Is secularisation of Pakistan possible?

[FaujHistorian]

How can that happen as long as Pakistanis can accuse each other of blasphemy, real or imagined, without fear of penalty? Or if Muslims stealing brides from Hindus isn't a prosecutable crime? Or if Muslims, even those who are listed as Muslims due to paperwork errors, can't freely choose another religion?

In each case it is religious intolerance over-riding secularism that prevails. The secularists can "get along" all they want but intolerant religious bigotry, supported by the mechanisms of the state, won't let go.

Religious intolerance is sadly there. Who can deny that.

If you read my post again. my suggestion was to emphasize on tolerance, truth and trustworthiness. These are the fundamental traits that can improve an individual as well help build a better society.

That's all.

peace.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The 2NT theory in no way precludes the possibility of a secular state. I think I addressed that point in my previous post. Besides anything else even if 2NT did preclude that possibility we are now in 2012. It really does not matter what ( other than academics ) of what happened in 1947. Pakistan is a reality today. Its does not follow that every generation in Pakistan is going to be hostage to the events of 1947.

I am sure we all have heard of evolution. When USA came about, its founding fathers talked about 'government of the people'. Clearly they overlooked the black people of USA. Over time changes have been made, those changes did not reduce or take away the gloss from the founding fathers. Let me stress it again, there is nothing intrinsic to Pakistan that prevents it from evolving into a secular state. The choice is ours. I think we need to debate this and win people to our side and then let time takes its course.

Now I will advocate why I think Pakistan needs to become a secular state but first we need to understand what a secular state is. I believe the Urdu translation of secular is La-din which I believe does the word secular injustice. The Urdu word suggests no religion or lack of religion. Now that gets the ignorent people ( of whom we have plenty ) all hot and ready to burn spare tyres and wreck the local bazaar.

A secular state to my understanding is a state which keeps it nose out of religion. It does not favour any particular religion and remains a neutral stance. This does not prevent the individuel from following his or her own faith. It is not per se against religion.

Now I want those who oppose a secular state to consider the following:-

1. Islam is split into many sects. Those sects are split into many schools of thought. Those schools of thought are split in many local mutations. The Justice Munir Report of 1953 mentions how 'No two scholars of Islam could agree on a single defintion of what Islam is'.

2. Faith is opposite of reason. Those who believe in it need no reason. Its absolute. Now thats fine as long as you keep that as private belief unto yourself but its not so great if you try to extend it to others. That will create conflict because others will not be prepared to be bound by your beliefs.

3. Once the state gets involved in religion the first question is which strand is the state going to uphold? Whichever strand it does uphold, its going to inevitably get involved in enforcing on others who don't agree. Conflict will follow.

4. By allowing religion to enter the business of the state you are opening the door to Mullahs. After all religion is their domain. The gross effect is that the Mulahs will make inroads into everything and will start pronouncing fatwas on anything and everything.

5. Now this is the rub: Because Mullahs preach faith, they don't worry about reasion and logic. Because they have absolute belief they do not brook any debate or questioning and as a corrolary to this reason and logic are banished. This finally leads to a oppressive society where nobody dare question anything lest they be accused of being heretics. This is nothing less than a nightmare.

6. Eventually each sect/religious school of thought will end up going to war against each other. Because each believes the absolute nature of their belief system as gods word and will they will be ready to kill in gods name. I believe thats happening in Pakistan already. Shia against the Sunni. The Suni against the Shia. The Wahabi against the Ismaeli and and on and on like sharks on a feeding frenzy.

7. I find it pathetic how so many Pakistani's chilling out in the secular West are some of the most ardent voices against secular Pakistan. So its quite acceptable for millions of Pakistani's to live in the secular West but all hell breaks out if you mention secular Pakistan. Why? Can they not see how absurd their argumentt is?

8. If indeed secular state contradicts and degrades Islam then why has no Mullah put out a fatwa telling Pakistani's 'do not go abroad to live for that is akin to being a kaffir'? I would love for those who oppose a secular Pakistan to explain this dichotomy to me.

9. What they are saying is 'I can live in the secular West and be a good Muslim' but we can't have a 'secular Pakistan because those 180 million Muslims will be in danger'. How absurd.

Of course I expect all those who are against a secular Pakistan but live in the West to suddenly declare' we are students, did Prophet mohammed ( PBUH ) not say go China for sake of knowledge'.

