Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/
religious-right-in-their-own-words-the-concept-of-an-
islamic-state/#more-9907

Pak Tea House

Home
About
Classifieds
Contact
Contributors

The Identity Crisis of Pakistan

Dark Comedy

August 25, 2010...9:39 am

Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an

Islamic State
Jump to Comments

Part 1

By Adnan Syed

This two part series revisits one of the pivotal events of the early Pakistani history; the riots by
the religious right wing parties to get Ahmadis declared as non-Muslims, and the subsequent
Munir-Kiyani inquiry commission report into the causes behind the riots. The report went on to
interview the religious leaders of the newly formed state of Pakistan regarding their motives and
their ideas of Pakistan as a pure Islamic state. As the interviews revealed the incongruous replies
of various leaders, they also showed vague but chilling ideas that the right wing parties
harboured to turn the newly formed Muslim nation into a political- Islam-dominated theocratic
nation. The interviews reveal the role of democracy, non Muslims, Jihad and punishments like
apostasy that would be practiced in an ideal Islamic state.

The interviews are as relevant today as they were 56 years ago. If anything, they foreshadowed
the violence that would engulf Pakistan as the state gradually ceded to the demands of the
Islamic right wing parties. Religious parties kept incessant pressure on the newly formed state to
take a turn towards Islamism. At the same time the pressure was on to the governments to kick the
Ahmadis out of the fold of Islam by a state decree. It was not until 1974, that another bout of
religious agitation got Prime Minister Bhutto to accede to their demands and get Ahmadis
declared non-Muslims. If anything, Pakistan has paid dearly for ignoring its founding father who
spoke unequivocally that the newly formed state would not be theocratic, and that everyone is
free to practice their religion as an equal Pakistani first and foremost.

(AZW)

One of the most pivotal events in the Pakistani history occurred in March 1953, as the right wing
parties went on mass agitation on the streets of Punjab to get Qadianis declared as non Muslims.

1 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

Mass disturbances broke out in the province of Punjab. They continued until the middle of April
1953. Martial law was declared in Lahore, which remained in force until the middle of May 1953.
Almost 23 people were killed by the firing of police and army on the rioters, before the unrest was
finally quelled. The violent protests and the events leading up to the martial law in Lahore were
the first signs that the religious right had far more extreme aspirations for Pakistan. Jinnah had
explicitly negated Pakistan as a theocratic state before his death. On more than one occasion he
had said that “Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine
mission”.

Still, the right wing parties persisted. Their umbrella group, Majlis-e-Amal, evolved around a
fundamental demand to the new state of Pakistan: Declare Qadianis (or Ahmadis) as non-Muslims.
In January 1953, a deputation of the ulama delivered an ultimatum to the Prime Minister of
Pakistan, Khwaja Nazimuddin. It called for the state to declare Ahmadis as non-Muslims, and
remove Chaudhry Zafarullah Khan (the then foreign minister of Pakistan) and other Ahmadis from
key posts in the government.

To his credit, Khwaja Nazimuddin, rejected the ultimatum on February 27, 1953 and arrested the
prominent members of Majlis-e-Amal. The disturbances started soon afterwards.

The Government of Punjab constituted a Court for holding a public enquiry into the disturbances.
The members of the enquiry commission were Justice M. Munir, Chief Justice of the Federal
Court, and Justice Muhammad Rustum (M.R) Kiyani of the Punjab High Court. Both gentlemen at
that time had quite distinguished careers. While widely respected for his experience, Justice Munir,
later that year in 1954, went on the wrong side of history when he validated the doctrine of
necessity in the Moulvi Tamizuddin case. In that case the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly
by Governor General was declared lawful.

Justice Kiyani is to this day remembered as one of the most upstanding judges who graced the
judicial benches of Pakistan. He spoke out against the Ayub Khan regime, risked his enviable
career for taking his stance, and was widely admired across Pakistan for not bowing to the
dictator. Grateful citizens of Lahore called him the “voice of Pakistan” at his retirement.

The Enquiry Commission produced a 380 page report that remains a treasure trove of information
about the early Pakistani history, the interaction of faith in matters of the state, and the
administrative lapses that the state had began showing as its self serving rulers started using
religion to undermine each others’ influence. The commission interviewed all the major parties
involved in the disturbances: the Punjab Government of Mumtaz Daultana, the Provincial Muslim
League, the Majlis-e-Ahrar, the Majlis-e-Amal, the Jamaat-e-Islami and the Ahmadiya
organizations. After talking to all parties, and sifting through 3,600 pages of written statements and
2,700 pages of evidence, the two member commission produced this important document called
“Report of the Court of Inquiry constituted under Punjab Act II of 1954 to enquire into the Punjab
Disturbances of 1953”.

The commission was firm in laying the blame on the religious organizations for inciting violence
and holding the government hostage by agitating on the streets. The commission called the Ahrar
and their allies insidious. However, the very last paragraph of this report is a scathing indictment of
the then Punjab Government and most of the provincial and federal governments that followed
since. In the Justices’ famous words, the 1953 disturbances should never ever have morphed into
something that serious. It was the subordination of the law and order to the political ends that
started the rot and allowed the religious right to play havoc on the streets of Lahore, Sialkot and
Rawalpindi. Democracy requires the rule of law, and the rule of law should never be a hostage to
political leaders’ considerations and machinations.

