• Home
• About
• IN MEMORIAM 1934-2009
• Columns
• > Postcard USA
• > Private View
• Longer Pieces
• Books
• Photos
• Contact

Finally, somebody has worked out as to what ails Pakistanis. The Columbus of this effort is Mohammad Abdul Qadeer, professor emeritus at the School of Urban and Regional Planning at Queen’ University, Kingston, Canada. He lives in Toronto. I suppose you need to be physically at a distance from what you are observing to get its contours right. When you are close, you can’t see the wood for the trees.

Qadeer, who once wrote a book on Lahore from a sociologist’s and urban planner’s point of view, when told that Pakistan had won a hard-fought Security Council seat, beating India, observed, “What Pakistan needs is not a seat on the Security Council but more public toilets in Lahore.” He has just published a book in London on Pakistan and what our social strengths and foibles are. He has devoted a section of the work to the Pakistani mindset and he seems to have got it right.

Qadeer writes that the Pakistani way of perceiving and apprehending reality has been forged in the crucible of an agrarian economy and caste-clan relations. While being an evolving structure of many different parts, the Pakistani mindset is marked by a set of persistent assumptions. We tend to personalise the impersonal. Whether the event to be explained is a flood, poverty, a child’s truancy or marital unhappiness, it is attributed to someone else’s manipulation, malevolent intentions — and when it is something positive — to outside goodwill. The prime mover of every event is believed to be a person. Social or economic processes and even physical forces play a secondary role in the standard Pakistani narrative.

The popular explanation, Qadeer writes, for the break-up of Pakistan in 1971 is Yahya’s, Mujib’s and/or Bhutto’s treachery. A more institutional explanation ends up blaming the Bengalis, India and/or the United States. Pakistanis studying at American universities have a standard explanation if they fail a course. “My professor was prejudiced because I am a Muslim or because I was a person of colour.” And if the student scores a success, it is attributed to his unassailable intellectual and academic superiority. In Pakistan, every occurrence has to have a human agent behind it. Over time, this has been reinforced by the corruption, nepotism and capriciousness of the state. Everyday life is based on ad hoc decisions and personalised dealings. This manifests itself in blaming others and weaving conspiracy theories.

Blaming others, Qadeer argues, has been burnished into a philosophy. He offers examples. The Pakistan Engineers Association blamed foreign consultants and the WAPDA chief for the Tarbela Dam’s cracks. Zionists and Hindus were blamed for breaking up Pakistan, ‘the citadel of Islam’. Terrorism and violence when it first occurred in Karachi was seen as the work of ‘the hidden hand’. NGOs are viewed as engaged in corrupting Pakistani women. If an employee fails to get promoted, it is attributed to the stronger connections of the person who did get promoted. It can also be the boss’s ethnic prejudice.

Qadeer writes that “from blaming others to believing in active plotting by enemies, imagined or real, is a short step. The Pakistani mindset is predisposed to presume conspiracy as the driving force of many events.” The roster of conspiring agents varies with the ideological disposition of the proponent and with the political or social tenor of times. In the 1960s, it was India, the communists and the CIA who were the plotters. The Jews and Israelis were added to the list after the 1967 war. Bhutto in his waning days proclaimed that the Americans had conspired to punish him for his friendship with China and for his fathering of the ‘Islamic’ bomb.

In the 1980s with the Soviets in Afghanistan, they were seen as primarily responsible for the turmoil in Pakistan. The Afghan ‘jihad’ spun out a new strain of conspiracy theories that have morphed into the militant Islamist creed of America, “the perpetrator of the clash of civilisations” and the leader of the infidels. The Ahmadis were blamed for most of the problems in Pakistan’s early days. Rival sects of Deobandis and Barelvis have blamed each other for Pakistan’s sectarian strife.

Qadeer points out that one person’s conspirator is the victim for the other side. Conspiracy as a cause of events is a constant. The theory is packaged in a paradigm that can be slapped on any situation. In other societies conspiracy theories are marginal; in Pakistan they are mainstream. Responsible people propound them and school textbooks offer them as historical truths. Then there is the Pakistani doublethink. The West is portrayed as immoral and yet almost everyone wishes to migrate to the West.

Road traffic in Pakistan is another example of doublethink. Drivers curse others for breaking the rules, yet routinely run red lights, drive on the wrong side of the road or tailgate. The archetype of the Mard-e-Mujahid or the Holy Warrior is embedded in the Pakistani psyche. Pakistanis also believe that given the right connections, anything can be fixed. The pursuit of the ‘fix’ feeds back on the state, making it all the more arbitrary. The ‘Dubai challo’ culture is strong and underscores Pakistani enterprise and the desire to pursue success and advancement in life. The Pakistani diaspora continues to grow.

Pakistanis, Qadeer notes, are verbose. Most people make speeches rather than ask questions. He ends by quoting that superb intellectual Eqbal Ahmed who wrote on the 50th anniversary of Pakistan’s independence, “The most striking feature of our national life has been the equanimity with which our elite has experienced disasters. We are consumed by appetites of life and devoid of moral instincts.”

And it will be a bold man indeed who will speak after Eqbal Ahmed has spoken.

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

Professor William Montgomery Watt died in October, 2006 at the age of 97 in his native Scotland. It is ironic that the death of this greatest of Islamic scholar went unmarked in Muslim countries, including Pakistan. A tribute in the London newspaper, The Guardian , called him ‘a Christian scholar in search of Islamic understanding,’ a ‘legendary figure’ who ‘dedicated his life to the promotion of dialogue between Christians and Muslims.’

Of his many scholarly works, his three books on the Prophet of Islam (pbuh) are considered classics in the field. His interest in Islam arose from his conversations with a Muslim student, Khwaja Abdul Mannan, who had come to Scotland in 1937 to study veterinary medicine. He belonged to the Ahmadiyya jamaat. Professor Montgomery Watt recalled, ‘I began to learn something about Islam, of which I had been largely ignorant. But the dominant impression was that I was engaged not merely in arguing with this individual but in confronting a whole, century-old system of thought and life.’

In 1999, Alastair McIntosh and Bashir Maan, a well-respected British-Pakistani, recorded an interview with Professor Montgomery Watt, who was then in his 90th year. He answered the questions asked of him with the simplicity and clarity of a truly enlightened man. Professor Watt approved the final text, thus putting the stamp of authenticity to his last views on essential questions in the closing years of a life dedicated to the study of Islam.

