Pakistanis Want Madrasa Reform

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Most Pakistanis want madrassa reform: USIP poll​

* Majority supports Islamic democracy, but distrust US and war on terror
* Oppose Talibanisation, but also military action against Taliban



WASHINGTON: A large moderate middle-bloc of Pakistanis support government reform of religious schools known as madrassas, which have been blamed for spreading Islamist militancy, according to a poll released on Monday.

The poll, funded by the US Institute of Peace (USIP), was conducted in the country before President Pervez Musharraf’s six-week state of emergency and the assassination of former premier Benazir Bhutto last month.

The poll results, released about six weeks before the elections scheduled for February 18, show that 64 percent of Pakistanis wanted madrassas reform by the government.

Islamic democracy: Most Pakistanis want their country to be a democratic Islamic state, but are deeply distrustful of the United States and its war on terrorism, the results reveal.

The results also show that a large majority of Pakistanis see democracy as fully compatible with Islam. Democracy ranked especially high among the 60 percent of respondents who wanted Muslim-based Sharia law to play a larger role in legal affairs of the country.

The survey finds strong public support for a wider role for Islam. Asked to gauge the importance of living ‘in a country that is governed according to Islamic principles’ on a 10-point scale, 61 percent give an answer of 10 (meaning ‘absolutely important’). The mean response is 9.0. However, when asked to gauge the degree to which Pakistan is currently governed by Islamic principles, the mean score is just 4.6 (on a 0-10 scale with 10 meaning ‘completely’). Sixty percent want Sharia to play a larger role, as compared to current Pakistan law.

“It shows there is no major Western-oriented secular sub-group in Pakistan. People want more Islam. They don’t think Pakistan is pious enough or that Islamic values are adequately expressed in daily life,” said Steven Kull, director of WorldPublicOpinion.org, a non-profit group affiliated with the University of Maryland that conducted the poll for the USIP.

No Talibanisation: The poll showed that 59 percent of the public want to hold the line against the encroachment of conservative Muslim mores known as “Talibanisation”, he said.

Three in five (60-62 percent) view the activities of Al Qaeda, local Taliban, and Pakistani Islamist militant groups as threats to Pakistan’s vital interests. However, a significant 14 to 18 percent do not view these groups as a threat to Pakistan.

Eighty-one percent say it is important for Pakistan to protect religious minorities and three quarters (75-78 percent) say that attacks on specific religious minorities are never justified.

Pakistanis also say it is important to live in a country where “the decisions of the courts are independent from influence by political and military authorities”, giving it a mean score of 8.6 on the 10-point scale.

The poll, which has a 3.3 percentage point margin of error, surveyed 907 adults in 19 Pakistani cities from September 12-28. About 49 percent of the respondents were women. reuters
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Sixty percent want Sharia to play a larger role, as compared to current Pakistan law.

“It shows there is no major Western-oriented secular sub-group in Pakistan. People want more Islam. They don’t think Pakistan is pious enough or that Islamic values are adequately expressed in daily life,” said Steven Kull, director of WorldPublicOpinion.org, a non-profit group affiliated with the University of Maryland that conducted the poll for the USIP.

I am not comfortable with what Kull seems to be implying, from the response to the "Want Shariah" question. My opinion on such sentiment has always been that it needs to be qualified in terms of what sorts of policies the people "wanting Shariah" actually want implemented.

Most Muslims might agree that society should be based on "Shariah", but that doesn't mean that they want intolerance, restrictions on Music, Art, gender segregation and gender based restrictions in education and the workplace. Unfortunately, audiences in the West, to whom these polls are generally targeted, have a particular negative stereotype of what "Shariah" means, which ends up being juxtaposed on the opinions they hold about Pakistanis.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Agnostic,

Does the scriptures have any leeway on the issue of selective implementation of the Sharia?

In India, our madrassas apart from the religious instructions are also imparting some aspects of the modern education so as to equip the students to find opportunities beyond being a Mullah. In this manner, the frustration of being unemployed and being prey to the fundamentalist opinion is diminished.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Salim,

This Islamic version of a Utopian Society, a society based on Shariah, is completely open to selective interpretation and implementation - which is why I am opposed to it. You see it in the differences between the Shia and Sunni schools of thought, you see it when a man in one society can be condemned to death for converting from Islam, while other Scholars say there is no such punishment prescribed in Islam. You see it in the differences in interpretation by the Mullah's of Iran and Saudi Arabia, and those of more moderate Islamic Scholars.

I don't think the average Muslim really goes into deep detail about what exactly the scriptures say. When you hear Muslims on the street say that Islam is compatible with democracy, that it advocates complete equality, tolerance and respect - that is what most people really believe their religion says (and I think that is justified). It is usually the "anti Islam" bunch, that drag up the "selective" Quranic verses and Hadith that talk about "killing the infidel" and "dar-ul-Harb" and a warped interpretation of Takiyya, to validate their fears and bias.