It would also help if those who oppose my view to give a constructed reply as opposed to one liners. Try to inform your opinion with some facts or reasons.

I would like to add some more points but I fear this thread is getting too long. I would highly recommend people read the Justice Munir report 1954. It makes excellant observations that sadly have come true today in Pakistan. It warns against what might happen if mullahs are let lose. I believe it makes the stronger case for a secular Pakistan than I could ever make. The nightmare it forecasts has come about in Pakistan today.

I have ran out of time but could somebody please put a link here to the Justice munir report 1954.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Pakistan doesn't need to officially be a secular country. The nation was formed as a country by Muslims, for humanity. A country where all groups - especially the majority Muslim community - would be able to live freely and practice religion freely - free from caste/extremist forces that had made their lives difficult previously under the constantly conquered colony.

a lot of people ask - what would Jinnah say about Pakistan today.....well it's hard to tell but going by his aspirations, he'd be disappointed but probably hopeful to say the least - since in many ways Pakistan is stronger now than it ever has been (and weaker now in some ways as well).

Religion is a personal matter. Islam teaches tolerance for all. In (proper) practice, Pakistan need not be a "secular" nation in order to ensure equal rights for all groups in the country. All it takes is leadership at the top, and ensuring that religious scholars in the country are educated in not just religious but also so-called "secular" subjects as well. Our Turkish friends have done a good job of training religious scholars to lead in their respective roles.

so at the end of the day - is secularisation of Pakistan possible? Probably not.......nor is it exactly a priority for Pakistan - an ISLAMIC Republic. However certain policies, practices and laws can be re-visited to ensure that none of them can be used improperly to promote inequality or injustice (e.g. blasphemy law) to ANY other groups - including non-Muslim ones.

I would reiterate though that religion is a private matter so therefore, it's 'encroachment' in day-to-day state affairs should be minimal. Religion between Man/Woman and God.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The Justice Munir Report

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

by the way - on this whole Ahmedi issue ---

the author forgot to mention a KEY point here which many hyper-secularist / socialistic - leaning 'enthusiastics' in Pakistan and outside tend to overlook:

it was a "secular" and "socialist" Z.A. Bhutto who started the anti-Ahmedi sentiments for purely votebank reasons (he wanted to gain support from the right wing Islamists)

it wasn't Gen. Z. Ul Haq's regime (which granted, did see the rise of orthodox schools of thought among segment of society)

curiously - it isn't just Pakistan. In so-called "secular" india and in Kashmir - there are Islamists calling for Ahmedis to be declared as non-Muslims. Hell - the same is going on even in Indonesia (where treatment of this group is much worse)



how convenient of the author to have over-looked the fact that much of the so-called "Islamization" was actually started by secular Bhutto.....as charismatic as he may have been, it seems almost as if his policy was to divide Pakistanis rather than unite them.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Pakistanis do - however need to brush up their knowledge on the meaning of this word

if you ask someone who is less educated, they will assume "secular" means "Godless" or "atheist" -- which is quite a damn-fool way of looking at it.....

it simply means a seperation between Church/Mosque/Temple and STATE.



while I dont believe Pakistan can, in practice, be a truly "secular" state - i also don't believe that Pakistan can be a country whose laws/Constitution/etc. are purely devised by Sharia law because in Pakistan there are 190 million (96-97% of which are Muslim) and in the Muslim world there are over 1 billion strong Muslims

who decides what is and what isnt Shariah? There are so many interpretations out there; some seemingly 'valid' and some seemingly self-serving and poorly understood.


Our parliamentarians spend days, weeks, months in order to pass a bill after deliberation.....our district courts are back-logged......how long and tedious will the process become if 80% of the time is spent simply deciding what is "Shariah" and what isn't.


as i said in my last post - Pakistan is a state by Muslims for humanity. Muslims played an important role in the formation of our motherland - our identity. They fought for it with wit and with sweat and blood. Respect them by making Pakistan an economically strong country free of lies and corruption; keep it safe and secure from our enemies. That's all that matters for the Muslims and non-Muslim brothers and sisters. in Pakistan


if Pakistanis really care for the country - and in this digital age where information is readily available - all we need to do is adopt a "best-practices" approach.


learn some "good" things from Islamic welfare states like UAE; learn some "good things" from a secular Muslim nation like Turkiye. . . learn some "good things" from even the U.S. and EU......mostly administrative things (i.e. how to PROPERLY govern a country, combat corruption, social ills, promote human development in rural areas, etc)



and for our right-wing fanatical citizens (every country has them) - well they should understand that the most "Islamic" thing to do would be to focus more on human development and promoting socio-economic growth for Pakistan and less on superficial nonsense such as enforcing hijab or length of beards or preventing girls from going to school, etc.