To the observation that many Westerners would question the value of dialogue with Islam because they see the Sharia as being cruel, Professor Watt said, “Well, similar punishments are found in the Old Testament – including, for example, the cutting off of women’s hands in Deuteronomy 25. In Islamic teaching, such penalties may have been suitable for the age in which Muhammad [pbuh] lived. However, as societies have since progressed and become more peaceful and ordered, they are not suitable any longer. If we demonise one another we cannot even debate such things. Dialogue is therefore imperative. It helps us to discern not just the meaning of the Holy Scriptures, but also the relevance that God wants them to have in our times.”

Asked about the Prophet’s(pbuh) attitude towards women, Professor Watt replied, “It is true that Islam is still, in many ways, a man’s religion. But I think I’ve found evidence in some of the early sources that seems to show that Muhammad [pbuh] made things better for women. It appears that in some parts of Arabia, notably in Mecca, a matrilineal system was in the process of being replaced by a patrilineal one at the time of Muhammad [pbuh]. Growing prosperity caused by a shifting of trade routes was accompanied by a growth in individualism. Men were amassing considerable personal wealth and wanted to be sure that this would be inherited by their own actual sons, and not simply by an extended family of their sisters’ sons. This led to a deterioration in the rights of women. At the time Islam began, the conditions of women were terrible. . . Muhammad [pbuh] improved things quite a lot. By instituting rights of property ownership, inheritance, education and divorce, he gave women certain basic safeguards. Set in such historical context, the Prophet [pbuh] can be seen as a figure who testified on behalf of women’s rights . . . Many Westerners today think that Islam holds women in the heaviest oppression. That may be so in some cases, but only because they look at certain parts of the Islamic world. Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey have all had women heads of state.”

To a question about jihad and what was and wasn’t terrorism, Professor Watt said, “Well, I think fundamentalists of any religion go beyond what their religion is about . . . I don’t think Islam is basically anti-Christian, but some extremists might take such a view. I therefore certainly don’t think the West is locked into jihad with Islam, though I suppose if the fundamentalists go too far they’ll have to be opposed. Iran’s comments about the “Great Satan” were aimed mostly at the United States: they were not made because the West was Christian. I think the West should try to overcome these strains between different religious groups. I do, however, think that the US is following a very dangerous policy in relation to the Middle East. The root of this trouble is that the US gives too much support to Israel. They allow them to have nuclear weapons and to do all sorts of things, some of which are contrary even to Jewish law. Jewish families occupy Arab houses without payment. That is stealing. I think that the US should be much firmer with Israel and put a lot of pressure on them, though this is difficult because of the strong Jewish lobby. Unless something is done there’ll be dangerous conflict in the Middle East. Such danger would be less likely to arise if people of all three Abrahamic faiths - Jews, Christians and Muslims - paid greater respect to what God teaches us about living together.”

To a question about ijitihad, Professor Watt’s answer was, “I would be inclined to say that the Quran is the word of God for a particular time and place and will not therefore necessarily suit other times and places. The prohibition on usury may have been good for a certain time and place but that doesn’t mean it will always be good. You see, I think that Muslims need help in reaching a fresh understanding of the Quran as God’s word, but comparison with the Bible does not help much. The Quran came to Muhammad [pbuh] in a period of less than 25 years, whereas from Moses to Paul is about 1,300 years. Christians could perhaps show from the Bible that there is a development in God’s relation to the human race . . . Traditionally Muslims have argued from God’s eternity that the commands he gives are unalterable, and they have not admitted that social forms can change. I therefore do not believe that either the Bible or the Quran are infallibly true in the sense that all their commands are valid for all time. The commands given in both books were true and valid for the societies to which the revelations were primarily addressed; but when the form of society changes in important respects, some commands cease to be appropriate, though many others continue to be valid. I do, however, believe that Muhammad [pbuh], like the earlier prophets, had genuine religious experiences. I believe that he really did receive something directly from God. As such, I believe that the Quran came from God, that it is divinely inspired. Muhammad [pbuh] could not have caused the great upsurge in religion that he did without God’s blessing. The diagnosis of the Meccan situation by the Quran is that the troubles of the time were primarily religious, despite their economic, social and moral undercurrents, and as such capable of being remedied only by means that are primarily religious. In view of Muhammad’s [pbuh] effectiveness in addressing this, he would be a bold man who would question the wisdom of the Quran.”

The nightmare of every American public figure is to be seen as anti-Semitic. It is a charge lethal enough to snuff out a political career and earn the man who has been so accused public opprobrium. No one will come to his aid in the press and the rightwing talk radio, with which the airwaves in this country are thick, will heap so much abuse and scorn on the man as to make his name mud and render him unfit to seek public office ever again.

The hypocrisy of it all is that privately many agree that the anti-Semitism charge has been used to denounce anyone who has dared speak critically of Israel. In one-to-one conversations, people who wouldn’t dream of being quoted in public, will admit that the pro-Israeli lobby exercises undeserved power and much influence. They would also concede that such blind support of all Israeli causes, right or wrong, does not serve the American national interest. However, there are few who would even dream of taking a public position on any issue where they have to criticise Israeli policy or Israeli actions. Ironically, there is far more criticism of Israeli statecraft and Israeli treatment of Palestinians and Israeli occupation of Arab land in Israel itself than there is in America.

Every American administration has gone out of its way to defend every Israeli policy and action, be it massacres of Palestinians, wanton bombing of civilians, or military raids into Palestinian settlements. There has been no administration more pro-Israel than that of George Bush. Under him and his cabal of pro-Israeli advisers and members of the cabinet, such as the Warrior Princess Condoleezza Rice, Israel has never had it better. Perhaps that is only natural because the state of Israel was brought to birth by President Harry Truman. If anyone should have guilt about how the European Jewry was treated, it should be the Germans. Why should America carry this burden when it has played no part in the persecution of the Jews?

Given this backdrop, President Jimmy Carter is to be commended for having written a book that upholds the trampled rights of the Palestinians. Since the publication of the book, which uses the word ‘apartheid’ in its title, thus likening the treatment of Palestinians at the hands of the Israelis to that of black South Africans by the racist white state that today lies in the dustbin of history, Carter has been subjected to great abuse. But the man has to be saluted. Because of what he has accomplished since he left the White House, he has become the world’s most respected and its most trusted statesman.

One of the attacks mounted on Carter said, “Even as Islamic Hitlerites gather in Iran to deny the first Holocaust of the Jews and to plot the second, former president Jimmy Carter tours America with a new book that describes Jews as racists and oppressors, and suggests they are also a conspiratorial mafia that intimidates ‘critics,’ controls America’s media and war policy, and are therefore also the source of Islamic terrorism and the Arabs’ genocidal campaign to eliminate them from the map of the Middle East. In other words, Americans beware of the Jew in your midst.”

