Islamic Law: "Abnormal Abuse of Rules Can Neither Legalise The Abusive Practice Nor Render the Authentic Rules Null & Void"

This is an excerpt from The Muslim Conduct of State by Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah

(1)As has aptly been said: "When stable communities whether Tribes, or City-States, or States of a modern type are permanently contiguous, customs hardening in time into law never fail to regulate their intercourse. Ubi societas, ibi jus; wherever developed communities are brought in contact with each other, judicial relations must sooner or later be formed not mainly by agreement, tacit or express, but by the very necessity of the case, and partly from the same cruses as those which working internally create states." 

(8) Law (Fiqh) is variously defined by classical Muslim jurisconsults. "The knowledge of what is for and upon one" is a definition attributed to Abu Hanifah) which in other words may be rendered as "the science of the rights and obligations of man". A late authority, Muhibbullah al-Bihariy, introduces this all-embracing subject in the following words  of his book (compiled 1109 H.) : " The science of ascertaining religious commands (regarding practical affairs of life) by means of their detailed guides." [By guides he means authority or source of information.]


(9) A glance at the contents of works on Fiqh would reveal that they embrace practically all the affairs of human' life, material as well as spiritual. In view of the standard definitions given above and is the face of the contents of works do Fiqh, there remains not the slightest doubt that international law, i.e. the rules of State-conduct in times of war, peace and neutrality, form part of the ordinary law of the land, the Fiqh. These rules of conduct are generally dealt with in books on Fiqh under the heading Siyar i.e. conduct,

(10) Here a brief expose of the origin of law according to Muslim jurists may profitably be added. They say that man must always do what is good, and abstain from what is evil, and take scrupulous care of the intermediary grades of plausible, permissible and disliked. It is, however, not easy to distinguish between good and evil, especially when the matter concerns the subtleties of a complex civilised life beyond the pale of ordinary commonplace things. 


Practical needs would have required the possession of the power to legislate (or lay down definitely grades of good and evil [in] each and every matter) in the hands of Man, either individual, as jurisconsult, or collectively organised, i.e. a State. Yet mere reason, regarded as the touchstone of good and evil, is not without grave difficulties. For it is possible, and also a matter of fact -- so argue Muslim jurists -- that different persons opine differently regarding the same things. 

The belief in Messengers of God is useful even from the point of view of jurisprudence, in so far as the awe and respect due to their persons lead to the acceptance of certain fundamentals without further dispute, wherefrom other and further details may be elaborated. For this reason, the Muslim savants are very thankful to the generosity of God that He gave men along with reason certain chosen human Guldes to help them in the conduct of life. These selected and chosen ones pointed out what God commanded, God the real Sovereign and Lawgiver, regarding good and evil. 


Muhammad has been acknowledged by the Muslims as the Messenger of God; and whatever he gave them in his lifetime, commands as well as injunctions, in the name of his Sender, God, was accepted by the Muslims as indisputably final and most reasonable. 


These Divine Commands, known as the Qur'an and the Hadith - as we shall see later in detail - served practically all the needs of the Muslim community of that time. But human needs multiplied later in such a manner that express provision seemed to be available for some of  the new matters in either the word or deed of the Messenger, who himself had passed away, disconnecting the link whereby Man could receive Commands from his Lord. The consequent result would have been fatal and the fabric of Fiqh would soon have collapsed under the strain, had not there been express provision in the law itself for further elaboration. Credit must also not fail to be given to the Muslim jurists, after the death of the Prophet, who not only discerned this elasticity of the Divine Law, but also utilized it to its fullest extent. In time there emerged a complete system of law which served all the purposes of the Imperial Muslims, even at the height of their widest expansion from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans.


(11) Thus law originated from the direct Commands of God; but the power retained by man to interpret and expand Divine Commands, by means of analogical deductions, and other processes, provided all that was required by the Muslims. In this way a dual need was served: that of sanctity to inspire awe in the minds of (hose who were intended to observe it, and that of elasticity or capability of development to meet the needs of times and circumstances.


(12) We have defined international law, first, as a part of the law of the land. The province of the law of the land is therefore, obviously, wider than that of international law; and we have no concern here with the portion of the law of the land which regulates internal affairs of the State or its subjects.


