an essential power base that contributes ideology and the sustained supply of a narrative into society, which in turn, feeds both radicalism and militancy in Pakistan.

    Madressas are where ideological indoctrination rejecting all opposing ideas is born. Sectarian violence, therefore, is one by-product of this manufacture of ideology and indoctrination.

    In Punjab, for example, the provincial government has had access to information and data regarding the sharp sectarian divide in the madressa sector for a long time. Much of this information is ignored primarily because of the state’s attitude towards sectarian tension and militancy. When police officers are questioned about the dynamics of sectarian killings, most retort that “this is sectarian violence and not terrorism” — almost as if the former is more organic.

    Religious seminaries are not significant due to the number of jihadis they contribute but are central to the production of the ideology that feeds the jihadi, even if said jihadi is in fact educated in public schools and universities.
    Madressas are an instrument for the ghettoisation of Islam to build a power centre within society which can challenge the legitimacy of the state or other competing societal stakeholders. Intra-society competition is normal except that in this case one group claims to have divine sanction. The issue here is not of militancy but the legitimising of radicalism through institutional means. Madressas cannot be seen individually but as a network used for ideological transmission.

    Islamabad, 2005: Girls from a madressa display posters during a protest against raids on seminaries in Islamabad. These protests were held in connection with the London blasts that year —Reuters file photo
    In fact, the post-1947 madressa in Pakistan has built ghettos within a ghetto — these emphasise a sectarian divide. Every sectarian group and its madressa aim for maximising power. In more recent years, this has translated into the increased propensity for all sects to use violence to negotiate with the state, for which legitimacy is sought through religion and textual interpretation.

    Therefore, the individual jihadi may not have come from a madressa but their guide and teacher, the one who radicalised them, often does.

    The radicalisation process goes and stays deeper; it is separate from recruitment for jihad, the patterns for which have undergone some change in the past decade or more.

    Pakistan-based jihadi organisations such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), and a few others have become more selective in their recruitment process. They now prefer better-educated militants. The JeM, for example, has long been recruiting from public sector schools. Most militant groups have also set a foothold in public sector universities to draw the more literate segment of the youth into their fold.

    Some of the bigger seminaries also develop literature that is extremely lethal, encouraging a constant conflict with the “other” until the latter is vanquished. According to this apocalyptic worldview, no other culture and civilisation will survive at the end of times but their own.
    None of this makes madressas less relevant.

    Madressas still serve as ideological power centres used to gain legitimacy for an ideological-militant group and build a community around it. The Jamaatud Dawa (JuD) madressas in Muridke, Lahore and Karachi thus resemble a central nervous system.

    Drawing power from creating an ideal

    Seminaries are a source of political power for its leadership, through their ability to bring hundreds of committed youth onto the street. These are dedicated beings who would not challenge the teacher or their organisational hierarchy. They believe that they have the formula for an ideal society and are fighting evil in pursuance of this ideal.

    Put another way, the girls and young women at Jamia Hafsa believed that Maulana Aziz’s 2007 agitation was to target corrupt and inefficient governments, and to bring society in line with the tenets of Islam. The women couldn’t care less about the consequences of their rebellion, nor did their passion dissipate even after the military operation.

    Scholar Masooda Bano categorised these madressa pupils as “rational believers” who added up the benefits of the life hereafter, possibly subtracted the perils of the material world and found that they ended up with a net gain. The in-charge of logistics at Bahria Town Rawalpindi, where these girls were kept after the operation, described them as restless and angry.

    If follows, therefore, that it is not for nothing that big madressas are now found at the entry points to just about every big and small town and city in Punjab and Sindh. Imagine the tremendous capacity to block a communication channel that main roads represent. If madressas were not an important part of this supply-chain, their mushrooming in a province like Sindh —reputed for its multi-culturalism and plurality — would not take place. Eventually, these religious seminaries in Sindh will contribute tremendously to transforming the socio-political culture of Sindh, as has happened years ago in southern Punjab. It certainly has captured the imagination of the upcoming middle class. Not surprisingly, tension vis-à-vis religious minorities or instances of Eid Miladun Nabi festivals being forcibly stopped have increased.

    The vagueness regarding political placement of religion in the new state of Pakistan meant that while political leadership remained largely secular, religion was left to ulema and pirs. The state engaged with both with different consequences. The ulema, in particular, adopted power maximization strategy to silence any alternative voice by labelling it apostate and anti-Islamic. They also became a source of political legitimisation for the rulers.
    The concentration of LeT/JuD schools along the border with India in Sindh, or in areas with Hindu population, or Deobandi madressas opened with funding from the Gulf across upper Sindh, all become contributory factors in the process of social conversion.