 

[Subramanian]

IMO it is not possible to secularize Pakistan and TBH there's no use of secularization of your country as it would make your society spineless like how our Indian society has become. However, rather than the negative term of south asian style secularism, I'd say you guys need to lighten up; like Turkey. Has Turkey been converted to a non-Muslim state? No. But does it have radical fanatics everywhere? No.

See? That's the balance which Pakistan should aim at.

And we should make our Hindu republic.

 

[Armstrong]

I won't go into details right now (because I'm simultaneously strolling along PDF and trying to figure out how one is supposed to account for 'Consolidated Retained Earnings as per IFRS 5 - Damn you founding fathers of 'accounting' !) but unless a digestible sales pitch is made for 'Secularism' it would be wholly unacceptable to the vast majority of the Pakistanis ! The Mullah, unfortunately, has had a lot of time to spread his poison and he, consequently, holds sway over the majority of Pakistanis (because the majority are an illiterate lot) and so I foresee a potential for a terrible backlash ! The Pukhtoons (especially the Tribals) will not accept it, the Punjabis and the Sindhis, even those who've follow a syncretic Islam, will not be entirely convinced never mind the Qadri fanboys in Punjab and Sindh ! The Baloch, from what I've heard, are a Secular lot but then again we've got a sizeable Pukhtoon, Hazara, Punjabi and Mohajir settler presence in Balochistan ! Heck, even a majority of our educated lot cringe in aversion on the very mention of the word 'Secularism' ! So I dunno but I fear a backlash, unless we can create (I know this may sound self-contradictory) a syncretism of Islam and Secularism and then sell it to the masses; Bhutto did that with his slogan 'Islam is our religion and Socialism is our Economy' ! I believe calling it 'Pluralism' or something along the lines of Lebanon's 'Confessionalism' may make the masses more 'amenable' to give it a try ! Or we could even give it a distinct 'Arabic' name or touch to it in much the same way 'Modaraba', being no different then an 'operating lease' is sold to the People as being 'Islamic' just because it has an 'Arabic' name to it and the non-technical gullible masses gobble it all up in the belief that they've just made their income more 'Halal' ! This would of course be in the short-term, with nothing less than a free comprehensive education which imparts genuine critical thinking to the People, be a sure fix to end this intolerance, bigotry and blatant hypocrisy in our society, in the long-term !

 

[truthseer]

The Justice Munir Report

So are you saying that secularization would solve this forever? Don't you realise that the Mullas will kill more people if this happens? Because they'll blame non-Muslims for this

 

[Subramanian]

His moral stance was really simple. There should be protection for individual provinces from the shenanigans from center. He never said or advocated militancy against the center. Never said that we want to rip apart the Indian union.

But congress was behaving as if it was the incarnation of gods. So it refused.

Congress calculation was that West Pakistan cannot survive for more than 2 years and East even less.

You gotta read the speeches made by Congressis and other Indians and how poisonous they were against East Pakistan (and the west too)., There were chants to reoccupy E. Bengal.

When the 50s came and Congress realized that Pakistan is not going anywhere, and instead have received the full support of USA, Congressites launched other destabilization plans.

Stop the damn wanter going to Punjab and E. Bengal was the war cry.

Don't process the jute in Calcutta. was the battle shouts.


But you the new generation of internet savvy Indians won't read that part. Sadly.

So this pathetic existence of a country called Pakistan will remain in your cross-hair and so will the long gone Jinnah.

If you want to know Jinnah, and don't want to dig deep, just read his 1948 interview to NYT correspondent.


peace.

Is not so simple,

I have no issues about Jinnah wanting Pakistan & East Pakistan,that was the only solution but thehaphazard way they went about things helped none.