(13) We have also acknowledged customs as contributing to international law. No system of law can positively provide guidance regarding every detail of every matter. Completion of a list of obligatory and prohibited things, along with details of a certain number of permitted matters -- that is all any system of law can achieve Naturally the prevalent customs  general practice, and even innovations hardening in time into prevalent usage eye) regulate the relations in such cases. 


(17) It may be added that, for purposes of illustration, precedents from Orthodox Practice have freely been referred to. These alone are binding. Abnormal and temporary abuse or overlooking of certain rules by a Muslim State can neither legalise the abusive practice nor render the authentic rules null and void. 


http://muslim-canada.org/conduct_1.html This is an excerpt from The Muslim Conduct of State by Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah

The Muslims Struggle for Islam is also Their Struggle to Preserve Their Cultures

Excerpts from a paper by Dr. Ejaz Akram

[Do not cite or reproduce from the following paper without permission of author]

A Definition of Culture

[Hence, in the light of the above ] I would like to present a definition of culture as “a realm of shared beliefs, ideas and symbols”. Inasmuch as culture is a medium between human beings, it also plays the part of binding individuals together, or that which binds humans with other humans. Non-material and higher aspects of cultures promote unity and cohesiveness in and across cultures, while the material side of culture such as geography and ethnicity often cause fragmentation.

Religion  AND Culture: Traditional & Modern Culture: Proximity & Distance from God

Traditional cultures are by and large religious cultures. 

It may be possible to find anti-religious or agnostic people and even small scale intellectual movements in the traditional world, but ultimate legitimacy of things in traditional cultures has always come from religion. Modern culture and cultures are exceptional in a sense that for the first time in human history they have managed to produce a secular ‘culture’ whose referent is not God and whose legitimacy comes not from proximity but distance from God. In a worldview that either denies the existence of God or relegates references to God as a backward form of human consciousness, it becomes possible to assert that all human behavior is socially and culturally determined, and culture alone is upheld to be the producer of the values it lives by.

Culture as a medium

Traditionally only religion has had the right to know cultures, inform the medium of culture of religious truth and want to see cultures as a reflection of itself. Only in modern times culture has equipped itself to look at not only itself but also religion. In that sense, it would be safe to assert that religious humans have a say on matters of culture while culture lacked the ability to do the same. This is because culture is a medium, it will carry in itself whatever one puts in it and people will only transmit across generations that which is of value, that what brings happiness, felicity, peace, and that which avoids pain, suffering and anguish. For the traditional man, it is religion that accomplishes the above and for the modern man, it is often the absence of religion that supposedly accomplishes that.

Religions views culture as its repository

Religion views culture as its repository. The ultimate source of religion is God, and God is out of the confines of time and space. The humans on the other hand are bound by time and space. The law, ethics, morality and rituals of religion are meant for those that live in the human abode. God is above humans and God’s knowledge seeks to inform the way people live in their earthly abode. In this sense, religion seeks to inform culture with perennial principles that are a key to leading a good life. 

Religions thus leave their imprints on human cultures. 

History of humanity is also a history of religions. There is nothing in the world that has nothing to do with religion. Religions have always sought to guide humanity towards cultivating cultures that uphold ‘thou must not kill’ and ‘thou must not deceive’. World religions always seek to regulate human behavior so that there is peace among humans.

In religious worldview, the marriage of religion and culture would be like the marriage of Heavens and Earth or the marriage of man and woman. The former representing the absolute and active principle while the latter is the reflection of the former as a receptacle:

“A traditional civilization, such as that of Islam, is dominated by a Divine Norm, by a ‘presiding Idea’ which leaves its profoundest imprint upon its earthly receptacles; yet each receptacle is given the freedom to develop its own innate possibilities within the tradition into which it is integrated and hence to give birth to a particular ‘world’ or ‘zone’ within the general matrix of the tradition in question”.[15]

Traditional religion views traditional cultures as its repository. 


Modern religion (different types of fundamentalisms, especially revisionist Islam in its salafi form) are uncomfortable with the concept of culture because in its worldview religion should be pure and pristine while culture is seen as a polluting agent that has corrupted religion. 

In the Islamic tradition, Muslim scholars have viewed traditional cultures with the terminology of ‘urf.[16] Ibn Khaldun, the famous 14^th century philosopher calls the study of societies (and their cultures) ilm al umran.[17] In the Islamic philosophic tradition, the relationship between traditional religion and traditional cultures was a symbiotic one in which ‘urf was informally considered by many doctors of law as a legitimate source of Islamic law.