    Kotri, 2007: Police personnel seize posters and literature from a madressa—Reuters file photo
    Therefore, it is flawed to measure the influence of religious seminaries in quantitative terms based on the number of students. The impact of these is widespread as a child going to a seminary has an impact on the thinking of other members of the family. People would be familiar with, for instance, a daughter going to an Al-Huda madressa changing the mother and eventually the entire household. This dynamic is mirrored in more traditional seminaries as well.

    Four generations of madressas

    A common and often misplaced understanding is that madressas represent historical cultural traditions. In fact, the madressa structure is dynamic and has evolved historically to become the behemoth that it is today. The contemporary madressa in Pakistan and a lot of other Muslim countries does not compare with the madressa born at the end of the 10th and beginning of the 11th century.

    The first formal madressa in Nishapur, Khorasan or others like Al-Azhar in Egypt or Nizamiyah in Baghdad were based on a different concept from the seminaries that exist today. Educational systems in Islam were first developed by the Ummayads and later evolved by the Abbasids.

    Rulers would provide patronage to ulema, who were associated with one seminary or the other, to seek political legitimacy. More importantly, these were centres of learning that not only excelled in religion but also other subjects.

    Typically, these madressas taught “Quranic” sciences, hadith, methods of fiqh, but also rational sciences like arithmetic, sciences and literature. This was revolutionary as it established institutionalised education, something that was not seen in Europe until the 13th century.

    Religious studies normally reflected particular jurisprudence and propagated certain ideological narratives. An important feature of this system was that these were personalised institutions, operationally and financially. These depended on waqf from the social elite, while the quality of learning depended on association with the teacher or the sheikh.

    A fourth generation madressa — the hybrid-madressa — seems to have evolved during the mid-1990s and expanded after the mid-2000s. These teach secular subjects, have English as the medium of instruction and function almost like a regular school. Many even offer GCSE O’ and A’ levels, and have uniforms that make them hard to distinguish them from secular schools.
    This pattern was later followed in India as well. Barring Akbar, most Mughal rulers were mindful of the ulema for reasons of political legitimacy. This meant creating waqf, or properties attached to madressas for their upkeep. These madressas were attached with mosques and taught subjects such as geometry, mathematics, civil engineering and others.

    These were first generation madressas, which enjoyed a functional relationship with society at large. Some of the 137 madressas that Pakistan inherited in 1947 included this type of seminary, which were attached with a particular ideological school or shrine. Almost all shrines had maktabs or madressas, an instrument that was gradually abandoned by pirs and sajjada nashins.

    The second generation of madressas began with Deoband, which was established in 1867, a few years after the first war of independence in 1857. This was also the beginning of a process of formalisation of the madressa structure in the Indian Subcontinent. Although Deobandi ideology is considered as revisionist, the genesis of the madressa and the underlying concept was reformist and modern.

    It was a deviation from the pattern of older established madressas such as Farangi Mahal that was run on waqf. Deoband established a more independent pattern of financing in which they were dependent on contributions from the public rather than the state or the elite. They taught Dars-e-Nizami which was developed in madressa Farangi Mahal.

    But Deoband was different in more than one way. It was a more bureaucratic structure than other madressas at that time, almost on the British educational pattern. However, Deoband’s reformism unfortunately confined itself to religion; prominent ulema like Rashid Gangohi considered teaching other subjects, including traditional medicine or tibb, as a diversion from the main focus of the institution. Thus the teaching of hadith was developed as its main forte. It was this tradition which was carried on in which rational sciences were almost totally abandoned.

    Barbara Metcalf, who is known for her work on Deoband, believes that this was to protect Muslim identity and was a reaction to British colonialism. Arshad Alam, who also blames the British for the evolution of this kind of dedicated madressas, is of the view that the colonial policy of separating religion from education meant that religion developed a definite space and the Muslim religious clergy engaged in a ‘hegemonic representation of masses’. The inspiration, of course, was Shah Waliullah who wanted ulema to play a distinctive role in the development of Muslim identity. Other reformist movements also followed this pattern of religious education.

    The vagueness regarding political placement of religion in the new state of Pakistan meant that while political leadership remained largely secular, religion was left to ulema and pirs. The state engaged with both with different consequences. The ulema, in particular, adopted a power maximization strategy to silence any alternative voice by labelling it apostate and anti-Islamic. They also became a source of political legitimisation for the rulers.

    In this socio-political background, madaris became centres to maintain the purity of Islam. According to a prominent Sindhi Barelvi cleric and mufti, Abul Khair Muhammad Zubair: “Madressas save people from a life of sin, by advising them according to the Qur’an and Sunnah”.