2 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

Justice Munir Kiyani Report ends with those prophetic words that need to be listened to by each
and every government of the state of Pakistan: “And it is our deep conviction that if the Ahrar
had been treated as a pure question of law and order, without any political considerations, one
District Magistrate and one Superintendent of Police could have dealt with them…… But if
democracy means the subordination of law and order to political ends—then Allah knoweth best
and we end the report”.

THE INTERVIEWS WITH THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT WING

The commission interviewed leading Islamic ulama of that time to ascertain their ideas of the
Islamic state, sovereignty and democracy in an Islamic State, legislature and law making in an
Islamic state, position of non-Muslims, definition of a Muslim, punishment for apostasy,
propagation of other religions, concept of Jihad, and role of Muslims within a non-Muslim state.

The interviews appear in pages 203 to 230. They provide a fascinating glimpse into the confused
ideas espoused by the religious right towards the new state of Pakistan. To our eternal shame,
Pakistan gradually went on to embrace this confusion rather than discard it in favour of a
democratic Muslim state. The Munir-Kiyani Report remains one of the first and one of the very
few reports that was able to disern the vague notion of an Islamic state ideal. This concept wrought
extensive destruction on Pakistan and on the region in decades to come.

The vague ideal still resides with the religious right, a full 56 years later after the report was
written. In 1960s, a concept of the “Ideology of Pakistan” gradually found its way into the grand
vocabulary. This ideology sought to replace the Muslim nationalism that the Muslim League
espoused in its struggle for Pakistan. The Munir-Kiyani report went on to quote Jinnah’s August 11
speech, and the various quotes where Jinnah unequivocally negated the concept of theocracy for
Pakistan, and called for Pakistan to become a modern democratic Muslim majority republic.

Interestingly, the religious right clearly recognized the Muslim nationalism embedded in the
demand for Pakistan. However, almost all of them called this concept unacceptable to them. These
denouncers included the Majlis-e-Ahrar, the erstwhile Congress allies before the partition for
whom “before partition this (nationalism) conception was almost a part of their faith”. Maulana
Ahsan Islahi called this Muslim nation state the creature of the devil. “None of the ulama can
tolerate a state which is based on nationalism and all that it implies”.

In March 1949, Jinnah’s concept of a modern nation state received its first blow when the
government of Liaquat Ali Khan passed the Objectives Resolution. The ulama freely admitted that
Objectives Resolution was nothing more than a hoax. Even though the resolution gave sovereignty
to Allah, in the ulama minds, the provisions of the OR, especially those relating to fundamental
rights, were directly opposed to the principles of an Islamic State.

THE CONCEPT OF AN ISLAMIC STATE

The committee posed a question as to “what is then the Islamic State of which everybody talks but
nobody thinks”. What is the conception and function of the state?

The ulama were divided in their opinions when they were asked to give examples of an Islamic
state in Muslim history. Shia Alim Hafiz Kifayat Hussein held out as his ideal the government of
the Holy Prophet. Another alim included the days of Omar bin Abdul Aziz (an Ummayid dynastic
but just ruler, who ruled between 717 and 720 AD), Salahuddin Ayyubi of Damascus (who

3 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

conquered Jerusalem a thousand years ago), Sultan Mahmood Ghaznavi (who looted and
ransacked India many times), Muhammad Shah Tughlaq, Aurangzeb Alamgir (the Mughal
emperor), and the modern day Saud dynasty of the Saudi Arabia.

Another alim Maulana Haamid Badayuni opined that the details of the state would be worked out
in the future by the ulama. Master Taj-uddin Ansari’s confused notion of an Islamic state can be
gleaned from the following interview excerpt:

Q.—If you are told that the Khilafat movement continued long after the Turks had abolished
Khilafat, will that be correct?

A.—As far as I remember, the Khilafat movement finished with the abolition of the Khilafat by the
Turks.

Q.—You are reported to have been a member of the Khilafat movement and having made
speeches. Is it correct?

A.—It could not be correct.

Q.—Was the Congress interested in Khilafat?

A.— Yes.

Q.—Was Khilafat with you a matter of religious conviction or just a political movement ?

A.— It was purely a religious movement.

Q.— Did the Khilafat movement have the support of Mr. Gandhi ?

A.—Yes.

Q.— What was the object of the Khilafat movement ?

A.— The Britisher was injuring the Khilafat institution in Turkey and the Musalman was aggrieved
by this attitude of the Britisher.

Q.— Was not the object of the movement to resuscitate the Khilafat among the Musalmans ?

A.—No.

Q.— Is Khilafat with you a necessary part of Muslim form of Government ?

A.—Yes.

Q.— Are you, therefore, in favour of having a Khilafat in Pakistan ?

A.—Yes.

Q.— Can there be more than one Khalifa of the Muslims ?

A.— No.

Q.— Will the Khalifa of Pakistan be the Khalifa of all the Muslims of the world ?

A.— He should be but cannot be.

4 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

As the justices pondered upon the role of Quran and Sunnah in the new state of Pakistan, it
quickly became clear that in an Islamic state that the ulama wanted for Pakistan would have to
follow, the constitution can only be framed by the agreement of ulama and mujtahids (modern
interpreters of Quran and Sunnah). Any modern law not conforming to Quran and Sunnah were
void and not to be followed by a Pakistani Muslim. Any provision of rule of international law to
which Pakistan is a party, which contravenes the Quran or Sunnah shall be void and not binding on
any Muslim in Pakistan.