Now, where did Carter say that Americans should be beware of the Jews who live in America? Nowhere. But you have to call a man a dog before you hang him.

Carter wrote, “The Palestinians have had their own land, first of all, occupied and then confiscated and then colonised. They’ve been excluded from their own gardens and fields, and pastures and churches. They have been severely restrained in their movements. They have to have different kinds of passes to go through different checkpoints inside their own lands on their own roads. The Israelis have built more than 200 settlements inside Palestine. They connect these settlements with very nice roads for the Israeli settlers, and then superhighways and so forth going into Jerusalem. Quite often the Palestinians are prevented from even riding on those roads that have been built in their own territory. So this has been in many ways worse than it was in South Africa.” Carter’s critic calls what the former President wrote “more than a lie”, in fact, “a blood libel.” It is another matter that not a word of what Carter wrote is untrue.

One of the great supporters of the Israeli causes is Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, whom Carter was due to debate at the Brandeis University. Carter declined to go and when asked why, replied, “I don’t want to have a conversation even indirectly with Dershowitz. There is no need for me to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine.” Carter told Boston Globe, “There is no debate in America about anything that would be critical of Israel.”

If Gen. Musharraf wants the world to believe that the 2007 elections in Pakistan are going to be free and fair, as he and his people claim, then it is Jimmy Carter whose stamp of approval he should obtain to validate his claim. Such is the man’s credibility that if he pronounces the elections free and fair, everybody would believe him, including the people of Pakistan.

But would Musharraf do that? The jury is out on that one.

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

There are some books that keep eluding you, books you can never quite lay your hands on. If you go looking for them in a library, either they are not part of the collection, or they have been lent out. Friends, when asked, tell you that yes, they did indeed have a copy but someone borrowed it, never to bring it back.

My elusive book for many years has been CLR James’s Beyond a Boundary, which many consider, and rightly too, as one of the finest books written about cricket and certainly the best about West Indian cricket. I looked for this classic “everywhichwhere” but for one reason or another I could never quite come upon it, though I did get close to doing so once or twice. Some law of supernature there certainly is which determines what will happen when. In this case, the preordained time for Beyond a Boundary and I making our RV – army shorthand for rendezvous – was to be the month of October in the year 2006.

James, called the Black Plato once by London’s The Times , was a West Indian intellectual and a cricket devotee, who is credited with being one of the founding fathers of African nationalism. It is an evocative memoir of a cricketing childhood in a black colony and the celebration of a game that is as rich as life. It is also a book about race, class, politics and colonial oppression. James, who died in 1989 at the age of 88 was the most stylish of all the cricket writers that there have been, including Neville Cardus who wrote about an Australian batsman, ‘His off drives were like shooting stars, all wrong on our English horizon.’ But the lyricism which James was to bring to bear on his descriptions of WG Grace, Don Bradman, Leary Constantine, George Headley and Frank Worrel remains unsurpassed in cricket writing.

Of Grace, James writes that when he was 58, he played for the Gentlemen at the Oval, made 74 and hit a ball out of the ground. ‘When he hit a stroke for three, he could only run one, and the runs were worth a century. Of all his innings, this is one I would choose to see. He had enriched the depleted lives of two generations and millions yet to be born. He had extended our conception of human capacity and in doing all this he had done no harm to anyone.’ Of George Headley who scored a century in every four test innings at a time when India, Pakistan and New Zealand were not test-playing nations, James writes that he had ‘to a superlative degree the three cardinal qualities of the super batsman. He saw the ball early. He was quick on his feet. He was quick with his bat.’ Headley told James in 1953 that from the time he began to play cricket, he saw every ball bowled come out of the bowler’s hand. He said if he did not see it come out of the bowler’s hand, he would be at a loss to know how to play. There is only one word for this gift. Awesome. ‘Headley did not care who bowled at him: right hand, left hand, new ball, old ball, slow, fast, all were the same. He loved the bad wickets, about which he said, “On a bad wicket it was you and the bowler. If he pitched up you had to drive. If he pitched short you had to turn and hook. No nonsense.”’

Leary Constantine was another amazing player. Here is James describing one of his strokes, ‘Constantine takes a long stride with his left foot across the wicket and, leaning well forward glances McDonald from outside the off-stump to long leg for four.’ He repeats the stroke a few balls later. Writes James, ‘In these two strokes there was not the slightest recklessness or chanciness. The unorthodoxy was carried out with a precision and carefully equal to the orthodoxy of MacDonald’s classical action and perfect length.’ Another stroke of genius that James saw Constantine execute, he describes thus, ‘Hammond bowled him a ball pitching a foot or so outside the off-stump, breaking in. Constantine advanced his left foot halfway to meet the ball and saw the break crowd in on him. Doubling himself almost into two, to give himself space, he cut the ball a little to the left of point for a four which no one in the world, not even himself, could have stopped.’

Of another great West Indian batsman, Wilton St Hill, whom James places in his gallery with Bradman, Sobers, Headley, the three Ws, Hutton, Compton and May, he writes, ‘No one I have ever seen, neither Bradman nor Sobers, saw the ball more quickly, nor made up his mind earlier. Time; he always had plenty of time. From firm feet he watched the ball until it was within easy reach and only then brought his bat to it with his wrists. He never appeared to be flurried, never in two minds. . . He stood beautifully erect and still and flicked the ball away like a conjurer. No one batting at the other end could ever have overshadowed him. Of that I am quite certain, and of very few can that be said. He saw the ball as early as anyone. He played it as late as anyone. His spirit was untameable, perhaps too much so. There we must leave it.’

Skipper Abdul Hafiz Kardar once said to me that every fast bowler has to be a little mad and as always he was right. James describes George John, a West Indian fast bowler of the 1920s thus, ‘Other bowlers can be qualified as hostile. John was not hostile. He was hostility itself. If he had been an Italian of the Middle Ages, he would have been called Furioso . . . Almost every ball he was rolling up his sleeves like a man about to commit some long-premeditated act of violence.’ This reminded me of Mahmood Hussain, who was fast and who was furious, especially if hit.

It is no small tribute to our own skipper, Kardar, that he finds lyrical mention in James’s book. He talks of cricket’s ‘measured ritualism’ and how human personality in sufficiently varied form registers itself ‘indelibly’ on the mind. He writes, ‘I mention only a few – the lithe grace and elegance of Kardar leading his team on to the field; the unending flow of linear rhythm by which Evans accommodated himself to returns from the field; the dignity which radiates from every motion of Frank Worrel; the magnificence and magnanimity of Keith Miller.’