    In an urge to enhance the power of revivalist movements such as those of the Deobandi and Barelvi, the madressa system was turned static, and rational sciences were excluded. Unlike older madressas that taught philosophy and logic these madressas were restricted in their imagination. They certainly cannot transform into the ‘Oxford and Cambridge’ of the future as Bano has argued in her work mainly because of an inherent dislike for rational sciences. This even applies to cases where non-religious subjects are included.

    Unlike Oxford or Cambridge, where rational sciences were important in debating matters of faith, these madressas do not encourage any deviation from the core religious explanation adopted by its management. The teaching of English or computers is mainly to increase employability. Today, madressa trained teachers have greater absorption capacity due to ‘Arabization’ of Islamic studies in schools. An increase in the Arabic component of the text and inclusion of Arabic in the curriculum by several private schools opens up job opportunities for madressa-trained people. Obviously, they also take their ideology along even to the schools.

    Logic, for instance, was taught only in reference to the various kinds of hadith or with regard to the interpretation of the Quran. This continues to be the case. The teaching process does not consider the need to nourish pupils intellectually, socially, and physically. Due to the centrality of this education system for the maintenance of the ulema’s power, they tend to protect it against any introspection or reform by using the argument of “tradition.” Institutional power was further consolidated with the creation of the four wafaqs (boards) in 1958/59 on sectarian basis.

    But many believe that what empowered both the ulema and the madressas was the State’s alignment with these to gain geo-strategic advantages.

    Approximately 5,000 madressas were established after 1982 during the period of US-Pak strategic alignment. This compares with the figure of 150 new seminaries that were added between 1977 and 1979. Before that, there was controlled proliferation. From 1960-71, for instance, only 482 new madressas were established. The numbers increased to 852 new ones during the 1970s.

    It was during the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto regime that agreements were signed with some Arab states for the promotion of Arabic, as a result of which madressas were set up in South Punjab. However, some suggest that a real shift insofar as madressas in southern Punjab go came after Mirza Aslam Beg’s appointment as GoC Okara. Not surprisingly, many commanders of the armies of Afghan mujahideen and later warlords were drawn from southern Punjab. These people were ideologically motivated and trained in madressas.

    During the Zia period, madressas became powerful centres for different ideological groups. There were two other significant things which happened during this period. First, the Halepoto report on madressa reform recommended improving economic conditions of the madressas. The government began providing financial help by diverting zakat funds. It was believed that the ulema were poorly paid and that students were in poor condition.

    According to a report in the early 1990s regarding Bahawalpur, the government knew exactly the sectarian divide that existed in madressas and knew which madressas were engaged in fanning sectarian hatred. This formula was later replicated across Punjab. Despite this, funds were never discontinued until Benazir Bhutto’s government came to power.

    Second, the Zia regime developed a system of educational equivalence that recognised madressa qualification as equivalent to secular education. The idea was to modernise religious seminaries and encourage them to teach non-religious subjects.

    Thus was born the 3rd generation of madressas, which were a merger of traditional and modern. The bigger or elite madressas offered Ph.D., M.A, B.A, and secondary certificates. Many madressas also teach English and computer sciences.

    Due to internal adjustments, three different kinds of madressas emerged: the elite, which also taught secular subjects; the traditional, which only taught the Quran and hadith; and then the lowest, the maktab-madressa.

    The 1990s and 2000s saw both a vertical and horizontal expansion of madressas. From distant geographical areas to middle class and elite, or women, madressas expanded in all directions. The elite madressas were critical in producing teachers that then went and opened their own madressas.

    Thus, this became an umbrella-like structure with each ideological system breeding its own nursery of madressas and maktabs. The issue is not of what subjects or books are taught but the manner in which the minds of students who would later become teachers themselves are trained. These madressas were further modernised with the introduction of a pre-requisite for admission being matriculation and/or intermediate, which also means some integration with the non-religious schooling system.

    In any case, Pakistan’s public and even private sector schooling is today far more integrated with the madressa system. There is a provision that allows students to leave school in third grade for hifz (memorising Quran) and rejoin after three years in grade 5. Serious educators say that the absence from school leaves a gap that often doesn’t get filled.

    A fourth generation madressa — the hybrid-madressa — seems to have evolved during the mid-1990s and expanded after the mid-2000s. These teach secular subjects, have English as the medium of instruction and function almost like a regular school. Many even offer GCSE O’ and A’ levels, and have uniforms that make them hard to distinguish them from secular schools. Superficially, a minor distinguishing mark is their insistence on even kindergarten girls wearing hijab. They also provide facility for hifz. Students opting for this skip regular classes and are gently taught a couple of other subjects but with much less rigour.