More chillingly, as the interviews revealed, the ulamas conceded the form of Government in
Pakistan, if that form is to comply with the principles of Islam, will not be democratic at all.

(Friday, Legislation in an Islamic state, who is a Muslim, and the position of non-Muslims vs. the
Muslims)

Share this: StumbleUpon Digg Reddit

12 Comments

Filed under Constitution, Democracy, Islam, Islamism, Jinnah, Judiciary, Liberal Democratic
Pakistan, Pak Tea House, Pakistan, Religion

Tags: Pakistan, extremism, minorities, Jinnah, Punjab, Partition, Ahmadis, Majlis-e-Ahrar, azw,
Adnan Syed, Munir Kiyani Report, Religious Right Wing, Khwaja Nazimuddin

Like Be the first to like this post.

12 Comments
YLH
August 25, 2010 at 9:49 am

Well written.

Junaid
August 25, 2010 at 10:14 am

The ulama were divided in their opinions when they were asked to give examples of an
Islamic state in Muslim history. Shia Alim Hafiz Kifayat Hussein held out as his ideal the
government of the Holy Prophet. Another alim included the days of Omar bin Abdul Aziz
(an Ummayid dynastic but just ruler, who ruled between 717 and 720 AD), Salahuddin
Ayyubi of Damascus (who conquered Jerusalem a thousand years ago), Sultan Mahmood
Ghaznavi (who looted and ransacked India many times), Muhammad Shah Tughlaq,
Aurangzeb Alamgir (the Mughal emperor), and the modern day Saud dynasty of the Saudi
Arabia.

Why do we have to look in the past to create our future?

I am just reading the book “The battle for God” and can see how we are stuck in the same
process, Europe was stuck 300 years ago.

5 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

aliarqam
August 25, 2010 at 12:16 pm

The damage has been done via Objective resolution, and after the embarrasement
contradictions before the Munir-Kiani commissiom, the Ulemas of all the sects come
together and bring a 22 points agenda for Islamisation. Which nowadays is part of various
religio political parties manifesto.

Ammar
August 25, 2010 at 2:50 pm

The religious right has always used Islam as a tool for their political benefits. Their existence
has lead to the nurture of Taliban. The war against extremism cannot be won unless we
revert to Jinnah vision of a secular and progressive state where everyone has the right to
practice their religion.

OMLK
August 25, 2010 at 4:59 pm

One cannot escape the fact that Pakistan is overwhelmingly Muslim, and the Muslims
generally believe that Islam requires it’s rule to be imposed every where. Even those
“liberal” Muslims who voice opposing views, nevertheless, have no answer to those who
hold this belief and quote the Quran as their basis (thanks to the idealogy of Maudoodi). To
my knowledge, in Pakistan, only the Ahmadiyya school of thought and the one led by Javed
Ghamdi have an idealogical basis, based on the Quran, that counters this view and explicitly
says that Islam does not aspire to policial power and the main objective of religion is self
purification and not a struggle to establish an Islamic system. The Pakistani nation has
responded by decalring the Ahmadis non-Muslims, and forcing Ghamdi to migrate abroad
after getting death threats. Any surprise then that the radicals are running amok here,
dragging Pakistan rapidly backwards. Either the Pakistanis renounce Islam, or adhere to an
idealogy of it that is peaceful, or continue to be haunted by the radical Mullahs. If Pakistanis
stick to Islam as their faith, yet do not have an idealogical basis for their faith that is
peaceful and moderate, then all else is lip service to Jinnah’s vision and the demand for a
modern, democratic Pakistan.

Bin Ismail
August 25, 2010 at 5:22 pm

Adnan Syed,

Excellent analysis. During the course of the Munir-Kiyani Commission, a very pertinent
question was put before all the ulema – “who is a Muslim?”. No two ulema agreed on a
single definition. The situation left the worthy Justices both bemused and amused. The
ulema were relentlessly in search of a definition of the term “Muslim”, applying which they
could ensure the expulsion of Ahmadis from the fold of Muslims. Finally, in 1974, they
discovered the long-sought definition of “Muslim”. A novel definition of “Islam”, unknown
to the Holy Founder of Islam himself, was finally found. They proposed, and the
Government accepted that “anyone who is prepared to falsify Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of
Qadian, is a Muslim”. This was then included in the Identity Card and Passport application
forms as “Declaration of Muslim” and all State-certified Muslim citizens of Pakistan were
made to sign it . A new definition of the term “Muslim”, unknown to God or His Messenger
had finally been arrived at, by the ulema and adopted through legislation by the Parliament
of Pakistan.

6 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

AZW
August 25, 2010 at 7:31 pm

Bin Ismail:

Yes, indeed the definition of a Muslim is one of the most interesting parts of these
interviews, where none of these ulemas were able to agree on a definition of a true Muslim.
Every theocratically inclined Muslim state discriminates against its own population
(including Muslims as well as the non Muslims) exactly due to the reason that they have
their own definition of a “true” Muslim.