James quotes the great John Arlott describing Ray Lindwall coming in to bowl. ‘From two walking paces Lindwall glides into the 13 running strides which have set the world a model for rhythmic gathering of momentum for speed-giving power. Watching him approach the wicket, Sir Pelham Warner was moved to murmur one word, “Poetry.”’

I am up to here with Afghanistan, the tribal belt, the comings and goings of stray camels, stray Taliban, stray smugglers, Coalition troops who took the wrong turn, drones be they on the ground or in the air, but more than all of them put together, I am tired of the think tanks of Washington and the experts who tell the rest of the world how to run its affairs while failing to persuade their own government to do so.

There were not many in this town of Washington who were not marching lustily to the beat of war drums as Bush got ready to invade Iraq. The few voices of sanity counselling peace were either denounced or ignored. And now the very people who either backed or condoned what this reckless and deluded administration unleashed in the Middle East are firing off warnings in every direction, in particular Pakistan’s. The problem is that there are just too many pandits in this place, more than are immersing themselves in the Ganges during a full moon.

One such pandit has just published a long essay in a quarterly journal on what ails Pakistan and Afghanistan, but basically the former. At one point he writes, “Supporting the Taliban was so important to Pakistan that Musharraf even considered going to war with the United States rather than abandon his allies in Afghanistan.” I am not making this up. Anyone who does not believe that need only look up the current issue of Foreign Affairs and read this and the rest of Barnett R Rubin’s thoughts. The bottom line of his long-winded analysis is that the United States should deal with Pakistan sternly and make it stop harbouring the Taliban and launching them into Afghanistan. But supposing Rubin is right and Gen. Musharraf did decide to declare war against America, did anyone in GHQ think of working out what would happen if Pakistan won the war. I shudder to think of the consequences of victory.

Rubin writes, “Contrary to the claims of the Bush administration, whose attention after the September 11 attacks quickly wandered off to Iraq and grand visions of transforming the Middle East, the main centre of terrorism ‘of global reach’ is in Pakistan. Al Qaeda has succeeded in re-establishing its base by skilfully exploiting the weakness of the state in the Pashtun tribal belt, along the Afghan-Pakistani frontier.”

As all foreign correspondents quote their taxi driver, Rubin quotes a Western military commander in Afghanistan who has no name. The commander is reported to have told the writer, “Until we transform the tribal belt, the US is at risk.” Why did he not have the decency to use the word that he really had in mind, the word not being “transform” but “invade”. Rubin next informs us that “intelligence collected during Western military offensives in mid-2006 confirmed that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was continuing to actively support the Taliban leadership, which is now working out of Quetta, the capital of Balochistan Province, in western Pakistan. As a result, a cross-border insurgency has effectively exploited Afghanistan’s impoverished society and feeble government.”

The new bugbear out here is the city of Quetta. I suggest that Gen. Pervez Musharraf invite all the American pundits such as Rubin, fly them in a C-130 to Quetta and then let them loose in the city so that they can ferret out all the Taliban chieftains who are supposedly living there and making war. If Rubin is right then the world will be rid of those guys and if he is wrong, at least Quetta will be able to clear its name as the world’s dodgiest city.

I was at a Pakistan-Afghan do — there is at least one in Washington every week, if not two — this past week where Arnaud de Borchgrave of the Washington Times and United Press International, stated that Musharraf has given the ISI orders to “re-conquer” Afghanistan so that the Taliban can be reinstalled in power. I may add that a year or two ago, de Borchgrave wrote that Osama bin Laden was alive and well and living in the city of Peshawar. I wish he had told me where, in case he wasn’t interested in the cash himself, so that I could have collected the $25 million that Uncle Sam had on offer for the find.

One of the two speakers at the Pak-Afghan do was Hassan Abbas, once an up and coming police officer and now in the doghouse as far as the “permanent establishment” in Islamabad is concerned. I am glad he laid to rest at least one myth about Pashtun hospitality. He said Pashtun hospitality is “selective”. Not everyone who walks into a Pashtun compound is welcome or has a goat slaughtered in his honour. In other words, the widespread belief that anyone who seeks hospitality from a Pashtun gets it, is a myth. So, there goes another of my cherished beliefs. Abbas said after the meeting that the other day he had received a life-threatening message — guess where? — on his cell phone. It was a text message. Who said the ISI is not high tech! I suppose all its carrier pigeons have been shot down and roasted for dinner.

The other speaker was Michael Scheur, who was once head of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit. Scheur said it was mistakenly thought by some that Pakistan is a “US proxy”. There was no such thing, he said, adding that the truth is that what Musharraf has done for the US is not in Pakistan’s interest. He brought his country to the brink of civil war. No other leader has gone out on a limb for America as Musharraf has. What Scheur implied was that Pakistan had done more than could be expected of any country and it could go so far and no farther.

Scheur is right. But in this town, he may be in a minority of one.

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

The passage of the Hisbah bill in the NWFP Assembly for the second time is a slap in the face of not only the Musharraf government and the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which had declared the first bill ultra vires of the constitution, but the vast majority of the people of Pakistan who abhor the Mullah’s Islam which is a travesty of Islam’s inner spirit of rationalism, decency and tolerance. Iqbal, who himself was the victim of a fatwa of apostasy by no less a divine than the Khateeb of the Badshahi Mosque in Lahore, said it best: Deen-e-mullah fi-sabeel Allah fasad (The mullah’s religion is to cause trouble in the name of God). Ghalib, whose sense of humour always flowered with such subjects, wrote in a Persian couplet that it was just as well the Shari’a had forbidden drink, otherwise one would have had to drink in the company of mullahs.

The Hisbah bill, which will create a parallel system of justice to the one prevailing in the rest of Pakistan, will also bring into being a competing administration. After what the Taliban did to the world, first by their own harsh and primitive rule and then by harbouring Osama bin Laden and letting him plan and execute terrorist attacks around the world, how can anyone in his right mind even think of replicating their rule and practices, which is what the Hisbah bill will do. Hopefully, it will be killed as the first one was. Those who brought the MMA’s political power did a great disservice to both Pakistan and Islam. They must be made to answer for what they did. What they have sown are the seeds of the country’s destruction and, for that reason, the mullahs, both armed and political, have to be expelled from the body politic.