    Generally, purity of religious teaching is maintained by instruction in the correct recitation of Quran and the teaching of hadith. While describing the Islamic content in teaching, the teacher of one such school explained how they ensure from Montessori that children’s drawings of any living being should not have eyes, ears and mouth — features that “put humans at par with God”.

    Many of these are linked with particular militant organisations or related groups. For example, the JuD has about 295 schools and five colleges. There are others that are linked with some Deobandi groups and the Tableeghi Jamaat. Most of these hybrid-madressa schools are concentrated in major urban centres to attract middle-middle and upper-middle class students.

    Another significant pattern that has emerged pertains to the development of a madressa network in which some madressa-schools share administration with third generation madressas and their boards. The development of this category coincided with the Taliban’s rise to power in Afghanistan. This is when religious parties and religious-militant leadership realised the need to produce qualified but ideologically committed human resource.

    Whither reform?

    The issue here is not the structure, but of reform in the core subjects and values that ulema don’t allow anyone to touch. The state did engage on a reform agenda starting from the 1960s, and as part of the process Jamia Islamia Bahawalpur was established in 1963 to harmonise modern and traditional education. The Jamia would award degrees and bring madressas under its training umbrella. However, the programme eventually fell prey to bureaucratic inertia.

    Another effort was made in 1970 to establish an ulema academy to train and educate imams and khateebs. The program was abruptly discontinued in 1982 due to internal ideological rivalry.

    Although no scheme for reform was launched during the 1990s, Benazir Bhutto’s government changed some rules, such as banning foreign students from studying in Pakistani madressas without obtaining a no-objection certificate. She also discontinued the investment of zakat in seminaries.

    The Musharraf government seemed keen on madressa reforms, for which a Pakistan Madressa Education Board (PMEB) was set up in 2001.

    However, the process focused mainly on peripheral subjects and improving technological infrastructure, for which money was also available from foreign donors. The British and the Americans were enthused by the idea of engaging with madressas, but the process again fell short of touching core subjects.

    Every time modernisation of madressas is mentioned, it is limited to peripheral activities. But as pointed out in the report on madressas by the International Crisis Group (ICG), “the madressa problem is beyond militancy. This is about kids being indoctrinated with a limited worldview.”

    Far from teaching Islamic history, the little that is taught at these seminaries reaffirms notions of lost grandeur and creates a worldview of constant conflict with other civilisations. Some of the bigger seminaries also develop literature that is extremely lethal, encouraging a constant conflict with the “other” until the latter is vanquished. According to this apocalyptic worldview, no other culture and civilisation will survive at the end of times but their own.

    A friend heading an NGO once suggested undertaking a project of teaching children how to make computer presentations. During the process, she argued, they would gently insert new ideas and push children to explore new concepts. She didn’t seem to realise that clerics jealously guard this turf because it is fundamental to their power. They will allow English, science and computers but no intrusion into the core subjects that build their ideological base.

    The ideal recipe, however, is not closing down madressas altogether mainly because the government lacks the infrastructure, and perhaps the commitment, to replace seminaries with something else. There is a need for reforming the syllabi, but that is not possible without a system of accountability of religious seminaries and engaging them in a dialogue first.

    This may not happen without revamping the entire education system, especially bringing private schools under the state’s regulatory purview. There has to be a single formula for all, else all efforts at regulation will collapse.

    Related: 

    http://peace-forum.blogspot.com/2015/03/lords-of-land-by-ali-arqam.html?m=1

    Dr Ayesha Siddiqa is an independent scholar, author of Military Inc, and is currently working on a new book on the sociology of militancy. Connect with her on Twitter @iamthedrifter or email: ayesha.ibd@gmail.com

    Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, March 1st, 2015

    Sunday, October 19, 2014

    The Taliban's Transformation from Ideology to Franchise by James Weir

    After 13 years of conflict in Afghanistan, money has replaced ideology and vengeance as a reason for Taliban ties. National or Islamic goals no longer motivate foot soldiers under the organization's name, making "political Islamism" and "violent" or "Islamic extremism" ineffective terms. As international resources are poured into military and political efforts -- often in pursuit of the quick fix -- conflict participants have learned to make insecurity profitable. Today, in many provinces, the Taliban's greatest influence is as gatekeepers to a host of black market activities that both sustain the organization  and help recruit members. To combat the Taliban, these extra-legal funding sources must be addressed or risk not just failure, but the continued financing -- and success -- of insurgents.