The word ‘urf in Arabic means human customs, conventions, practices and social habits.[18] It comes from the same root word as irfan or ilm al ma’arifa which implies higher and Gnostic knowledge. 

Muslims' struggle for Islam is also Their Struggle to Preserve their Cultures

All religions are first and foremost traditions. There is nothing intrinsically modern about religion. Like the institution of family, religion is also a traditional institution. Out of all living religions, Muslims are still arguably closest to their religion and constitute the last remaining frontier that modernism vies to engulf and dissolve. 

The Muslims’ struggle for Islam is also their struggle to preserve their cultures as receptacles of Divine words.

According to S. H. Nasr:

“Islamic culture displays an undeniable unity which is the result of the spirit and form of the Islamic revelation and ultimately of Divine Unity itself. In the same way that the whole created order is the theophanic reflection of the One in the mirror of multiplicity, so are the various ‘faces’ of Islamic culture so many human echoes of the one Message which is itself beyond the human and which alone bestows upon the activity of a human collectivity the purposes and values which make it worthy of being called a culture in conformity with the noble destiny of man”.[28]

Read full paper: http://baytunur.blogspot.com/2009/08/religion-culture-contours-of-debate.html

Read more by and about Dr. Ejaz Akram http://baytunur.blogspot.com/2010/06/modernism-secularism-evolution-culture.html

The Place of Politics & the Place of an Islamic Government in Religion

Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani  

"He [the Political Worker] departs the vehicle of effort and work from the road of faith in the unseen - yearning for the Afterlife, seeking Allah’s pleasure and devotion to His love - to the path of seeking rule, glory, dominance, and achieving rule and subsequently the materialist galaxy.”

"They made politics and the establishment of an Islamic government the primary objective and highest aim of all the rules of religion, and it is as though the rules of worship etc. are not aimed at [anything] besides one goal which is the establishment of an Islamic government."

Some Muslims in our time who undertook [the task] of refuting secularism have gone too far in this until they fell into a subtle mistake, that changed the focus and caused many errors in this field; that is, they made politics and the establishment of an Islamic government the primary objective and highest aim of all the rules of religion, and it is as though the rules of worship etc. are not aimed at [anything] besides one goal which is the establishment of an Islamic government, and it is as though worship and religiosity (diyanah) are all means in the attainment of this primary objective; to [the extent] that they diminished the importance of worship and made it an exercise and training for the fundamental target, which is the establishment of a theocratic government (al-hukumat al-ilahiyyah).


Due to this cogitation, two dangerous causes of corruption emerged:


First: since worship became a means in the establishment of a theocratic government, it is not regarded as an objective in itself, and by its [performance] is intended a gradual progression to the fundamental target. Thus, if the conditions demanded that these means be sacrificed by choosing other means to [attain] that important objective then indeed from the results of this cogitation is that there is nothing preventing sacrificing them because they are not the objective.


Second: one does not have a relationship with means besides a basic ordinary relationship [which falls] within the domain of necessity, and naturally he will regard it as a transitory passing stage, and will not regard it as his life target and the goal of his efforts, and will not progress in it and excel therein with the sensations of [spiritual] experience, delight and tranquillity within him.


In the words of the esteemed scholar and great preacher Mawlana Shaykh Sayyid Abu ‘l-Hasan ‘Ali al-Nadwi (Allah Most High protect him) in his refutation of some of the writings of the deceased teacher, Sayyid Abu ‘l-A’la Mawdudi: 


“Indeed those who obtain their religious information from the source of this interpretation of Islam alone, and limit their study of Islam to these books alone, their relationship with Allah will be rendered restricted and limited, and [will congeal] into dry, rigid formalism (jamidatun rasmiyyah), empty of internal states which the believer is required to adjust [himself] to. 


