Oxymoron - a figure of speech which is self-contradictory ! I'd love to be an oxymoron but I wouldn't know what that means !
I think I should begin with a definition of Secularism first because we clearly understand it to mean differently ! George Holyoakes, who first coined the word 'Secularism' defines it as such :
“Secularism is a code of duty pertaining to this life,
founded on considerations purely human,
and intended mainly for those who find theology indefinite or inadequate, unreliable or unbelievable. Its essential principles are three:
The improvement of this life by material means.
That science is the available Providence of man.
That it is good to do good.
Whether there be other good or not, the good of the present life is good, and it is good to seek that good.”
Other definitions of Secularism that pop up are as follows :
‘that certain practices or institutions should exist separately from religion or religious belief’
‘…it asserts the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, and freedom from government imposition of religion upon the people,
within a state that is neutral on matters of belief, and
gives no state privileges or subsidies to religions’
‘…it refers to a belief that human activities and decisions, especially political ones, should be based on evidence and fact rather than religious influence’
‘…in European laicism, it has been argued that secularism is a movement towards modernisation, and away from traditional religious values’
‘…in political terms, secularism is a movement towards the separation of religion and government’
‘…secularism can also be the social ideology in which religion and supernatural beliefs are not seen as the key to understanding the world and are instead segregated from matters of governance and reasoning…and in this sense, secularism can be involved in the promotion of science, reason, and naturalistic thinking’.
Now the bold part are in direct contravention to Islamic Values. Islamic Philosophical Thought doesn't view Our Life and its very Purpose to be founded on purely human considerations without any higher purpose whatsoever for such materialism is quite the antithesis of the Islamic meaning of Life ! The Quran decrees that our sole purpose in life is to worship the One God and that worship can take the form of anything from ritual prayer to right action to an act of charity to pondering the nature of existence ! Whereas what the definition suggests is that the spiritual dimension of our lives play second fiddle to our wordily needs and not the other way around ! Furthermore the second part of the first bold part suggests that Secularism is mainly intended for people who consider 'theology to be inadequate, indefinite, unreliable or unbelievable', now as soon as a Muslim prescribes to the inadequacy, unreliability or unbelievablity of Islamic Theology...then he isn't a Muslim anymore and consequently there is little point arguing with him further on this topic !
And yes...might I even bother elucidating the incompatibility of the statement, which is a major premise behind Secularism, that 'Science is the available Providence of Man', with the Islamic concept of what or rather whom Providence is derived from ?
In the other definitions portion :
In the case of the first 3 bold statements, the first 2 are based on erroneous assumptions. The first bold statement reads 'it asserts the right to be free from religious rule and teachings'; the error, over here, lies in a failure to understand Islamic polity whereby a Muslim becomes subject to the Shariah Law as soon as he or she prescribes to the Islamic Faith. And what is the Shariah Law...well it is everything from political, economic, penal and dietary laws to those that deal with rituals, Jihad, standards of propriety and social laws of Islam. Now many of the aforementioned are concerned with one's private life but the rest concern a Muslim Community who can justify the presence of a political voice of their own and as such are supposed to regulate the affairs of the Community! As far as religious teaching is concerned; I understand the importance of having this from two facets, the first being the right of the majority to impart religious education to their children as per their own belief systems (and this is a very secular human right too) and for the Govt. to facilitate the provision of that by having proper courses on Islamic Studies so that a child is equipped not only with the tools to think critically but also to appreciate and understand the nuances of the Quran much more than he otherwise would have. And that brings me to the second reason, which is purely academic by the way : The policy of hushing up religion as a private affair between man and his God has failed miserably because in the name of that freedom so much hatred and venom filled Islam is being taught by private Madrassas to children as young as 4 or 5. The State, has a responsibility, to equip the child with a much more tempered down, much more humanistic version of Islam instead of risk letting them become the would-be extremists of tomorrow.
Onto the 3rd of the 3 bold statements which reads 'gives no state privileges or subsidies to religions’; Pray tell me...how does a Muslim individual who is supposed to help out his fellow Muslim in times of need by giving Zakat or helping him go for Hajj, reconcile that with the notion that Muslims collectively aren't supposed to do the same when they actually have more resources at their disposal to carry out those injunctions ? And isn't a Parliament and by extension the Govt, in a Muslim majority Country, a reflection of the collective will and resources of countless Muslim Individuals ?
And lastly the underlined part (to distinguish it from the rest
) implies a disassociation of the supernatural or spiritual as I would call it from the wordily and that dichotomy is not only foreign to Islamic Theology and Philosophical Thought but also the mode by which some of our Greatest Polymaths worked ! Hence why the promotion of science and reason is (or atleast was) intrinsically linked to Islam !
Lastly one must understand one other premise behind Secularism - That all religions and opinions are created equal ! Now if we were to prescribe to such a view then we'd have to negate the Islamic view point of how other religions got corrupted over time...hence the raison detre of Islam coming to Arabia ! This is not to say that its adherents are discriminated upon but simply a realization that not all view points are correct and deserving the same weightage as others. So as a Muslim it is incumbent upon us to allow other view points to have a bona fide space to express themselves but we mustn't either compromise on the Islamic injunctions that are made incumbent upon us as soon as we constitute a community with some political representation !
As for Mr.Ataturk...I do not doubt his sincerity to the Turkish Nation and so I will not comment on his person but the unbridled production and consumption of alcohol, of gambling, the absence of Islamic Family Laws etc., do not, in my humble opinion, make for a very good case for Quranic injunctions being followed !
And Pakistan's problems are, as I have incessantly alluded to before, are not because of Islam or Secularism but because of our abysmal state of Governance and 30 years of continuous conflict. Take the example of China, it isn't a Secular State, Communism by its very nature is hostile towards religion, and yet they are on track to become one of the greatest countries of the world. Similarly, the Muslim Empires of ages past were functioning with the Shariah Law as the Law of the Land, and the managed to carve out a great name for themselves in history ! So my friend...I can't stress enough that talking about Islam or Secularity...really is a moot point ! Its Governance that makes or breaks a nation !
P.S Religion was bound to come into the fray...when you're discussing Islamic State vs Secular State...because I dunno about you but 'Islam' isn't the name of my local football team...its a 'Religion' !
And yeah...just my two cents !
Indeed there is a reason why Europe and west is so advanced compared to the (mostly) backward east - they are following Quranic values in their state and governance for the most part. Kemal Ataturk adopted the same Quranic values, protocols and look where is Turkey today compared to pakistan.
keeping aside their ethnicity, Sect & religious/political views. Pakistan was very unfortunate when one of the Greatest leader in Muslim World & founder of Pakistan left Pakistanis alone. If M.A. Jinnah had lived for atleast 12-16 years, Pakistan story would be very very different now & i can BET you that Pakistan would be same as Turkey today (or may be much ahead of Turkey). Jinnah(R.A) was a great with strong & indepandant views & was very talented & educated.