I had a similar impression about the author of that excerpt from a conversation with Jinnah - she was analyzing his statements about Islam being compatible with democracy and the events of the "golden age of Islam" (as Jinnah and his sister saw it) under too fine of a microscope.

 

[solid snake]

I reject "Sharia" outright. Muhammad Ali Jinnah made it quite clear he wanted Pakistan to be a secular, democratic country. Our population is too poor and too illiterate to understand the implications of a so called Sharia state.

If Pakistan ever adopts any kind of Sharia government system, I will disown it.

 

[Energon]

This Islamic version of a Utopian Society, a society based on Shariah, is completely open to selective interpretation and implementation - which is why I am opposed to it. You see it in the differences between the Shia and Sunni schools of thought, you see it when a man in one society can be condemned to death for converting from Islam, while other Scholars say there is no such punishment prescribed in Islam. You see it in the differences in interpretation by the Mullah's of Iran and Saudi Arabia, and those of more moderate Islamic Scholars.

My biggest point of contention with the implementation of a legal system based on theology in the world today is that the authority over the interpretation of the literature lies solely in the hands of theologians who lack adequate training in subjects that truly pertain to the operations of current human society. We can all sit here and lament over the "golden age" of the hallowed past, but the truth of the matter is that human societies have since globalized and advanced to a point where it requires it's leaders and policy makers to take into account many things way beyond the realm of religion.

IMO Sharia has become a symbolic 'safety zone' for many Muslims who feel disenfranchised by a global order that is primarily western in nature. The thought process seems to be that in order to regain the dominant identity, reclaim the glory of the past and make up for losses (social and military) incurred in modern history Muslims have to immerse themselves into an Islamic system that will put them on the path to obtaining all these objectives. Although I can understand why people feel this way, it seems to be an unfeasible venture based on faulty reasoning.

It makes more sense to design a system that revolves around the immediate needs of the people and leave religion to accommodate their spiritual needs in a separate and more appropriate setting.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Salim,

This Islamic version of a Utopian Society, a society based on Shariah, is completely open to selective interpretation and implementation - which is why I am opposed to it. You see it in the differences between the Shia and Sunni schools of thought, you see it when a man in one society can be condemned to death for converting from Islam, while other Scholars say there is no such punishment prescribed in Islam. You see it in the differences in interpretation by the Mullah's of Iran and Saudi Arabia, and those of more moderate Islamic Scholars.

I don't think the average Muslim really goes into deep detail about what exactly the scriptures say. When you hear Muslims on the street say that Islam is compatible with democracy, that it advocates complete equality, tolerance and respect - that is what most people really believe their religion says (and I think that is justified). It is usually the "anti Islam" bunch, that drag up the "selective" Quranic verses and Hadith that talk about "killing the infidel" and "dar-ul-Harb" and a warped interpretation of Takiyya, to validate their fears and bias.

I had a similar impression about the author of that excerpt from a conversation with Jinnah - she was analyzing his statements about Islam being compatible with democracy and the events of the "golden age of Islam" (as Jinnah and his sister saw it) under too fine of a microscope.

You are my Abu Ben Ädhem.

May your tribe increase.

Your courage to see reality is what is so sadly missed to make understand the world that there are real moderates who have nothing to do with the incorrect image and who should be listened to, rather than put all in the same basket!

Your thoughts are what I am trying to impress upon but not with the authority and knowledge that you have of your scriptures!

Your and Mastan Khan's type will win the world!

On the other hand, I don't blame the non Moslems for selective reading and correlate it with the upsurge of terrorism wherein these fundamentalist also use selective interpretation .

Therefore, the terrorist should be stopped. Non Moslems cannot do it. It is you, the Moslems, who must.

You know the scriptures best and you know how they are making Islam get a bad name for no fault of Islam!

I also do not buy the usual pathetic refrain that poverty and illiteracy is the cause of terrorism. If they can understand radicalism, they can also understand reality! It is just that the radicals have the money to fund the education in the madrassa and the power of the fundamentalists have belied Musharraf's efforts to contain such horrors in Pakistan!!

 

[dabong1]

Which madrassa did osama go to?

Barack Obama has noted in his two books, "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope," that he spent two years in a Muslim school and another two years in a Catholic school while living in Indonesia from age 6to 10.

I wonder what a "Muslim school" is.

 

[Spring Onion]

Which madrassa did osama go to?

Barack Obama has noted in his two books, "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope," that he spent two years in a Muslim school and another two years in a Catholic school while living in Indonesia from age 6to 10.