Everyone must be reminded of what the Taliban and their rule were like. One way of doing that is to look through a 1998 report – The Taliban’s War on Women – issued by Physicians for Human Rights, a much respected group that shared the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize for its campaign to ban landmines. In a foreword, Abdullahi A An-Naim, a Sudanese professor of law, wrote, ‘Muslims everywhere must vehemently challenge and rebut any alleged Islamic justification for any violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Muslims and their governments must strongly condemn human rights violations wherever they occur and whoever commits them, and not only when speaking out is convenient or politically expedient. Most of the policies or practices of the Taliban government documented in this report have no Islamic justification whatsoever.’ But while all Muslim governments remained silent while the Taliban ravaged the country and committed atrocities on fellow Afghans, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia remained their two support basis. The report said, ‘In particular, those governments that support the Taliban, notably Pakistan, should be publicly called upon to end their support for the regime, and an effective arms embargo should be established.’

The report said that the manner in which the human rights of women had been violated by the Taliban regime was ‘unparalleled in recent history.’ What they had done was ‘an affront to the dignity and worth of Afghan women and humanity as a whole.’ The Taliban were rustic youths recruited by the ISI from Afghan refugee camps in Pakistan and madassas. On assuming control of most of Afghanistan, they ‘targeted women for extreme repression and punished them brutally for infractions.’ According to the report, ‘No other regime in the world has methodically and violently forced half of its population into virtual house arrest, prohibiting them on pain of punishment from showing their faces, seeking medical care without a male escort or attending school.’

The Taliban took control of Kabul on 26 September, 1996 and issued edicts forbidding women to work outside the home, attend school, or to leave their homes unless accompanied by a husband, father, brother or son. In public, they were to be covered in a head to toe burqa with only a mesh opening to see and breathe through. Women were not permitted to wear white – the colour of the Taliban flag - socks or white shoes or shoes that made noise while they were walking. Houses and buildings in public view were ordered to have their windows painted over if females were present in them. Men and women were segregated in different hospitals. In 1997, all Kabul hospitals were ordered to suspend medical services to the city’s half million women at all but one poorly equipped hospital for women. Female hospital staff, including doctors and nurses, were banned from working in the city’s 22 hospitals. The one place where women could seek treatment had only 35 beds and no clean water, electricity, surgical equipment, X-ray machines, suction or oxygen.

One of the first Taliban edicts was prohibiting girls and women from attending school. In 1998, they ordered the closing down of more than 100 privately-funded schools. New rules were issued that limited education to girls up to the ages of eight and restricted it to the Quran. Kabul became a city of women beggars. These beggars had once been teachers and nurses who, said the report, were now ‘moving in the streets like ghosts under their all enveloping burqas, selling every possession and begging so as to feed their children.’ The report said, ‘It is difficult to find another government or would-be government in the world that has deliberately created such poverty by arbitrarily depriving half the population under its control of jobs, schooling, mobility and healthcare.’ Those in Pakistan who claim to this day that the Taliban brought peace to Afghanistan should read just this one, single line. ‘The ‘peace’ imposed on that portion of the country under Taliban rule is the peace of the burqa, the quiet of women and girls cowering in their homes, and the silence of the citizenry terrorised by the Taliban’s violent and arbitrary application of their version of the Shari’a law.’ Executions, including those of women, were done in the football stadium and people were forced to come, watch and raise slogans of Allah-au-Akbar.

The burqa which some women are now insisting upon wearing in Europe, is a health hazard, the report said. A female pediatrician told the authors of the report, “My activities are restricted. Walking with the burqa is difficult; it has so many health hazards. You can’t see well and there is a risk of falling or getting hit by a car. Also for women with asthma or hypertension, wearing a burqa is very unhealthy.” One doctor said that the burqa may cause eye problems and poor vision, poor hearing, skin rash, headaches, increased cardiac problems and asthma, itching of the scalp, hair loss and depression. Other Taliban edicts make horrifying reading. Music was entirely banned. Music shops were closed down. Growing a beard became compulsory, as did its length, which was that of a clenched fist. Five prayers became compulsory. Keeping of pigeons and other birds was forbidden. While the Taliban were heavily into the narco trade, the use of drugs and opiates was prohibited. Kite flying was banned. Pictures of the human form or face were banned from public display and even in hotels. People with long hair were to be arrested and shaved. Perhaps the Taliban had a sense of humour because this provision of the law added, ‘The criminal has to pay the barber.’ Women were disallowed from washing clothes in water streams. Music and dancing was forbidden at wedding parties. Tailors were disallowed from taking measurements of women customers. Sorcery was prohibited. Homosexuals were buried alive with walls built around them.

But back to Pakistan. Gen Musharraf and the PPP deserve to be complimented on the women’s rights bill. One hopes the General realises that if allowed to have its way, the Hisbah bill will push Pakistan into a hell hole we may not come out from.

The time to act is now. General, dump the MMA.

With his writs flying around the higher courts of Pakistan from Karachi to Peshawar, Iqbal Geoffrey, litigant extraordinaire, who has declared himself the “world’s greatest living artist”, is also making waves in the remote town of Greenwood, South Carolina. His work is on display at the Lander University. Why Lander University, only he can say. Could it be its age, the place being 135 years old? Sir Geoff will have to explain one day when he is not suing left, right and centre, including Charlie’s aunt who was last seen in the vicinity of Wah village.

Sir Geoff must have a thing about far-flung American states because last time he had a show in North Dakota. Did he choose South Carolina this time because that is the state where that siren of sirens, Ava Gardner, was born? Maybe yes, because when Miss Gardner was shooting Bhowani Junction in Lahore, Sir Geoff was a starry-eyed student at Law College, who may even have been in one of the crowd scenes shot outside the Lahore railway station. Next time you view Bhowani Junction, check that out. If you don’t catch a glimpse of Sir Geoff, you will certainly see that prince of Lahore’s roads, Sardar Muhammad Sadiq.

Sir Geoff does not exhibit in Chicago where he studied and Harvard where he picked up an LLM, which is no small potatoes, even his jealous competitors in law and art will concede. Sir Geoff, of course, leaves them sleeping at the post. He has been accused of many things in life, but not modesty. In one of his recent forays into print, he wrote, “True, I am not a big commercial success, only critically acclaimed, but The Times (not Daily but London) wrote of my work in l962 as distinguished and in l985 stated that never since Leonardo da Vinci has there been an artist of my intellect and genius for art. Humility is one thing, magnanimity is a different kind of cuckoo. You tell me of anyone else who topped in three universities in law; has an IQ of 440 and holds two post-doctoral degrees, yet lives a simple, ascetic life. There is a foot-long entry on me since 1962 in Who’s Who in America.” Game, set and match, Sir Geoff.