This is particularly when the emphasis that the root goal of sending Prophets and the end target of their teachings and the utmost of their actions is the production of change in this limited worldly life, and bringing about change for the better, and establishing human civilisation on proper foundations, appears [many] times repeatedly [in these books]; 


and when the focus on this aspect appears with ferocity and irascibility, enthusiasm and passion, and in a manner that makes conceptions of divine love, lordly pleasure and otherworldly success, meagre;


 it is natural and something that concurs with reason and is consistent with [logical] analogy that he departs the vehicle of effort and work from the road of faith in the unseen, yearning for the Afterlife, seeking Allah’s pleasure and devotion to His love, that road which the Prophets instituted, to the path of seeking rule, glory, dominance, and achieving rule and subsequently the materialist galaxy.” (Al-Tafsir al-Siyasi li ‘l-Islam, p. 107, published by Nadwat al-’Ulama Lucknow, 1399 AH/1979 AD)


In sum, these authors in their eagerness to refute secularism, and their focus on the political aspect of the Shari’ah, made all of Islam a political ideology, instead of making politics religious. 


The truth is that politics is a branch of the branches of religion, just as business and economics is a branch thereof, and indeed the rules of religion pertain to politics, just as they pertain to business. However nothing of politics and business is the root goal of the message of Islam, nor a fundamental objective of its rules and teachings. Thus, just as the connection of the rules of the Shari’ah to business do not entail that business becomes the objective of religion, similarly the rules of the Shari’ah pertaining to politics do not imply that politics be made the fundamental objective of Islam.


Hakim al-Ummah Shaykh Ashraf ‘Ali al-Thanawi (Allah Most High have mercy on him) drew attention to this point in a brief [but] firm statement, all of which is insightful, so we will quote it here, translating it from Urdu to Arabic. He says (Allah Most High have mercy on him):
“Allah Most High said: ‘those who, if We establish them in the land, establish regular prayer and give regular charity, enjoin the right and forbid wrong: with Allah rests the end and decision of all affairs.’ (Qur’an 22:41). It is clear from this verse that the essential objective is religiosity (diyanah) and nothing of politics and jihad is the fundamental objective — it is only a means to establish religiosity. And for this reason, spirituality and the rules [regulating] religiostiy were given to every one of the Prophets (upon them be peace) without exception, while politics and jihad were not given to all of them. Jihad and politics were given to some of them when the need and interest [of their communities] demanded [them], and indeed that is the condition of means, since they are not given except for a necessity.

Read full article: http://deoband.org/2010/05/general/politics/the-place-of-politics-in-religion/

Biography of Mufti Taqi Usmani: 

Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani is one of the leading Islamic scholars living today, an expert in the fields of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economics, Hadith and Tasawwuf.

Born in Deoband in 1943, he graduated from Dars e Nizami at Darul Uloom, Karachi, Pakistan. He specialized in Islamic Jurisprudence under the guidance of his eminent father, Mufti Muhammad Shafi, the late Grand Mufti of Pakistan. He has been writing on various Islamic topics in English, Urdu and Arabic and is author of more than 60 books and numerous articles.

In tradition to the scholars of Deoband, recognizing the importance of Tasawwuf, he traversed the path under the guidance of khulafa of Hakeemul Ummat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmetullah ajmaeen). In addition to his busy schedule he is himself a mentor to numerous spiritual aspirants all over the world. He also conducts a weekly session for the public interested in spiritual improvement.

List of publications include: (Updated May 2004) The Authority of Sunnah, An Introduction to Islamic Finance, Discourse on Islamic way of Life, Islam and Modernism, Islam aur Seasate Hazra ( Islam and Contemporary Politics), Islahe Ma'ashara (Perfecting society), Islahi mawa’iz (Discourses for spiritual perfection) (3 volumes)  http://www.albalagh.net/taqi.shtml; 

Islamic Discourse in the West: Political Islam & Liberal Muslim Movements

Liberal, Progressive or Reformist Muslim?

Over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, in accordance with their increasingly modern societies and outlooks, liberal Muslims have tended to reinterpret many aspects of the application of their religion in their life in an attempt to reconnect with the original message. This is particularly true of Muslims who now find themselves living in non-Muslim countries

Such people may describe themselves variously as liberal, progressive or reformist (in application but not in the tenets of the faith); but rather than implying a specific agenda, these terms tend to incorporate a broad spectrum of views which contest conservative, traditional interpretations of Islam in many different ways.

Although there is no full consensus amongst liberal Muslims on their views, they tend to agree on some or all of the following beliefs:

 

Ijtihad

This means that liberal Muslims often drop traditional interpretations of the Qur'an which they find too culturally conservative and relative, preferring instead readings which are more adaptable to modern society. Most liberal Muslims reject derivation of Islamic laws from literal readings of single Qur'anic verses. They generally claim that a holistic view which takes into account the 7th century Arabian cultural context allows deeper insight into the manner in which the commands of God (Allah) are carried out.