All those things about Congress shouting this,that were all done because of Anger from all the blooshed and relocation that happened,just like u guys had issues with kashmir and did the Lashkar Hamla.

Congress might havae said whatever but they never protected us Hindus and whatever we did as a backlash is to protect ourselves.

Congress ll keep showing the other cheek and get bashed.

Even in Punjab,it was the Hindu Mahasabha who helped people migrate and despite that we had so many dead.

Dont club us with the Congress,if it was upto them today we ll have a corridor connecting East and West Pakistan and perhaps we would have lost it all,

Luckily the moron Gandhi died and we were saved.

And all politicians give good interviews,the real test of a politician is how long his values stand after he is gone and Jinnah failed 100% in that.

 

[Luffy 500]

Secularism will always be unacceptable to muslim world i.e common muslims. Why should muslims embrace something that is inferior when we have a superior form of governance in ISLAM. It has been proved time and again that secularism has been a epic
fail in the muslim world and this satanic ideology was always been forced on muslims by dictators and thugs. One eg. is how
Ataturk and kelamist forced secularism in turkey and had almost destroyed it until AKP came to the rescue. The biggest threat
to the muslim world today is these suckulars who are slave mentality munafiqs. Getting rid of these pest should solve all the
problem.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

be a sure fix to end this intolerance, bigotry and blatant hypocrisy in our society, in the long-term !

Education and teaching tolerance is the key, not a syncretic Islam.

Allow enough Islam into politics to protect the heritage and people who want to practice it (so that things like banning the headscarf to become 'modern' don't happen); and enough secularism into politics to ensure idiots, extremist Mullahs and whatever don't have a strong hold/monopoly over political affairs; and to ensure stuff like bigotry are wiped out for good.

We can't do away with Islam just like that to join the 'system' as someone called it before; but we certainly can protect both the majority and minorities rights if we try hard.

 

[Subramanian]

My comments in italics under your remarks.

Yeah,

I am not saying Jinnah is an idiot/anything.

I personally found Gandhi/Nehru certainly incompetent,Gandhi may have been a good man,a positive image but nothing more.

I found Jinnah,Patel and Rajaji to be the only one with balls and mind to sit across a table.

Sadly Patel n Rajaji were not the No.1 & No.2.

I infact Hate Jinnah because he was so good at what he does,for example i dont hate Ayub/Yahya Khan,whereas I hate Musharraf again because they are worthy enemies,

Tito's reign and Our partition are big lessons,

Tito prevented a partition and ended up having something much worse.

We delayed a partition and had something bad.

Not that bad a comparison.

 

[truthseer]

Education and teaching tolerance is the key, not a syncretic Islam.

True Shariat must be enforced for peace

Allow enough Islam into politics to protect the heritage and people who want to practice it (so that things like banning the headscarf to become 'modern' don't happen); and enough secularism into politics to ensure idiots, extremist Mullahs and whatever don't have a strong hold/monopoly over political affairs; and to ensure stuff like bigotry are wiped out for good.

That's an assumption made on the fact that people will vote for non-Muslims. Remove minority's reserved seats and see them get one vote. Hell, remove separate electorate and see how many Muslims vote for a reserved minority seat

We can't do away with Islam just like to join the 'system' as someone called it before; but we certainly can protect both the majority and minorities rights if we try hard.

Islamic Shariat would do this

 

[FaujHistorian]

As I have said many a times.

The term "secularims" is only for the fashionable city elite.

What rocks the common man's boat is simple. Bread and butter for two times a day (do waqat ki roti).

Common man also gives a damn to Mullah. It is only the educated elite in Pakistan who are the bearers of Mullahcracy either in the name of Saudi Jiihad, or Irani Jihad.


Thus it is not to the common man to rid the Mullah and ayatullah hold on Pak educted elite, unless this elite wants to get rid of Mullahs themselves.


Majority of bomb explosions, and AK-47 attacks in Pakistan has a root in Saudi-Mullah or Irani-Ayatullah,.

The day we truly become independent of the Mullah-Ayatullah cabal, we will be A-OK.,

And this will not happen just because secular groups of Pakistan are in power. Because they are not truly free of Saudi and Iran.


Our educated elite must move away from slogans of Islam and secularism. Instead our focus should be on simple things. Be nice to each other, and speak truth and hate those who try to bring Saudi and iran into Pakistan.

Peace.