Nothing has been heard lately of his threatened or actually filed law suit against the Hayward Gallery, London, which venerable institution Sir Geoff was suing to the tune of 65 million pounds sterling because it had allegedly damaged 350 of his paintings. Hayward mounted an exhibition of the work of some Indian and Pakistani artists, including Sir Geoff, nearly twenty years ago. What I find crazy is that instead of entering three or four paintings, Sir Geoff trucked 350 of them to Hayward. Once the show was over, the gallery de-framed them, according to Sir Geoff, and put them on a slow boat to Karachi, or maybe it was a British Airways cargo plane, where they arrived in a state that was, well, not pretty.

When asked about it, Sir Geoff said, “I don’t paint pretty pictures. I make a difference. I just say, please do not da Vinci, Caravaggio, El Greco, Goya, Van Gough or Duchamp me.” When Sir Geoff sued, the gallery’s lawyers offered him 65,000 pounds sterling, which he refused, saying he would accept nothing less than 65 million sterling. With Sir Geoff, it is either neck or nothing. To celebrate his North Dakota show, he delivered a speech to the staff and students of the Dickinson University. His topic was: ‘The Imperilling Inbetweenities by the Malevolent Mullahs of Mediocrities and How World Peace and Neovision can proceed in an All American Way.’ Next time you see the word “inbetweenities” in the revised edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, please remember that you read it here first.

Sir Geoff, who once threatened to sue me in London, Paris, Lahore and perhaps Lisbon, but changed his mind for some reason, always mails me copies of every writ that he files and every pro bono publico petition that he writes. I also once appeared as a defence witness in a case he had filed against a fellow lawyer who had said less than flattering things about him. Sir Geoff tells me he won the case.

Being a direct line of descent Syed, the first three digits of his fee from clients are 786. Zeros or no zeros are added to that figure, depending on his mood and what side of the bed he got out of that morning. For years now, he has been firing off writs to urge the government to make a certain cement company pay Rs500 million in fines imposed on it by a court many moons ago. The company should be decorated because it has succeeded in paying not a red penny to anyone, least of all the government. Sir Geoff, who will tilt at any windmill he comes across, considers that unethical. His latest writ ends with the prayer, “Relief requested herein may be generously granted insofar as more than enough time has been superciliously, collusively, deceptively, pompously and vexatiously wasted.”

Sir Geoff has also filed applications to the Chief Justice of Pakistan to be allowed to pay a social call on Dr AQ Khan, who “promised to write a quality book” on him. His pleas have fallen on deaf ears, of which Islamabad is full. In fact, the capital of the Islamic Republic is nothing but one monstrous deaf ear. Sir Geoff also wants Dr A.Q. Khan released, arguing that since he has been pardoned, there is no basis for the Sarkar to keep him incommunicado under permanent house arrest.

Sir Geoff has many titles, so I hope he would not mind yet another that I hereby confer on him: King of Lost Causes.

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

It must say something about Pakistanis settled in the United States that the four or five Urdu weekly newspapers they pick up without charge from every grocery outlet, Pakistani restaurant, community centre and mosque carry vast amounts of advertising from holy miracle-makers, self-declared religious divines, medical quacks, spell-casters, ghost-masters, Sufis, sadhus, palm readers, astrologers, mind readers and physicians.

If these imposters are spending large sums of money on advertising their miracle cures for every ill and every problem that man is heir to, obviously there are enough takers for their fraudulent wares. In other words, those who keep their hard-earned dollars flowing into the bank accounts of these crooks may be living in America physically, but in all other respects, they remain where they came from: a world of superstition, ignorance and fear. Instead of dealing with life’s problems, they want a quick fix by what they believe are miracle workers. I asked an Urdu newspaper editor in New York if his advertisers paid him in time. “I don’t trust those characters. They have to pay in advance and they do. There are plenty of fools living in America, so worry not,” he replied. The answer to my next question about the newspaper’s “moral responsibility” came through a shrug of the shoulders. Ask a silly question!

But let us visit some of these gentlemen and what they promise in return for your money. Here is Swami Manjeet Ji, whose picture shows him to be a young man with a necklace of precious stones around his neck, no flowing beard though. The ad says: “The world’s most famous and celebrated expert of palmistry, astrology and spiritual treatment. Beware if those who offer 100 percent guarantees. Swami Manjeet Ji has resolved the problems and difficulties of countless people. Swami Manjeet Ji can ease every difficulty you face by virtue of his spiritual powers, spells and God-given abilities. Examples: Impediments in the way of marriage; marital tensions; indifference of the one you love; evil spell cast on your family, home or business; children with no interest in education; defiant offspring; failure despite hard work; earnings lacking in ‘barkat’; business losses; inability to secure employment; repeated accidents; immigration and court problems; property disputes; headaches; insomnia; incurable ailments. In short, no matter what the problem, Swami Manjeet Ji will render advice that works. He can remove all impediments because nothing is beyond his ability to set right. He joins separated lovers and because of his God-gifted powers, he helps suffering humanity. Where everyone else fails, success kisses his feet. We don’t talk: we deliver. Try it for yourself.” The Swami lists a Flushing, New York phone number and address. May his business flourish because that is what his clients deserve.

However, Master Amar, who provides a toll-free US number, leaves Swami Manjeet Ji way behind, considering what he can deliver and accomplish. His message begins with a challenge: Anyone who can prove that Master Amar is hostile to any creed, religion or nation will be given a cash award of $10,000. The first message is for women: “Stay-at-home women and those who cannot attend to their homecare duties because of the hostility, drunkenness or infidelity of their husbands should phone Master Amar right away.” His other message is for unhappy lovers. “Your separated love can come back to you in a matter of days. How? Phone Master Amar and find out.” All those who have been left uncured by their doctors are also urged to call Master Amar. And if you have a court case and you want to know what the judge will decide, all you need to do is call Master Amar. Other Master Amar’s accomplishments include: If someone has cast a black magic spell on you, his name and address will be provided to you free of charge. Master Amar also warns: “Beware! Before you send your money to any pandit or baba, phone Master Amar and you will see for yourself what on-the-mark advice he delivers.” Master Amar, another blurb in the half-page ad states, has the power to heal every emotional injury and lift every evil spell.