 

Human rights

§                     Most liberal Muslims believe that Islam promotes the notion of absolute equality of all humanity, and that it is one of its central concepts. Therefore, a breach of human rights has become a source of great concern to most liberal Muslims Though Human Rights is perceived to be of the utmost concern of all devoted adherents to the Islamic faith, liberal Muslims differ with their culturally conservative counterparts in that they believe that all humanity is represented under the umbrella of Human Rights.

§                     Muslim liberals often reject traditional interpretations of Islamic law, which allows Ma malakat aymanukum and Slavery. They see that Slavery opposed Islamic principles which they believe to be based on justice and equality and verses relating to slavery or "Ma malakat aymanukum" now can not be applied due to the fact that the world has changed

 

Feminism

The place of women in Islam, traditional gender roles in Islam and Islamic feminism are likewise major issues. For this reason, liberal Muslims are often critical of traditional Islamic law interpretations which allow polygyny for men but not polyandry for women, as well as the traditional Islamic law of inheritance under which daughters receive less than sons. Traditional Muslims believe this is balanced by the right of a wife to her husband's money, whereas the husband does not have a right to his wife's money.

It is also accepted by most liberal Muslims that a woman may lead the state, and that women should not be segregated from men in society or in mosques. Some traditional Muslims also accept a woman as a leader of state so long as it does not conflict with her obligation to family

However, other Muslim feminists embrace hijab, pointing out its tendency to de-sexualize women and therefore assist them in being treated less as an object and more as a person. Some conservative muslims follows the wearing of the hijab but did not prevent the woman from showing their adornment. Thus, one of the liberal view for the verse was intended for that time. And a general meaning of the verse for modesty can also be found from this.

 

Secularism

Some liberal Muslims favor the idea of modern secular democracy with separation of church and state, and thus oppose Islam as a political movement.

The existence or applicability of Islamic law is questioned by many liberals. Their argument often involves variants of the Mu'tazili theory that the Qur'an is created by God for the particular circumstances of the early Muslim community, and reason must be used to apply it to new contexts.

 

Tolerance and non-violence

Tolerance is another key tenet of Liberal Muslims, who are generally open to interfaith dialogue and conflict resolution with such communities as Jews, Christians, Hindus, and the numerous factions within Islam.

Liberal Muslims are more likely to reflect the idea of jihad in terms of the widely accepted "internal spiritual struggle" rather than an "armed struggle." The ideals of non-violence are prevalent in Liberal Muslim ideology and backed by Qu'ranic text; "permission to fight is given only to those who have been oppressed... who have been driven from their homes for saying,'God is our Lord'" (22:39)

 

Reliance on secular scholarship

Liberal Muslims tend to be skeptical about the validity of Islamization of knowledge (including Islamic economics, Islamic science, Islamic history and Islamic philosophy) as separate from mainstream fields of inquiry. This is usually due to the often secular outlook of Muslim liberals, which makes them more disposed to trust mainstream secular scholarship. They may also regard the propagation of these fields as merely a propaganda move by Muslim conservatives.^[16]

Liberals are also more likely to accept scientific ideas such as evolution and the results of secular history and archaeology.

Read full article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam

SOME SAMPLES OF THE DISCOURSE  IN THE WEST:

SECULARISM, ISLAM, & DEMOCRACY: Muslims in Europe and the West

Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010
Time: 7:00pm - 8:30pm
Location: The Great Hall, Cooper Union
Street: 7 East 7th Street
City/Town: New York, NY

Is there a fundamental clash of values between secularism and Islam and between freedom of expression and freedom of religion? In what ways are Muslims living in the West contributing to their democratic societies? Can Islam exist as a Western religion? Is it a Western religion already?

The AAUP, ACLU, PEN American Center, and Slate welcome Professor Tariq Ramadan in his first U.S. appearance since he was barred from the country in 2004. Professor Ramadan will participate in a panel discussion, which will provide Americans with the first opportunity in five years to hear his ideas relating to secularism, Islam and democracy.

http://www.meetup.com/NYC-progressive-muslim/messages/boards/thread/8812557/post/34668314/?hash=34668314

ISLAM'S EUROPEAN REFORMATION? A "WESTERN" VERSION OF ISLAM

Christian C. Sahner

February 16, 2010

The controversial Tariq Ramadan’s latest book promotes a “Western” version of Islam. Is he the “Muslim Martin Luther”?