OMLK: first step would be to reverse the poison that we are pouring into the ears of our
young generation. Have a read of Ali Chishti’s brilliant article in the Daily Times where he
explains how even the non Madrassah syllabus is inducing hatred in the youth. We have all
grown up with Zia’s children: those fuming victim-mentality riddled generation that thinks
the world is out to get us, and freely mixes political Islam with everythging under the sun.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=20108\25\story_25-8-2010_pg3_5

AZW
August 25, 2010 at 7:34 pm

I will also add that we will be unable to live with Zia’s grand children if this propagation of
hatred continues unabated. These grand children will be too many, too confused, too chaotic
and too violent and would overwhelm the state of Pakistan eventually.

Octavian
August 25, 2010 at 8:57 pm

Reading of the Munir report should be made mandatory. The exchange between the
Honorable Justice and the reprobate mullahs is an eye opener and serves as a clear warning
for those aspiring to create some divinely inspired Islamic state (which no one can define0

Tilsim
August 25, 2010 at 10:31 pm

AZW

Thank you for writing a very interesting piece.

“rule of law should never be a hostage to political leaders’ considerations and

machinations.”

I agree and that is something very few in Pakistan respect.

I think the paper below from Carnegie on Islam and the path of political development in
Pakistan is well worth a read. It gives an excellent overview and highlights how both the
PPP and PML-N and in fact all political forces (except Ayub, Musharraf and the minorities )
have pushed greater and greater Islamization of the laws in Pakistan. I think this is the
objective reality that anyone posting on this website is dealing with. If the PML-N comes
into power, I believe we will see the final phase of Zia’s project.

With that background in mind, a societal consensus has to be developed about what is wrong
with this sort of islamisation and what bad consequences it is leading to (arbitrary justice,

7 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic Sta... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/religious-right-in-the...

one size fits all Islam, terror, xenophobia, economic collapse etc). Any thought of a secular
legislative reversal, however much it may be desirable, is not a realistic goal until the public
see a real problem with this sort of Islamic state and practice. We need to see more opinion
pieces that highlight the specific issues. I think many writers in the English press at least
have started to raise their voices as well as the blogosphere – encouraging sign!

http://carnegieendowment.org/files/Topychkanov_Islam_Eng.pdf

Sadia Hussain
August 26, 2010 at 1:17 pm

This paradox has been imposed upon as Pakistan was envisioned as liberal progressive
democracy; however the religious indoctrination gave rise to militancy as the clergy slowly
and steadily poisoned our political system as we fight extremism we also need to remove the
influence of religion from our politics.

Tilsim
August 27, 2010 at 2:36 am

@ PMA
“Today Kabul, Islamabad, New Delhi are still fighting the old battles.”

Whilst the history is all quite fascinating, let’s not stretch it so thin that it breaks.

Leave a Reply
Logged in as pakistanprevails. Logout »

Notify me of follow-up comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Subscribe to PakTeaHouse by Email

Search

8 of 18 8/27/2010 10:17 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/
religious-right-in-their-own-words-what-constitutes-
a-true-muslim/

Pak Tea House

Home
About
Classifieds
Contact
Contributors

Why is Pakistani Middleclass So Skeptical of Democracy and Why Our Defense is

Not Convincing?
The State Must Go Weeding

August 27, 2010...6:52 am

Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a

True Muslim
Jump to Comments

Part 2

By Adnan Syed

This series revisits one of the pivotal events of the early Pakistani history; the riots by the
religious right wing parties to get Ahmadis declared as non-Muslims, and the subsequent Munir-
Kiyani inquiry commission report into the causes behind the riots. The report went on to
interview the religious leaders of the newly formed state of Pakistan regarding their motives and
their ideas of Pakistan as a pure Islamic state. As the interviews revealed the incongruous replies
of various leaders, they also showed vague but chilling ideas that the right wing parties
harboured to turn the newly formed Muslim nation into a politically Islam dominated theocratic
nation. The interviews reveal the role of democracy, non Muslims, Jihad and punishments like
apostasy that would be practiced in an ideal Islamic state.

Originally planned as a two part series, I decided to split it to three parts due to the sheer
volume of information in interviews in the Munir-Kiyani Report.

(AZW)

SOVEREIGNTY AND DEMOCRACY IN ISLAMIC STATE

Munir-Kiyani report was one of the first studies into the contradictory stance taken by framers of
the Objectives Resolution. The report pointed out that the Resolution misused the words
“sovereign” and “democracy” when the Resolution stated that the constitution to be framed was
“for a sovereign state in which principles of democracy as enunciated by Islam would be fully
observed”.

1 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

Problem is, when a country is sovereign, its people or any group of people are fully entitled to
conduct their affairs any way they like and “untrammelled by any consideration except those of
expediency and policy. Absolute restriction on the legislative power of a state is a restriction on
the sovereignty of the people”.

Islamic state, in that sense cannot be sovereign, “because it will not be competent to abrogate,
repeal or do away with any law in the Quran or the Sunnah”. Importantly, if the Islamic state
legislature is a sort of “ijma”, masses would be precluded from that group because “ijma-e-ummat
in Islamic jurisprudence is restricted to ulama and mujtahids of acknowledged status and does not
at all extend, as in democracy, to the populace”.