My favourite is Baba Jinnan Wala Pirzada Nazir Ali Shah, the “famous Syed of pure lineage, who needs no introduction, being a part of the mystical chain of Sakhi Lal Shahbaz Qalandar.” Further, he is “the master of all masters, Pakistan’s international award winning divine whom you have watched on TV. He is also Pakistan’s approved Gold Medallist, Registered No. T-A-110.” While the body of the ad is in Urdu, for the benefit of the people of America there is a paragraph in English as well, which goes: “In condition of non workability 15 lakh rupees will be awarded to applicant and advance payment will also be refund. Master epistemology of astrology, big king of asirology only we have the master of super magical moutras, bequause we take assistance from noble ghost. We have 72 noble ghosts all the tune. We have got these ghosts in heritance note.” While Baba Jinnan Wala’s grasp of the English language and his proofreading my leave something to be desired, his message is loud and clear. One of his “satisfied clients,” whose letter he reproduces, says, “Open letter from America. My name is Tariq and I was in love with a Hindu girl. I wanted to win her no matter what the cost but under no circumstances was she willing to forsake her Hindu religion. In the newspaper Khabrain (friend Zia Shahid to please note), I read about Amil Pirzada Nazir Ali Shah and I got in touch with him. Inside of one hour, not only did he convert that girl from Hinduism to Islam but we even got married. Today, I am happy in my home with my wife. May God give Pirzada Nazir Ali Shah a long life.” The Pirzada lives in Iqbal Town, Lahore and he lists a mobile phone number, which I refrain from reprinting as some of those who have read so far, might be tempted to call him and part both with their money and their brains.

There is also Maulana Hafiz Tauqir-ul-Hassan Shah Sahib Orphanage Wala, who can fix everything, including immigration problems. He lists his phone number and appears to reside at The Orphanage, Multan Road, Lahore. I must also not leave out “Spiritual Scholar and Winner of the Presidential Award Pirzada Amjad Shah of Bukhari Chowk, Pindi Bypass, GT Road, Gujranwala,” who lists three mobile phone numbers. His message is directed at “Pardesi sisters and brothers” whom he cautions against fake faith healers who brag that their sole motivation is public service. He cites the “thousands of calls” he receives from those who have kissed their money goodbye without coming by the promised results. He says these so-called miracle men know nothing about djinns or black spirits or spirit helpers. They don’t know the difference between the black arts and the arts of light. These ignorant men even invoke angels whose sole occupation is prayer and who have nothing to do with temporal affairs. He goes on the throw an “international challenge” to all magicians wherever they may be operating from to test their powers against his. “By the grace of God, they will not be able to withstand even one single strike of mine.” We are also informed that Pirzada Amjad Shah is the great grandson of Haji Fateh Din, famous throughout the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent. I take it he has gone to the great beyond and is now answering for what he did on earth. The ad concludes: “Treat Pir Jamal’s spiritual heir Amjad Shah Bukhari and God willing, one phone call will change your life.”

And then there is the evergreen classic with the slogan “A male never grows old.” What it promises is best left to the reader’s imagination. This promise of everlasting youth comes from an outfit called Herbal City with a toll free US number. There is also Hakeem Saleemi with a New York number who sells sure-fire cures for every disease on earth. He also promises that the use of a certain ointment in the right place will make up for the “misdeeds of childhood and the ill effects of youthful recklessness.” Another of Hakeem Saleemi’s preparations “used by Maharajas once” banishes old age and brings back youth. It also rejouvenates facial skin so that no lines remain. It is a guaranteed formula for enhancing marital love and keeping a man young until the age of 80. This magic elixir of youth has been in the Hakeem’s family for 200 years.

Well, all I can say is: “Pass me the sick bag, Mickey.”

After all my years in this business, I have come to the conclusion that there is only one honest newspaper in the world: The Weekly World News. Why? Because not a single word that it prints is true. With other newspapers, New York Times down, you don’t ever know if what you are reading is true. With WWN, you know where you are. If that is not honesty, then no such bird exists.

George Orwell, after having written hundreds of thousands of words for newspapers, was constrained to observe: Truth was never published in newspapers. I wish he were around in 1979 when the Weekly World News was launched. He would have greatly appreciated the honesty of its columns.

It is another matter that many of WWN’s readers have more faith in what they read in its pages than they have in the scriptures. They actually believe that every word they read there is true. My take on that is: if it works for them, no one should have a quarrel with it.

One of the weekly’s running stories is Batboy sightings around America. There is no shortage in this country of those who believe that Batboy lives. And who knows, they may be right. I look at it this way. If Bush can be president for two terms running, then anything is possible in America. David Perel, the weekly’s executive vice president explained what the difference between the New York Times and his publication was. “A guy calls up The New York Times and says ‘My toaster’s talking to me,’ The New York Times hangs up on him. And then he calls us up and says, ‘My toaster’s talking.’ We say, ‘OK. Put the toaster on. We want to talk to him’.”

The weekly paper which you can pick up at any grocery store checkout from one end of America to the other, is printed in black and white. No colour. Those who make regular appearances in WWN’s pages include the Bat Boy and a space alien named P’lod, who is said to have had an affair with Hillary Clinton. Other WWN favourites are Big Foot, Nessie the Loch Ness Monster and alien abductions. The paper also reports that Elvis Presley has been sighted, the theory being that he is not dead. He only pretended to be dead. There is little doubt that some believe Elvis to be alive. And that reminds me of what Dorothy Parker said when told that President Herbert Hoover was dead. “How can they tell?” she asked.

WWN has a thing about Oprah Winfrey, as is evident from the stories it has run about the daytime television diva. Headlines: ‘Oprah is an alien,’ ‘Oprah ate my baby.’ One story reported that Oprah was worshipped on a distant planet and there was even an Oprah bible. One recent story said a graduate student and his computer had exchanged vows in a private ceremony at a prominent technology institute. Jim Romberd, the groom was reported to have said, “Tears were streaming — live, over the Internet — from those few friends who were unable to join us.” The story went on to say, “Jim, who has enjoyed very little human dating, insists he’s the first to interface in such a manner. He calls the practice ‘gigamy.’ ‘The machine’s given me so much joy that I finally decided to do the honourable thing and make an honest computer of it. Now we’ll create a domain together,’ he said. ‘We’ve designed our own ring networks.’ “

WWN’s David Perel in an interview with a website called Badmouth was asked what the mainstream media could learn from his weekly on how to get it right the first time. He replied, “That’s why our new slogan is ‘America’s most reliable newspaper.’ It’s a question of going into the jungles of the Amazon and finding that dinosaur that’s alive. It’s getting those Pentagon sources and getting the truth about the ‘spy cat’ — the cat that was taught to talk in a government lab and then was sent over to Iraq to gather intelligence. I think it’s just pure perseverance — plus a lot of time at the bar after work.”