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/02/1149 Islam’s European Reformation?

Islam as a Political Tool: The Bhutto Era of Islamization of Pakistan

Mubarka Ahmad

The process of Islamising the state of Pakistan started as early as 1949. It was then that Pakistan’s career as a theocracy began in theory; with Liaquat Ali Khan’s (Prime Minister, 1947-51) move to secure the adoption of the Objectives Resolution by the Constituent Assembly, thereby substituting divine sovereignty for the sovereignty of the people. However, despite the fact that successive constitutions declared Pakistan an Islamic Republic, the use of Islam in politics remained chiefly rhetorical, to the great displeasure of religious organizations who championed the desirability, if not the necessity, of making Pakistan a truly Islamic state. 

President Ayub Khan (1958-69) showed clear modernistic tendencies; yet retained a modest complacency towards a degree of pre-existing Islamic ideology legitimized by the Pakistan movement, but took it no further . The trend of predominantly religion-free politics continued with Yahya Khan (1969-71), who similarly showed little sympathy for the religious parties. Till the rise of Pakistan People’s Party in the 1970s, the political stance regarding religious parties had been unsympathetic, as evidenced by the imprisonment and original announcement of death sentence of Maulana Maududi, head of the Jamaat-i-Islami in response to the Punjab disturbances in 1953.

It was only after the fall of Dhaka that the role of religion in politics was drastically altered. Power was handed over to Bhutto, who had won a clear victory in West Pakistan in the 1971 elections. Much to the consternation of the people and despite his liberal-progressive leanings, it was Bhutto who signed the risky merger between religion and politics soon after. It was with his coming to power that Islam became a catalyst for furthering political motives.

BHUTTO’S ERA:

The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had won the 1971 elections on a heavily leftist map for governance; entrenched as it was in socialist ideals and thereby enjoying massive support. However, it was not long before the tide shifted. “It was not until Zulfikar Ali Bhutto came to power at the end of 1971 following the secession of East Pakistan that any elements of Islamic ideology began to appear in Pakistan’s substantive foreign policy. Islam came to the forefront of all policy and law-making decisions, and, ultimately, a vast host of issues, economic , policy-related etc. were increasingly dressed in Islamic colours. Religion soon after became the official legitimising strategy for all political manoeuvres. 

The PPP’s view of the role that religion would play in Pakistani politics was an issue controversial from its very inception. Bhutto introduced the term ‘Islamic Socialism’, but was never truly able to define its tenets . The ambiguity was ultimately used to an advantage when the political expediency of religion became evident. “Devotionalism", however, had never originally been part of the PPP’s strategy to rally the masses for support, and Bhutto had never been seen to portray himself as an observant Muslim; the rightly guided leader of a Muslim nation . For the most part, religion remained distinct from the politics of substantive policy-making. The PPP’s governance policy never encompassed a theocratic Pakistan, merely a socialist state based on principles of Islamic justice – whilst retaining Islam as a personal matter for the individuals of the state. This further supported PPP’s leftist stance as originally envisioned. This strongly leftist and somewhat secularist stance, however, was soon drastically altered. 

What were the reasons, then, for the shift in policy; why did the PPP feel the need to resort to religious rhetoric and appeal to religious justifications as key guiding factors for policy and law-making? “If most of Pakistan’s leaders were not particularly enthusiastic about Islamisation, why did so many take the initiative to bring it about, or at least acquiesce in it, when the populace has never once opted to vote for religious parties committed to the creation of an Islamic Pakistan? The attempt is to understand why and how religion began to carry this value as a political tool for governance.

Amongst other factors, the events of 1971 are of crucial importance in this regard. Bhutto was handed a country that had only recently been split into two. International politics and external alliances were in complete disarray. Having lost its only significant ethnic and religious minority, the Hindus, Pakistan drew closer to its neighbours in the East . The Governments of Saudi Arab and the United Arab Emirates supported “all kinds of Islamist activities in Pakistan to save it from falling in the clutches of socialism, and negating its thus-far latent Islamic identity. Bhutto acknowledged this interest, and realised the advantages of building alliances with these oil-rich states. The most powerful alliance Bhutto would seek with the Gulf would be an ideological one; Islamic brotherhood. 