    In early 2014 we conducted research that examined violent extremism and Taliban networks with the hope of bridging differences between insurgent groups, community elders, and the Afghan government. In interviews with active, former, and imprisoned Taliban, tribal leaders, and government officials in Helmand and Herat provinces of Afghanistan a consensus emerged: joining the insurgency pays well, especially in a countryside marked by insecurity and economic stagnation. And more important than an insurgent salary, -- Taliban rarely mentioned, and most emphatically denied, ideological or political inspiration -- being associated with the Taliban enables quasi-independent profiteering from a diverse array of illegal activities.

    Sources of Money

    In Herat and Helmand provinces the five major sources of insurgent funding are the drug trade, protection money charged to international and government contracts, the Islamic taxes (Ushr and Zakat) applied to local businesses, smuggling, and collecting electric and telecommunications bills. With Afghanistan producing between 75 and 90 percent of the world's poppy -- Helmand province producing 48 percent of that share alone -- the Taliban's revenue stream reaches high and low; benefiting laborers, transporters, government officials, and businessmen. Helmand, unsurprisingly, is also among the most violent, insurgent-raddled provinces.

    The United States has spent $7.5 billion dollars on drug eradication programs and estimated $104 billion dollars on development assistance in Afghanistan since 2001. Respondents explain the Taliban charge "protection money" to nearly all development programs or disrupt their implementation. The rates are said to vary between 10 percent and 20 percent and charges can occur at multiple stages. Similarly, charges levied to transportation contracts supplying NATO bases is a lucrative Taliban practice first documented in 2009 by Aram Rostom, and further detailed in June 2010 in Warlord, Inc., a report to the U.S. Congress. Nevertheless, in a July 2014 quarterly report to Congress, the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR) expressed dismay that the U.S. Army continues to contract organizations known to support the insurgency.

    Three Transformations

    The Taliban's history can be broken down to three periods associated with three basic motivations: ideologically inspired emergence in the mid-90s; resurgence in the early years after the NATO intervention driven by seeking retribution to grievances, both local and national; and transformation in recent years into a loose network utilizing an intimidating brand for extra-legal financial gain. Ideology and retribution still remain but grow less relevant to the movement as they expand into changing circumstances. Nevertheless, those who profit from the Taliban name are expected to accommodate the ideological or extremist fringe as a price of association.

    Emergence and Ideology (1994-2001)

    The Taliban rose to power two decades ago, vowing to end civil war and lawlessness and establish an "Islamic state." The war weary Afghan people, seeing the Taliban's quick success in subduing abusive warlords and marauding militias, initially welcomed the movement. Ideologically inspired by faith and nation, under the banner of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban held promise of a better future.

    Over time most found the group's methods and dictates excessive. Women's rights, basic liberties, the economy, education, arts, and health care -- nearly all quality of life indicators -- suffered under the imposition of draconian order that was arbitrary, stifling, and often barbaric.

    By the norms of modern governance, Taliban rule was a failure: the country grew internationally isolated and impoverished. Despite this, peace and rudimentary rule of law ensued for the first time since the Soviet invasion in 1979, establishing the Taliban's credibility amongst some Afghans.

    Resurgence and Vengeance (2002-2008)

    In response to 9/11, U.S. air power intervened in Afghanistan in late 2001 to support the northern resistance routing the Taliban from power. The movement quickly retreated, returning home or settling in Pakistan. At first they appeared to have given up their quest to govern before their reemergence, the reason for which remains murky.

    The prevailing narrative for reemerging is that the Afghan government leaders, supported by international forces, provoked the retired Taliban and other traditional adversaries by conducting unwarranted house searches, arrests, and sometimes torture. Feeling threatened in their homes, many former Taliban joined others who felt persecuted or excluded and began to conspire -- all within safe harbor of Pakistan.

    Meanwhile, high officials in the Afghan government -- often the same disreputable figures that the Taliban replaced in the mid-90s -- grew rich on foreign contracts and mishandled aid. Overtime, dissatisfaction with the Kabul government and international forces combined with local and personality based grievances inspired acts of violent retribution. By 2006 and 2007, Taliban attacks on government officials, tribal leaders, and international forces had substantially escalated.

    Transformation and Franchise (2009-present)

    As the insurgency intensified, so did the resources sent to quell it. Taliban benefited from the money pouring into the country by taxing the billions spent on transportation and development contracts. Meanwhile, smuggling and growing poppy, the Taliban's traditional funding sources, grew more lucrative in regions where the government and NATO lacked control.