Perel was told that a lot of news organisations were cutting back on their international coverage to save money, while WWN appeared to be ‘bucking that trend’. He explained, “Wherever the story is in this solar system, we are going to send a reporter there if possible to get it. No question about it. We’re not just going to sit in this newsroom and take what comes across the wires and rewrite it. We’ve got to go out. We’ve got to pound the pavement. We’ve got to fly past the rings of distant planets to get the exclusives.” He said WWN “excels at finding scoops that are timeless, because the rest of the press has been so derelict in their duty to report on the rest of the solar system and psychic phenomenon. It’s just left this area wide open for use to bring it to America, the world, the galaxy.”

One of my favourite WWN stories ran under the headline ‘Paris Hilton Rejected by Alien Body Snatchers’. It went on to quote an alien by the name of Vortrex who said, “As soon as we beamed the Earth woman you call Paris Hilton onto our ship she began criticising our wardrobes, hair styles, and makeup. My wife Vizbin is the personal stylist for everyone on this ship and suffered emotional injury.”

I am asking Weekly World News to fly a team of space aliens to Pakistan to monitor the 2007 elections. Since the government has floated the fantasy that they are going to be ‘free and fair’, what better monitors could one ask for than space aliens!

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

Brig FB Ali in a more just society would have been the commander-in-chief of the Pakistan Army, but instead he was made to serve time and forced to flee the country he served and he loves. He has been living in Canada and you will meet few people with a clearer understanding of things and a more principled outlook on life. He is also a superb writer. In another dimension of time, had he become what Gen Musharraf is today, he would have written a far better book, which would also have had the added virtue of being entirely truthful.

Brig Ali recently wrote a paper he called Rediscovering Islam. He sent it to some of his friends, but given the situation the Muslims are in today, it deserves to be read by many, many more. Hence this column. What follows is FB Ali’s, not mine, but it is an edited version of what he wrote. He begins: ‘It is necessary that we Muslims face up to the reality that the Islam that we profess, practise and preach today is not working. And has not worked for a long time. This is true both for our communal life as societies, and our personal lives as individuals. In Muslim countries and communities around the world there is no shortage of mosques and preachers; prayer and fasting are common; millions perform the Hajj every year. Yet most of these societies are rife with corruption and injustice; poverty and illiteracy prevail; sickness and malnutrition are common.

‘This failure of Muslim societies to solve internal problems has been matched by their failure to deal with external challenges. No Muslim society today, whatever its geography or history, can be pointed out as one where humanity has progressed, or as a model of how human beings should live. There has not been such a one for centuries. At the personal level, for each Muslim there is a fundamental paradox, whether we face it or not. How can we reconcile the wide prevalence of injustice and suffering with our belief in a world in which a just and merciful God reigns supreme? Some acknowledge that there are problems, but believe that they are due to Islam not having been applied correctly or not fully. A number of Muslims blame all our problems on the “enemies of Islam,” and, in recent years, some of them have taken up violent jihad against these “enemies.”

‘When the Quran brought Islam into the world some 1,500 years ago, it had a remarkable effect on the warring tribes and worldly townspeople of Arabia: it transformed them into a single people imbued with a transcendent vision for all humanity, and a sense of mission to spread it.

‘The obvious question arises: could it be that the Islam we believe in and practise today is not the same Islam that raised its earlier followers to such great heights? The original Islam had no dogma, no ritual, no complex set of dos and don’ts, no special class of persons learned in the religion who guided and judged other believers; in short, none of the elaborate structure that now passes for Islam. The problem we face is that Islam today is a complex and rigid structure, frozen in time, which covers over and obscures the original and essential message that Islam brought to humanity. Further complicating the issue is the emergence of a class of self-styled religious authorities and “guardians,” so that there is now a virtual priestly class in Islam, where there was no place for one in its original version.

‘The first step to understand the Quran’s real message is to discover the correct meaning of the terms and concepts that occur in it, to take their meaning as it was understood in the Arabic of that time. Secondly, to discover the Quran’s position on any topic, we must put together all the Quranic references to it and then see the coherent picture that emerges. The third step is to deduce the overall ideology that the Quran teaches, within which its positions on all the major issues it covers fit in a consistent, logical manner. However, merely understanding the meaning of the different portions of the Quranic text is not enough, we also need to understand the significance and relevance of these meanings for us today. Where the Quranic message deals with practical injunctions, these relate to contemporary matters, but conform to the fundamental principles and values that should govern all human conduct, anywhere, anytime. For its own time and place such a message is completely true and valid, and applicable in all its detail. But in places where circumstances differ materially, and even in the same area after the passage of time, the message becomes of limited validity and applicability. The practical injunctions are no longer fully relevant since people’s ways of living and their social structures have changed, while the descriptions of abstract matters no longer satisfy since human knowledge and modes of thought have advanced.

‘Since the Quran is the last of the revealed books and no more wahy will occur to take its place, the fundamental truths and realities that have always been conveyed through wahy can be discovered only through the Quran. This aspect led some Muslim theologians to advance the view that every word of the Quran is applicable for all time to come, and this proposition has become a dogma among most Muslims. This is unfortunate, since not only is it impossible to implement this in practice, but it also contradicts the Quran’s own teaching on the subject. What are valid and applicable for all time to come are not the words of the Quran but the truths, realities, principles, values, concepts, etc. that lie behind, and are the basis of, these words. The Quran itself makes this clear. There is a set of three passages that introduce the term Umm al-Kitab (the essence or core of the divine message), the only such usage of this term in the whole Quran. Read together, these passages say, in summary, that for every period there is a divinely inspired message and, when this period ends, the fundamentals of the message remain permanently applicable while the rest becomes nullified. The rest is similar to the transitory elements of the earlier messages, as those with knowledge and understanding can discern. The three basics are: the fundamental truths underlying the system within which we exist; the principles of action that should govern human conduct; and the permanent values which we should adopt and uphold. These are the foundations and the fundamentals of Islam.

‘The permanent values that should permeate our lives and govern our actions can be derived from the Quran, many of them from the attributes of Allah, the most important being: freedom, love and justice. The final word must remain, as always, with the Quran. And the Quran’s final words could not be clearer on this issue. Based on both the external and internal evidence, the final substantive portion of the Quran received is: ‘For you this day have I brought to its culmination your way of life and bestowed upon you My final favour, and approved for you Islam as a way of life.’ The Quran urges us, as free and rational persons, to recognise the Supreme Being who is the creator and sustainer of our universe, and whose laws govern it. It tells us that we possess the potentiality to become the surrogates, the representatives, of Allah in our world, and offers us this role. To undertake this responsibility, to act for Allah in our world and fulfil His purposes and obligations in it, this is the way of life that is Islam.’

Comments