At the level of public diplomacy, the Islamic Summit in Lahore was seen as the right political move to further this growing bond. Socialism, the initial guide to policy- and law-making was put aside and international politics began rapidly leading to a change in priorities. The crucial aspects of this dependency were, “economic assistance… temporary migration and employment of hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis in the Gulf States. Bhutto’s commitment to the Gulf-alliances, and the value he attached to them became manifest when the emergence of Pakistan’s nuclear program was accompanied by deeply Islamic rhetoric, alarming many. It was one of the first in a series of moves to create an ‘Islamic identity’ for Pakistan. 

These events relating to external affairs and foreign policy amalgamated to create an environment that led Bhutto to realize the latent power in religious rhetoric, and the crucial role that Islam would play for economic advantages and initiating alliances with these hugely wealthy Gulf monarchies. As Delvoie elucidates, the need for “strengthening ties with these countries… to diversify Pakistan’s sources of financial and political support at a time when he thought the country had become overly dependant on the United States and precisely when the Gulf states were beginning to deploy the wealth accumulated as a result of spectacular increases in the price of oil had hit the PPP hard. 

However, a far more dangerous shift was soon to follow: the use of Islamic rhetoric for internal politics – rallying the masses, seeking legitimacy for controversial policies, and Islam as a means to ensure popular support. The political use of Islam was now evident to the PPP, not just for international alliances and fiscal benefits, but more so for the growing internal threats to power. By the late 1970s, the PPP was facing a substantial threat from the Pakistan National Alliance (PNA); an umbrella organization of nine opposition parties that was to contest the upcoming March elections. The primary uniting feature of the resistance was a general dislike for Bhutto’s politics, but given varying and sometimes even contradictory party-agendas (Asghar Khan’s secularism, Khan Abdul Wali Khan’s socialism, and Maududi’s assertive Islamism), an agreement on the necessity of a positive role of Islam in policy-making became the ‘official’ party-agenda for the PNA . This signified the emergence of the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) as one of the key players in Pakistani politics. 

As a result, the legal structures began to be heavily influenced by this process of Islamisation, if simply as a means to prove the Government’s loyalty to Islam by infiltrating it into the Constitution. Subsequent amendments to the Constitution followed; making Islam the state religion and setting pre-requisites for the head of state to be Muslim. In a frenzy to break the momentum of the PNA-led movement, numerous Islamisation measures erupted. Shariat laws were introduced; gambling, horse racing, and alcohol were banned. The PPP manifesto was duly amended, making Friday the weekly holiday, introducing Quranic studies as mandatory for all students, establishing Ulema (clerical) academies and so forth . A new newspaper “Musawat" was founded to propagate Islamic justification for the PPP rule. These steps were of course accompanied with the appropriate rhetoric seeking to allow Bhutto to gain electoral support from the more religiously inclined quarters of society. ‘Socialism’ was accordingly replaced in party literature for “Musawat-i-Mohammadi"(‘Equality of Mohammad’), i.e. Islamic egalitarianism. These moves established the PPP’s dedication to the cause of Islam, which became Bhutto’s most powerful defence to fight the PNA in their own battlefield. One of Bhutto’s last desperate bids to buy off religious parties agitating for his overthrow with U.S. backing was to declare the Ahmadiyya Community non-Muslim in 1974. In 1976, he controversially appointed General Zia-ul-Haq the Chief of Army Staff in another move to appease the JI, of whom Zia was a close compatriot. Ironically, upon the advice and persuasion of Mian Tufail, the militant leader of JI, Zia overthrew Bhutto in 1977 . Later expressing regret for his political tactics, a resigned Bhutto claimed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, “I appointed a Chief of Army Staff belonging to Jaamat-i-Islami, and the result is before us all. 

Islam had thus evolved into the most predominant political factor to facilitate in both external and internal scenarios, by the end of Bhutto’s regime and as a result thereof. Although his insistence upon the role of Islam in Pakistani politics during his final days in power could not save his fading popularity, it did serve to reinforce the centrality of Islam for the military regime that followed. The dangerous alliance between military might and religious pressure thus found its seeds in Bhutto’s policy shifts, only to find renewed force under the approaching military rule. 

Read full article: http://www.chowk.com/articles/islam-as-a-political-weapon-in-pakistan-Mubarka-Ahmad.htm