    With many former Taliban leaders killed, imprisoned, or hiding in Pakistan, a new generation of young men, unable to access the legal funding visibly flooding the country, joined for profit, respect, and even reprieve from the restrictions of village life and the labors of farming arid land. Interviews reveal many who once served with the Afghan government and ISAF, or wanted to, but later joined the insurgents due to threats to their family or unemployment. The older, more ideological Pakistan-based leadership is struggling to maintain disciplinary and financial control over groups active, often in isolation, across a border.

    Small, mostly criminal networks brandish the potent, profitable Taliban brand without a cause beyond themselves and their small, tight-knit communities. Increasingly these groups send money back to the Quetta Shura -- instead of the other way around -- and are occasionally asked to facilitate more hardcore ideological actors or suicide bombers, in exchange for the opportunities of association.

    Distracted by Terror

    We find in the Taliban today an organization with parallels to the family focus of the Italian Mafioso, the crime interests of the Latin American drug cartels, and the predatory nature of the Afghan mujahedeen militias of the early 90s. The leaderships' call from their safe-haven in Pakistan for continued violence in the name of faith and country echo faintly in the Afghan countryside. As Najib Sharifi explains recently in Foreign Policy, it remains to be seen whether the calls from ISIS will resound differently -- the interviews we reference occurred before ISIS became a looming presence on the geopolitical landscape.

    Nevertheless, in Afghanistan, near daily reports of senseless death and destruction distract from the pervasive, extra-legal practices that sustain participants and motivate association. Efforts to combat the insurgency must attack these black markets. In a future report, we examine the five major Taliban funding sources in Helmand and Herat. Past military or political efforts to combat the insurgency have overlooked and very often exacerbated the local economic circumstances that now drive ordinary rural Afghans into becoming insurgents. Rechanneling extra-legal activities into the legitimate economy will do more to weaken the Taliban and stabilize the country than negotiating or killing.

    James Weir is a cultural anthropologist and independent researcher who has done work on Afghan life stories and tribal politics in the Afghanistan and Pakistan region.

    Hekmatullah Azamy is research analyst at the Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies (CAPS), a Kabul-based independent and policy-oriented think-tank, where he conducts research on peace, security and development studies. These views are his own.

    The Taliban's Transformation from Ideology to Franchise
    by James Weir, Hekmatullah Azamy OCTOBER 17, 2014, southasia.foreignpolicy.com
    Read in Urdu اردو مین پڑھین
    http://e.dunya.com.pk/detail.php?date=2014-10-19&edition=LHR&id=1343263_23754780