When this question was put in front of various religious leaders, the following replies were made.
Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Pakistan leader Maulana Hasanat and Syed Ata-ullah-Shah Bukhari said that the
religion (din) was complete and nothing else was required. Bukhari even went on to say that any
more laws would constitute kufr (way of the unbelievers). Moudoudi however proposed an idea of
Majlis-e-Shura (the council of advisors) to deal with matters not covered in Quran and Sunnah.
Moudoudi did not supply any further written material regarding his ideas of the Shura, the status of
this body (whether it was a standing body or it had any legal or binding force etc.). No further
explanation was given to reconcile Moudoudi’s stance that was drastically different from the two
gentlemen before him, and almost constituted kufr according to one of them.

POSITION OF NON MUSLIMS IN AN ISLAMIC STATE

The religious leaders were almost clear that the position of non Muslims in the Islamic state of
Pakistan would be that of zimmies and they will neither be full citizens of Pakistan, nor they would
have the same rights as the regular Muslims. Maulana Hasnat went on to say that:

“Their position will that of zimmies. They will have no voice in the making of laws, no right to
administer the law and no right to hold public offices”.

Mian Muhammad Tufail of Jamaat-e-Islami (who died in June 2009) stated that “I do not
acknowledge these rights (of minorities) for the Christians or other non-Muslims in Pakistan if the
state is founded on the ideology of the Jamaat”.

However, another alim, President of Jamiat-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni

had his own ideas about the status of non Muslims in Pakistan. When asked if he had read Quaid’s
August 11 speech that spelled out equal rights for the minorities (in a sense Quaid discarded the
idea of minorities by proclaiming that everyone was first and foremost a Pakistani). Mr. Badayuni
stated that all communities (Muslims or not) should have, according to their population, proper
representation in the administration of state and legislation”. But in his opinion, non Muslims
cannot be taken in the army, judiciary or be appointed as ministers.

He also stated that non Muslims in an Islamic state are not zimmies (since zimmies only belong to a
land conquered by the Muslims), but are “mu-ahids”, people with whom some agreement is made.

All of this contradictory talk of non Muslims’ rights led the learned justices to a very fundamental
question:

Just what makes any one a Muslim?

THE DEFINITION OF A MUSLIM

2 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

It was a simple question asked by Justice Munir and Kiyani to the learned alims of the new state of
Pakistan. The question was simply “please define a Musalman”.

Maulana Hasnat Qadri (Jamiat-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan): “He must believe in the unity of God, must
believe in the prophet of Islam to be a true prophet, believe in the Holy Prophet as the last of the
prophets, believe in Quran, believe as binding the injunctions of the Prophet, must believe in
Qiyamat (the day of judgement)”.

Maulana Muhammad Ali (President, Jamiat-e-Ulama-i-Pakistan): “Muslim believes in the Quran

and what has been said by the prophet. Nothing more is required to be believed or needed to be
done”.

Maulana Moudoudi: “Muslim believes in tauheed, all the prophets, all the books revealed by God,
angels and the Day of Judgement….Any alteration in any one of these (five) articles will take him
out of the pale of Islam”

Ghazi Siraj-uddin Munir: “A Muslim believes in the kalmia….and leads a life in the footsteps of
the Holy Prophet”.

Mufti Muhammad Idris, Jamia Ashrafia, Lahore: “There is a distinction between the (Persian
word) Musalman and the word “Momin”….It requires pages and pages to describe what momin is.
A person is a Muslim who professes to be obedient to Allah. He believes in the Unity of God,
prophethood of the Prophets and in the Day of Judgement. A person who does not believe in azan
(call for the prayer) or in qurbani (sacrifice) goes outside the pale of Islam”.

Maulana Muhammad Ali Kandhalvi, Darush-Shahabia, Sialkot: “A person who in obedience to

the commands of the prophet performs all the zarooriyat-i-din (religious requirements) is a
Musalman. Zarooriyat-i-din are those requirements which are known to every Muslim irrespective
of his religious knowledge.”

Maulana Ahsan Islahi went on to say there are two kinds of Musalmans; political Muslims and real
Muslims. A political Muslim had to fulfil 10 basic requirements and he could be a Muslim citizen
of an Islamic state. The real Muslim needed to “believe in and act on all the injunctions by Allah
and his prophet in the manner in which they have been enjoined upon him”.

The above were just a few, but not all of the interviews conducted by Justice Munir and Kiyani.
The justices ended this section with those memorable words: “Keeping in view the several
definitions given by the ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines
are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done
and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of
Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims
according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of everyone else”.

Today, the religious zealots hunt the non Muslims on the streets of Pakistan, whether these
“non-Muslims” are Shias, Ismailis, Ahmadis or any other sect that is considered outside the pale of
Islam and fit to be killed. The warning signs were all there, right in the pages of the Munir-Kiyani
Report as one after another alim, told a story of a violent religious reality that the new Islamic state
would entail.

Not only the ulama had clear designs about the non Muslims, they also had violent religious
warfare ideals that an Islamic state would engage in against the infidels. The seeds of a chaotic
Pakistan that would suffer under incessant religiously mandated militancy were sown way back in
the fiery speeches of the ulamas right after the creation of Pakistan. The religious right were

3 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

looking to oust the Ahmadis first from the pale of Islam, before they can turn their attention
towards turning Pakistan into a premier Islamic state.