I wonder what a "Muslim school"

and wonder who bred and brought in UK and USA and attended Western Modern Institutes are also involved so what about them ????

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Actually who care which Moslem school he went to?

None cares.

That is why he is leading an important figure like Hillary Clinton in the polls!

Indicates that none these days in America, bring in religion and colour in their opinion.

They care for realpolitik and what is good for their country beyond religion and colour!

The USA has indeed matured!

 

[Cheetah786]

Most in Pakistan also complain about corruption as long as they are on the hand that gives.yet these are the same people call bribe a necessity as long as they are on the receiving end.

Most countries that have so called sharia Law have double standereds through out the world 1 law for others None for the controlling party.

Who in Pakistan will enforce the sharia law.100% of drugs guns and bullets come from Afghanistan and NWFP into pakistan Yet these are the same people who wants to inforce sharia law.

 

[dabong1]

Pakistanis want ‘Islamic democracy’: poll




By Anwar Iqbal

WASHINGTON, Jan 7: The majority of Pakistanis want a larger role for both Islam and democracy in their country, but are deeply distrustful of the United States and its war on terror, says a survey released in Washington.

The in-depth survey of public opinion, conducted by a private surveyor called World Public Opinion for the government-funded US Institute for Peace and released on Monday, reveals the majority in Pakistan supports a moderate and democratic Islamic state.

Most Pakistanis want Islam to play a larger role in society. However, the majority also favours a more democratic political system, rejects ‘Talibanisation’, and supports recent government efforts to reform the Madressah system by focusing more on science and mathematics.

Few people have any sympathy for Muslim militant groups and most would like to see the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas integrated into Pakistan. There is, however, a small but significant minority that shows sympathy for Muslim militant groups.

The survey also found that opinions towards the United States are quite negative, apparently linked to a growing perception that the United States is hostile towards Islam and Muslims.

The survey finds strong public support for a wider role for Islam in Pakistan. Asked “How important is it for you to live in a country that is governed according to Islamic principles?” on a 10-point scale, 61 per cent give an answer of 10 (meaning “absolutely important”). The mean response is 9.0. However, asked the degree to which Pakistan is currently governed by Islamic principles, the mean score is just 4.6.

Sixty per cent want Sharia to play a larger role, “as compared to current Pakistan law,” than it does today.

The surveyors note that the support for Sharia playing a greater role may indicate desire for the civil courts to perform their functions more effectively rather than for a fundamental change.

At the same time a large majority of Pakistanis want Pakistan to be more democratic. Asked “How important it is to you to live in a country that is governed by representatives elected by the people” on a 10-point scale, the mean response is 8.4. Asked to rate Pakistan in this regard the mean score was just 4.8, though the polling was conducted just before emergency rule was imposed.

Interestingly, among the 60 per cent majority who support a larger role for Sharia compared to current Pakistani law, 64 per cent give the importance of democracy a 10 -- considerably higher than for those who do not favour more Sharia.

Pakistanis want ‘Islamic democracy’: poll -DAWN - Top Stories; January 08, 2008

 

[roadrunner]

So? What is Islamic democracy, and how will it be put to effect so that it satisfies every version of Islam for each Pakistani. Obviously it's not been thought through.

 

[roadrunner]

The Quaid's vision for Pakistan was this

"I cannot emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish. Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England, conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation.

Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.

The Quaid's vision for Pakistan was one where religion and politics did not mix. Now this can be Shariah, and it can be democratic. The only working Islamic democracy is one where religion is separated from politics.

 

[Neo]

Salim,

This Islamic version of a Utopian Society, a society based on Shariah, is completely open to selective interpretation and implementation - which is why I am opposed to it. You see it in the differences between the Shia and Sunni schools of thought, you see it when a man in one society can be condemned to death for converting from Islam, while other Scholars say there is no such punishment prescribed in Islam. You see it in the differences in interpretation by the Mullah's of Iran and Saudi Arabia, and those of more moderate Islamic Scholars.

I don't think the average Muslim really goes into deep detail about what exactly the scriptures say. When you hear Muslims on the street say that Islam is compatible with democracy, that it advocates complete equality, tolerance and respect - that is what most people really believe their religion says (and I think that is justified). It is usually the "anti Islam" bunch, that drag up the "selective" Quranic verses and Hadith that talk about "killing the infidel" and "dar-ul-Harb" and a warped interpretation of Takiyya, to validate their fears and bias.

I had a similar impression about the author of that excerpt from a conversation with Jinnah - she was analyzing his statements about Islam being compatible with democracy and the events of the "golden age of Islam" (as Jinnah and his sister saw it) under too fine of a microscope.

Well said mate, excellent post!
Fully support your views.