    Saturday, April 5, 2014

    Suicide is Haram, Forbidden in islam - Fatwa by Chief Mufti Saudi Arabia

    مفتی اعظم سعودی عرب کا فتویٰ

    منیر بلوچ 
    سعودی عرب کے مفتی اعظم شیخ عبدالعزیز کی جانب سے فتویٰ جاری کیا گیا ہے کہ ''قرآن و سنت کی روشنی میں خود کش حملے ناجائز اور حرام ہیں۔ خود کش حملے کرنے والا، خود کُش حملوں کی ترغیب دینے والا یا اکسانے والا دونوں اسلام کی رو سے کفر کا ارتکاب کرتے ہیں‘‘۔ خود کُش حملوں کی حمایت کرنے والے ایک بہیمانہ تصور کی نمائندگی کرتے ہیں۔ یہ دینِ اسلام کو بدنام کرنے کے مترادف ہے۔ خود کش حملے کرنے والے اور کرانے والے سمجھ لیںکہ وہ انسانیت کے سب سے گرے ہوئے مقام پر ہیں، ان کے اس غیر انسانی فعل کا اس کے سوا اور کوئی مقصد نہیں کہ اسلام اور مسلمانوں کو اقوام عالم میں بدنام کیا جائے تاکہ وہ لوگ جو قرآن کی پاکیزہ تعلیمات اور رسول اﷲﷺ کی حیات طیبہ کا بغور مطالعہ کرنے کے بعد دین کی طرف مائل ہوتے جا رہے ہیں‘ انہیں اس سے متنفر اور بدگمان کر دیا جائے۔
    فتویٰ، فقہ اسلامی کی ایک اہم اصطلاح ہے۔ کسی انفرادی یا اجتماعی معاملے پر کسی مستند عالم دین سے شریعت یعنی اسلامی قانون کے مطابق جو رائے لی جاتی ہے اسے فتویٰ کہا جاتا ہے۔ اسلامی فقہ کا ماہر، درپیش معاملے کی تشریح و توضیح بھی کر دیتا ہے‘ جو اسلامی تعلیمات اور مصلحت سے مطابقت رکھتی ہے۔ فتویٰ دینے والے کو مفتی کہتے ہیں۔ یہ ایسا فرد ہوتا ہے جو شرعی قوانین اور اس کی گہرائیوں کا پورا علم و ادراک رکھتا ہے اور جس کے پہلے دیے گئے فتوے یا اس کی طرف سے جاری کیے گئے بیانات، اسباق اور خطبات کو کسی شک و شبے کے بغیر تسلیم کیا جا چکا ہو۔
    سعودی عرب کے مفتی اعظم سے قبل مصر اور سپین کے ممتاز مذہبی سکالرز، قرآن و حدیث کے اساتذہ اور اسلامی فقہ کے مجتہدین کی آراء بھی منظر عام پر آ چکی ہیں‘ جن کے مطابق خود کش حملوں کے ذریعے یا بے گناہ لوگوں کو یرغمال بنا کر قتل کر دینے کی اسلام میں کوئی گنجائش نہیں۔ پاکستان میں جس طرح فوج اور ایف سی کے جوانوں، خالد خواجہ اور کرنل امام کے علاوہ بے گناہ شہریوں کو قتل کیا گیا، اسلام اس کی ہرگز اجازت نہیں دیتا ۔ قرآن پاک اور احادیث مبارکہ میں واضح طور پر فرمایا گیا ہے کہ کسی بے گناہ مومن کی جان لینے والا ابدی جہنمی ہے۔ جو گروہ خود کش دھماکوں کے ذریعے اپنے مقاصد حاصل کرنے کی کوشش کرتے ہیں وہ بتدریج اجتماعی خود کشی کی جانب چل پڑتے ہیں اور ان کا ٹھکانہ جہنم کا بدترین حصہ ہوتا ہے۔
    اگر طالبان سے ان کے مسلکی نظریات کو ہی سامنے رکھ کر بات کی جائے توکیا وہ جہاد کے بارے میں حضرت ابو بکر صدیقؓ اور دوسرے خلفائے راشدینؓ کے احکام اور ہدایات کو پیش نظر رکھتے ہیں؟ حضرت ابوبکر صدیقؓ کے دور خلافت میں جب اسلامی لشکر جہاد پر روانہ ہونے لگا تو انہوں نے اسلامی فوج کو جو سب سے پہلا حکم جاری کیا‘ اس میں انہوں نے سخت تاکید کرتے ہوئے فرمایا: '' آپ درختوں کو نقصان نہیں پہنچائیں گے، بچوں، بوڑھوں اور عورتوں کے خلاف کوئی اقدام نہیں کریں گے اور جو لوگ غیر مقابلین ہیں (جنگ کے میدان میں نہیں آئے) ان سے کسی قسم کا تعرض نہیں کریں گے‘‘۔
    رسول کریمﷺ کے مکی دور میں مشرکین اور کفار نے رسول خداﷺ اور ان کے ساتھیوں پر ظلم و ستم کے پہاڑ توڑ دیے لیکن حضور نبی کریمﷺ نے ان کے تمام جبر و استبداد کے جواب میں اس طرح کا رویہ اختیار کرنے کا حکم نہیں دیا بلکہ ہر دی جانے والی تکلیف پر صبر و شکر کی تلقین فرمائی، حتیٰ کہ حبشہ اور مدینہ شریف کی طرف ہجرت کر جانے کو ترجیح دیتے ہوئے مظلوم مسلمانوں کو اس کے بدلے میں جنت کے اعلیٰ مقامات کی بشارت دی۔ صبر کا مطلب ہی یہ ہوتا ہے کہ اپنے موقف پر سختی سے کاربند رہتے ہوئے اپنا نقطہ نظر انتہائی شائستگی کے ساتھ پیش کیا جائے اور اﷲ تعالیٰ کی طرف سے بہتر حالات کا انتظار کیا جائے، اﷲ تعالیٰ یقیناً صبر کرنے والوں کی مدد و اعانت کرتا ہے۔