Sunday: Punishment for apostasy and the concept of Jihad by an Islamic State

Share this: StumbleUpon Digg Reddit

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Terrorism, Shameless Religious Bigotry and Pakistani Mindset

Long March – A Long View
The Undefined Equilibrium between Pakistan and Islam. Part 3: Objectives Re…
Modi only person denied entry to America: US panel report

23 Comments

Filed under Islam, Liberal Democratic Pakistan, Pak Tea House, Pakistan, Partition, Punjab,
Rights, minorities

Tags: Pakistan, Democracy, Islam, Muslim, Jinnah, Punjab, Ahmadis, Justice Munir, azw, Adnan
Syed, Munir Kiyani Report

Like Be the first to like this post.

23 Comments
Amaar
August 27, 2010 at 7:19 am

We have been bitten by these snakes and the poison feels unbearable now!

Bin Ismail
August 27, 2010 at 8:28 am

Religion, primarily deals with matters of faith and spiritually guides man towards his Maker.
When we talk about the concept of an “Islamic State”, we are examining a state that is
governed by an authority acceptable to the majority of its citizens as both the Chief Spiritual
Guide as well as the Chief Executive in worldly matters. This was possible during the
lifetime of the Holy Prophet, after he migrated to Madina because he was, by virtue of his
spiritual status, the Final Interpreter in all matters of religion, for the majority of the dwellers
of Madina, who were Muslims. Regarding the domain of worldly affairs, the Muslim and
non-Muslim citizens of the State of Madina, both, through the Charter of Madina, accepted
the Holy Prophet as the Chief Executive, Chief Judge and Chief Arbiter. So it came to be a
spiritual guide was assigned the additional responsibility of statecraft. After the demise of
the Prophet, his successors were handed over both these spheres of responsibilities. With the
death of Ali, came the death of the institution of Khilafat in Islam, and since this Khilafat
was a combination of spiritual and temporal leaderships, the Islamic State also died with
him. The dynasties that succeeded Ali, were merely a series of mundane rulers, who did not
even come close to qualifying as spiritual guides. The “State” lived on but the “Islamic

4 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

State” was no more.

A comparison between the situation around the last days of Ali and today, reveals to us that
an “Islamic State” is not even hypothetically possible now. During the Khilafat Rashida,
there were no sects among Muslims. Today there are more than seventy. During the Khilafat
Rashida, there was only one interpretation of Religion, the one issued or endorsed by the
Khalifa. Today, there are more than seventy. We are talking about more than seventy
interpretation on each issue. No sane person could even imagine drawing the potential of
this dissent into the business of the state and government and yet expect the state to survive.

Amaar
August 27, 2010 at 9:45 am

@bin Ismail

Very true. But during khilafat i rashida, we had those khwaraj whose slogan was ‘ta’at lillah
wal amru shura bainana’ (obedience to Allah and principle of consultation). Rejecting
khilafat, this group carried out murders and assassinations of Sahaba ruthlessly. Even the
assassin of Ali was a hafiz-i-Quran Ibn Muljam and the attack too was within a mosque.

For all practical purposes this group was the first terrorist ‘Islamic’ group. IMO, Taliban and
AlQaida are the progeny of the Khwaraj. JI and JUI types are also their pupils. God save us
from these modern day Khwaraj.

Ahsan
August 27, 2010 at 10:50 am

Islam as I know is justice and absolute justice. Keeping in mind the opinions of some
learneds that a non-muslim cannot be an equal citizen of an ‘Islamic’ state, I wonder, with
due respect, this is a serious negation of the concept of equality. Islam to me greatly
emphasize on merit and ability.

If a person is able and meritorious he deserves the highest rank. He can be a minister, army
officer, Chief Justice and yes President or Prime minister.
and
This would be exactly Islamic!

Yasir Qadeer
August 27, 2010 at 11:00 am

Until you limit religion to your personal life, its fine but when religion is tool which you
apply on economics and politics that is where it becomes complicated. The whole world
does not run on our standards and we need to understand that.

Amna Zaman
August 27, 2010 at 12:36 pm

The trust deficit between the government and people needs to be addressed here. Islam is a
moderate religion and the true teachings need to be promoted to finish wipe out the distorted
ones.

Hira Mir
August 27, 2010 at 12:41 pm

5 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

Education is the right of every citizen. We must press to support such ideas in which citizens
are provided with standard education that will give them International recognition.

Bin Ismail
August 27, 2010 at 1:54 pm

When it comes to defining a Muslim, one wonders could anyone ever have greater insight
into this definition than the Holy Prophet himself. Does anyone enjoy greater authority than
the Founder of Islam himself, in relation to defining the term “Muslim”? When the first
census in Madina took place, during the lifetime of the Prophet, someone inquired from him,
who should be counted as a Muslim. The Prophet’s reply was simple: “Write down for me
the names of all those who call themselves Muslim”.

ramesh
August 27, 2010 at 3:39 pm

why the necessity of the outward or the visible criteria required to be called a”muslim”and
not the inward or the spritual state of ones mind,which could be different from one showing
the required outward look.this is only necessory to rule and subjugate the ‘ following’.only
the’worldly’reqirement’to be a muslim and not the godly.that is why it is essential to keep
the two seperate and not one

AA khalid
August 27, 2010 at 4:31 pm

Very interesting and worthwhile articles.

I do think however, we should also start a series of articles like the present one initiated by
Adnan Syed, known as the ”Religious Left”.

Present the writings and thought of other liberal Muslim intellectuals, scholars and thinkers.

A series of posts on the liberal political theology that other religious intellectuals and
thinkers have presented.

Vajra
August 27, 2010 at 4:38 pm

@A. A. Khalid

Unfortunately, it would seem that there is no choice. Unless such a stance is clearly
articulated by the ‘Religious Left’ as you have called them, their position will go
unexplained and undefended by default.

AA khalid
August 27, 2010 at 4:51 pm

@ Vajra

Yes I think we should present an alternative religious discourse. I think I will try and start an
equivalent series presenting liberal religious thought. I liked the format Adnan used which
was to use direct quotes.

That I think is an accessible and easy form of presentation, but it takes a lot of research and

6 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

hence time. But I think it is necessary as you said to present an alternative.

AA khalid
August 27, 2010 at 4:57 pm

I think the fundamental crux and problem with this imagined ”Islamic” state which is really
a clerical sharade with the singular imposition of a particular interpretation of Islamic Law
(which goes against the juristic tradition, hence one should argue that these movements are
not ”orthodox” but wholly modern manifestations which are reacting to these modern
conceptions of the nation state and modern legislation, as they feel their spheres of authority
are being eroded by democratic discourse).

It is also the absolute disregard for human agency (free will) and rationality. Furthermore it
undermines the egalitarian teachings of a singular but diverse humanity which share
common values.

The real problem however, is that this religious right does not recognize any form or
conception of a common civic identity, i.e. the crucial lesson of citizenship. A form of
membership which transcends but does not disregard other identities of a religious or ethnic
nature. We need a common civic identity, which is wholly inclusive.

Vajra
August 27, 2010 at 5:33 pm

@A. A. Khalid

I tried to write what comes out below cautiously and without committing myself to a theistic
position, which I don’t hold, to be honest.

Nothing worked. It seems that to express the thing in direct terms is the only way.

There is a lot of material already, much of it contributed by you and Bin Ismail, others as
well. It quite conclusively offers a platform for observant liberals to support democracy.

The format you liked was quite effectively deployed by Adnan and many of us will look
forward to it, once you have carefully drafted your platform.

There will be those of us who are encouraged at the possibility of the broadening of the
liberal front in Pakistan herself that might ensue. There will be others who will examine it
carefully to see if its generic stand will be useful to observants of other religions, who
sometimes feel excluded in these discussions by their personal discomfort with what they
perceive as a sterile secularism which fails to take a genuine personal faith into
consideration or to reconcile faith with civic duty.

It should be interesting. Do however invest in a steel helmet even as you write.

YLH
August 27, 2010 at 6:04 pm

“religious left”

In Pakistan after Qazilbash Waqf v. Chief Land Commissioner PLD 1990 SC 99, there is no
scope for religious left.

7 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

Raju Brother
August 27, 2010 at 6:13 pm

What constitutes a true Muslim?

Either some abstract concept is pre-defined by the founder, discoverer, inventor, in no

uncertain terms; or it will never be definable. Everybody would have his own subjective
view on it, and all those views would be understandable.

In fact the question is all the more absurd, because it asks not what constitutes a Muslim, but
rather what constitutes a ‘true’ Muslim, as if there are grades of being Muslim, and not just
different shades of being Muslim.

The portrayal of the question as one of grades and not shades presupposes, that in the midst
of such diversity of sects, of opinion in Islam, one is supposed to not only categorize shades,
but also one has to assign every shade a grade. Why would any shade accept for itself a
lower grade?! As the Muslims lack a singular earthly representative of Allah on earth, there
is no way that question will be answered. So why pose an unanswerable question?

asterisk
August 27, 2010 at 6:57 pm

bin ismail writes:

“The Prophet’s reply was simple: “Write down for me the names of all those who call
themselves Muslim”.”

The muslim terrorists, dictators, killers, rote-learners, talibani teachers/mulhs etc. they all
expressly call themselves muslims.

So what’s your way out now?

Amaar
August 27, 2010 at 9:31 pm

@asterisk

These people would also be technically ‘Muslim’ at least in name if not in spirit. The right of
someone to associate himself to Islam stands regardless of his misdeeds. Just as Hitler was a
‘Christian’ and those mobs who killed Muslim migrants by their millions in 1947 were
‘Hindu’.

Bin Ismail
August 28, 2010 at 12:37 am

In the opening chapter of the Quran, Surah Fatiha, God introduces Himself as “Maalik-e
yaumid deen” meaning ‘Master of the Day of Judgement’. This is one of the principal
attributes of God as revealed in the Quran. Man has been reminded that God and God alone,
will judge people’s state of belief and action – no one else.

God also says in the Quran: “And do not say to anyone, who even says ‘salam’ to you, ‘you
are not a believer’ ” [Quran 4:94]. Thus has God shut the door to suspicion regarding
someone’s being or not being a believer. A mere pronouncement of “salam” or salutation of
peace should quell all curiosities regarding the state of belief or disbelief of the pronouncer.

8 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

During the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, whenever someone accepted Islam, he would
simply declare “laa ilaaha illallaah Muhammadur rasoolullah”, meaning ‘there is none
worthy of worship except Allah – Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. This brief
statement which takes less than ten seconds to deliver was all that it took and the person was
considered by all as a Muslim.

The Holy Prophet, the founder of Islam, himself defined a Muslim in the following words:
“He who offers salat (prayers) the way we do, faces in the direction of our Qibla (Kaaba)
and partakes of animals sacrificed by us, is indeed a Muslim – such as is guaranteed by Allah
and His messenger.” [ref: Bukhari & Muslim].