    حضرت ابوبکر صدیقؓ کا حکم تو یہ تھا کہ دشمن کے علاقوں میں درختوں کو بھی نقصان نہ پہنچایا جائے، لیکن تحریک طالبان پاکستان کے نام سے 'جہاد‘ کرنے والے کیسے لوگ ہیں جو ہسپتالوں میں بھی خود کش دھماکے کرتے ہیں جہاں دور دور سے آئے ہوئے بے گناہ مریض اپنی بیماریوں اور حادثات میں لگنے والے زخموں کے علاج کے لیے مقیم ہوتے ہیں۔ ان میں بچے، جوان، بوڑھے اور خواتین سبھی شامل ہوتے ہیں۔ یہ ایسے 'مجاہد‘ ہیں جنہوں نے سکول جانے والے بچوں کی ویگنوں اور گاڑیوں کو بھی نشانہ بنانے سے دریغ نہیں کیا۔ انہوں نے باغات، بازاروں، ریل گاڑیوں، لاری اڈوں، بزرگان دین کے مزاروں، مارکیٹوں، مساجد اور دوسرے مذاہب سے تعلق رکھنے والوں کی عبادت گاہوں کو بھی نشانہ بنایا۔ یہ کارروائیاں کرنے والے لوگ وہ ہیں جنہوں نے اپنی مساجد پر تو صحابی رسول حضرت ابوبکر صدیقؓ کا نام گرامی بڑے خوبصورت الفاظ میں نقش کرایا ہوتا ہے اور یہ حضرات اپنی مساجد اور مدارس میں ان کی زندگی کے واقعات کو متبرک سمجھتے ہوئے اپنے پیروکاروں کو سناتے ہیں، لیکن بدقسمتی کہیے کہ یہ لوگ خود ان کی طرف سے دیے گئے احکامات اور ہدایات کا ذرہ برابر احترام نہیں کرتے ۔۔۔کیا اس بے ادبی پر صحابہ کرامؓ ان سے راضی ہوتے ہوں گے؟
    ہماری فوج جو صحرائوں، میدانوں، سنگلاخ پہاڑوں اور برف پوش چٹانوں پر ملک کی سرحدوں کی حفاظت کے فرائض سر انجام دے رہی ہے، وہ جو وطن کے اندر کسی بھی قدرتی آفت کا مقابلہ کرنے کے لیے ہمہ تن تیار ہوتی ہے، اس کو مارنے والے کون ہو سکتے ہیں؟ سب جانتے ہیں کہ تھر میں لاکھوں بچے، بوڑھے اور عورتیں بھوک سے بلک رہے ہیں، روزانہ دو یا تین بچے غذائی قلت یا مہلک بیماریوں کا شکار ہو کر لقمہ اجل بن رہے ہیں۔ ان کی دن رات حفاظت اور ان کے ایک ایک جھونپڑے اور گھر تک راشن اور ادویات پہنچانے کے لیے افواج پاکستان دن رات کام کر رہی ہیں، فوج کی جانب سے قائم کیے گئے فیلڈ اورایمر جنسی ہسپتالوں میں ڈاکٹر اور نرسیں ہمہ وقت مصروف رہتے ہیں۔ بھوک اور بیماریوں میں مبتلا لوگوں تک راشن اور دوائیں پہنچانے والوں کو نشانہ بنانے والے بتائیں کہ وہ کون سے دین کی خدمت کر رہے ہیں؟ دین اسلام تو ان حرکتوں کی قطعاً اجازت نہیں دیتا، یہ لوگ کس مذہب کے پیروکار ہیں؟ وہ معصوم بچے جن کے تن پر کپڑے نہیں تھے وہ جواں اور بوڑھی عورتیں جو ناکافی لباس کی وجہ سے میڈیا کے کیمروں سے بچ کر کونوں کھدروں میں چھپ رہی تھیں، ان خواتین کو تن ڈھانپنے کے لیے لباس مہیا کرنے والوں کے رستوں میں اگر بارودی مواد رکھ دیا جائے تو ایسا کرنے والے کس طرح اﷲ کے احکامات کی پیروی کرنے والے کہلا سکتے ہیں؟
    وہ لوگ جو سعودی عرب کے مفتی اعظم شیخ عبد العزیز اور الازہر یونیورسٹی کے مفتیوں کی جانب سے خود کش حملوں کو حرام قرار دینے کے فتوے کے بعد بھی ناسمجھ لڑکوں سے خود کش حملے کروا رہے ہیں کیا وہ اﷲ اور اس کے رسول حضرت محمد مصطفیٰٰﷺ پر ایمان لانے کے معیار پر پورے اترتے ہیں؟
    http://dunya.com.pk/index.php/author/munir-ahmed-baloch/2014-04-05/6635/44003740#tab2


    1. THE DEVIANT KHAWAARIJ, HTs, TERRORISTS, TAKFIRI JIHADIES ETC - YouTube

      www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB183623FD78B96D7


      If a Muslim is aware that someone, maybe another Muslim, is planning to commit an .... that the suicide bombings that go on today are not permitted in Islaam at all. .... The Senior Scholars of Saudi Arabia have refuted Bin Laden BEFORE the ...... Wahhab rahimahullaah, and the current grand mufti of saudi arabia, explains:

    The Debate with Zaid Hamid (Aman Muzakrat Ki... by zargham-hyder-9