Thus from many angles, God and His messenger have on one hand set very simple and
uncomplicated standards for defining a “Muslim” while on the other discouraged suspicion,
leaving the final judgement with God.

tilsim1
August 28, 2010 at 2:03 am

@ Adnan Syed

This is an excellent and informative article. Thank you.

The status of non-muslims in an Islamic state is problematic. Mullahs have no problem with
non-muslims being regarded as second class citizens but muslims like me do. Many mullahs
would be the first ones to complain about perceived second class treatment of muslims in
say Switzerland etc because they can’t have mosques with minarets.

Frankly this part of Islam needs ijtihad now that we have nation states, not tribal culture and
laws.

Nasir
August 28, 2010 at 2:38 am

mullahs are the worst beasts on Allahs earth – and the paki mullah is the worst of all mullahs

Raju Brother
August 28, 2010 at 2:41 am

Amaar wrote:

These people would also be technically ‘Muslim’ at least in name if not in spirit. The right
of someone to associate himself to Islam stands regardless of his misdeeds. Just as Hitler
was a ‘Christian’ and those mobs who killed Muslim migrants by their millions in 1947
were ‘Hindu’.

This argument just does not hold.

A person can be of any religion and commit a crime. Nobody says that a crime is because his
religion, unless, the criminal himself invokes his religious affiliation as motivation and
justifies the crime in religious terms.

Hitler invoked the ‘Aryan Race’ as his justification, not his Christianity. He was in war with
other Chrisitians.

9 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

As far as Partition is concerned, the killings that occurred were between two communities
which identified themselves differently, whose tribal interests were in conflict, and much of
it were revenge killings.

The hatred and brutality that were shown could have been built up by religious propaganda,
but the catalyst for the killings was not religion, but rather greed and revenge, even as we
know that the situation was created because of the demand for a religion-based Partition.

Not every crime committed by some Muslim automatically makes him Al Qaeda. But if he
commits some crime citing some religious duty or through his past associations it can be
proved that he considered himself as working for some religious cause, then the epithet of
‘religious extremism‘ would indeed by apt.

If a substantial number of people of that religion are also of the opinion, that the crime was
indeed sanctioned by the religion, then the religion is also to be blamed.

AZW
August 28, 2010 at 9:16 am

AA Khalid:

It is also the absolute disregard for human agency (free will) and rationality. Furthermore
it undermines the egalitarian teachings of a singular but diverse humanity which share
common values.
The real problem however, is that this religious right does not recognize any form or
conception of a common civic identity, i.e. the crucial lesson of citizenship. A form of
membership which transcends but does not disregard other identities of a religious or
ethnic nature. We need a common civic identity, which is wholly inclusive.

It would be great to read about the endangered species called the religious Islamic left wing
and what are their views on the political system, constitutions and the citizens of a nation,
Muslim or not.

For the past 1,000 years, Islamic world has been leaning towards a right wing political Islam
ideology that frowns at human reasoning by terming it inherently mistake-prone. To chase a
utopian world of black and white good vs. bad, this group led by the likes of Tamiyya,
Ghazali of the old, and Afghani, Moudoudi and Qutub of the modern world has successfully
crushed any sort of Islamic revivalist movement. I would think any revivalist movement is in
the lines of what Mutazzalites followed some 1,000 years ago in Damascus and Baghdad.
Would that be correct?

From a previous thread, I understand that you favour a softer religiously-hued secularism. I
have mixed thoughts on this front. The left wing religious school of thought, according to my
understanding is more humanist in its outlook. I am however not sure if political systems
need a preference of left wing versus right wing Islam, or that the extreme right wing
philosophy of the religious organizations in Pakistan need to be fought by a left
wing/humane interpretation of Islam. Because when we start using religion as a backdrop for
our political system, extreme religious bigots will have a platform to always impose
themselves on the system.

Do we really need a modern Islamic revivalist movement on the political front? Maybe a
1,000 years ago the Islamic world needed that left vs. right wing religious debate. Maybe
300 years ago, Europe needed a gradual evolution towards secularism through a softer

10 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Mus... http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/religious-right-in-the...

version of Christianity. But world has grown quite far ahead of those initial evolutionary
phases. Political secularism guarantees religious freedom, but the western political system
does not try to sustain itself from a softer version of religion. Why should we try to reinvent
the wheel today?

Leave a Reply
Logged in as pakistanprevails. Logout »

Notify me of follow-up comments via email.

Subscribe by email to this site

Subscribe to PakTeaHouse by Email

Search

Top Posts
The Identity Crisis of Pakistan
Why is Pakistani Middleclass So Skeptical of Democracy and Why Our Defense is
Not Convincing?
Religious Right in Their Own Words; What Constitutes a True Muslim
Talibanization of the heart
In Pakistan, a Sex Industry Has Begun to Boom
Billionaire pledges his fortune for aid
An Extraordinary Group Photograph From 1997
The State Must Go Weeding
Love and Sex at LUMS 1: The Secret Love Life of LUMS Students
Liberal Pakistani Websites and Indian Right Wingers
Religious Right in Their Own Words; the Concept of an Islamic State
Dark Comedy

11 of 20 8/27/2010 10:18 PM