Clones in Utopia: Misunderstanding the Notion of Diversity in Islam

Is the Islamic society meant to be Utopia in which everyone appears to be cloned from the same mold?

Islam is a religion that wholeheartedly embraces diversity and promotes it both actively and passively.  The notion of diversity in Islam has many dimensions: social, societal, racial, and religious.

Let us start with social diversity.  A wide range of social norms are included within the Quranic teachings: only the broad outlines of what is socially acceptable are defined.  The Holy Quran does not prescribe the specific details of how these concepts are to be practiced in our day to day lives.  For example, the notions of politeness in mutual interactions and fair dealings in trade and commerce are introduced in Quran.  However, it does not go as far as codifying how these are to be implemented, leaving the door open to interpretation and situational flexibility.  For example, throughout the Islamic history different practices at social and governmental level have been adopted for fair trade - in accordance with local customs and social conditions in very diverse geographies.

Let us move on to societal diversity.  While promoting egalitarian implementation of the rule of law, the notion of societal diversity finds a prominent place in the Islamic constructs.  The Holy Quran clearly states that there is societal stratification but that it should not be the basis of giving preferential treatment.  In fact, pureness of heart and character - not measurable by any mortal being - is determined to be the only true measure of a persons worth.  Islam goes a step further and institutionalizes mechanisms that would equitably sustain societal diversity.  The most notable amongst these is "Zakaat" (literal translation: that which purifies), which is commonly seen as a means of re-destributing wealth by taxing excess wealth at 2.5% per year; however, it is not meant to create a flat society with no layers.  In fact, the institution of zakaat can only function if there are layers in society - comprising donors and recipients, at a minimum.

Islam was one of the first religions to institutionalize racial diversity, which has been the hallmark of invariably all societies/nations within the Islamic civilization.  Islamic societies have always been racially diverse and race has never been institutionalized as a stumbling block to one's progress.  I would argue that this notion of racial egalitarianism was the reason for a relatively rapid geographical expansion of Islamic societies.  The civilization that started with an Arabic (or Semitic) origin rapidly expanded to include Turkic, Central Asian, African, Coptic, Malay, Caucasian, and South Asian races.  While we do not have readily available demographic data and census to demonstrate this racial diversity, there is sufficient anecdotal evidence that demonstrates that individuals and social groups with diverse racial backgrounds rose to prominence within Islamic societies.

In a historical context, Islam always incorporated religious diversity - both exogenous and endogenous.  Just as with racial diversity, religious diversity always flourished in Islamic societies.  For example, Bernard Lewis documents how Jewish people had prominent roles in managing financial affairs of the Ottoman empire.  After the capture of Jerusalem in 1187, Salahuddin (aka Saladin) was the first to allow Jewish population to move back to and even own property in Jerusalem.  The Islamic history is replete with examples of such exogenous religious diversity - Mugal Emperor Akbar (1542-1605) in India took it to an extreme by inventing a hybrid religion that incorporated Islam and Hinduism (although that didn't survive for long).  One can quite reasonably argue that Islam has also embodied endogenous diversity in terms of sects (shia's, sunnis and their offshoots) and schools of thought (diversity of opinions engendered by Imams).  Until the last few decades, this diversity was seen as a sign of strength and seldom triggered conflict.

It is then quite unfortunate that with the decline of the Islamic civilization, which was in much evidence through most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, these notions of diversity have gradually fallen by the wayside and almost completely faded.  As Islamic nations, and later countries, spiralled into social, cultural, economic and political decline, the notion of diversity kept getting buried deeper and deeper.

We see today's Islamic civilization - spread across countries, nations, sects, races - as an intolerant one, and increasingly insular.  Muslims have become xenophobic and averse to tolerating any opposing views.

But the story gets worse, unfortunately.

There are those in many Muslim societies who believe that Islam is a narrow, distinctly branded and self-enclosed religion.  This thinking goes further that such narrow interpretations of Islam must be shoved down everyone's throats by force.  The Afghan Taliban during their rule (1997-2001) demonstrated ample evidence of this narrow-mindedness.  For example, all males were forced to grow beards and wear similar "Islamic" attire.  Women were banned from all public places, which meant that it was impossible for them to hold any jobs or to even leave their homes.  Any "outsiders" were shunned and viewed with deep suspicion.

The problem with this approach is that it views Islam as a monolithic religion - and the question arises which brand of Islam is "correct?"  Once the notion of diversity is caste aside, all Muslims are then to be forced into becoming mindless clones.  And, a society of these clones must then be the Utopian model of heaven on earth, right?

We should revert back to the roots and read carefully the Holy Quran - the Moral GPS that provides general guidance and allows for a million flowers to bloom; all of different shapes and colours.

Previous Blogs:

• The Growth of Martyr-Making Industry
• Intolerance as Evidence of Impotence?
• Good Concept - Bad Implementation
• A Tale of Two Cities
• A Note to Islam's Apologists
• Is Pakistan's Flooding a Curse or a Blessing?
• Some Misconceptions about the Holy Quran
• Who is an ideal Muslim?
• Do Societies Need Moral Guidance?
• Quran as the Moral GPS
• A Moral GPS in Pakistan?

The Growth of Martyr-Making Industry

Yes, it is true.  "Martyr-making" has become an industry in Pakistan.  It has many "producers" and it has many "clients."

Before I describe either the producers or the clients, and their motivations, its useful to explore the notion of 'Martyrdom,' or "shahadat" in Islam.

The Holy Quran extols the virtues of those who lay down their lives in the cause of defending Islam, or fighting oppression under the aegis of an Islamic state.  It is indeed the highest calling that one sacrifices his or her own life for the greater wellbeing of others -- a notion well-understood in all nations and religions throughout history.  The Holy Quran also lays out highest rewards for those who have attained this level of sacrifice: they are to be recognized by Allah alongside prophets and the most pious, and they get an after-life existence that we are not meant to fully understand (that is, the specifics are somewhat irrelevant).  It is imaginable that those achieving this status would be ideal Muslims in their lives leading up to martyrdom.

To state the obvious, the status of martyrdom is related to the person's intention and the circumstances in which they lay down their life.  No human being is capable of understanding a third-person's true intentions (although they might be able to analyze the circumstances).  Therefore, no human being has the right to declare a person martyr, or otherwise.  This is a role solely reserved for Allah Himself.

However, this simple notion has become obscure over time.  Many have sought to assign other details which may be mutually contradictory or sometimes border on the absurd.  Often you hear about x number of "hoors" (proverbial virgins) who are waiting for these martyrs in heaven.  The "x", of course, is a variable factor depending on which mullah you listen to; some of these mullahs have willfully obfuscated the notion of martyrdom by bringing in details that were intentionally left out of the Holy Quran.

And that brings us to the producers of the martyr-making industry.

These producers are of three types: self-proclaimed mullahs, leaders of political parties with a religious bent, and more rarely, government functionaries and leaders.  Each of these producers would proclaim that someone has achieved the formal status of a martyr - and thus should be elevated above mere mortals.  For all three groups, the motivations are very often political and linked to achieving their own vested interests, including the establishment of their own bonafides as a "leader."  These vested interests are driven also by a need to feed the various clients.

The clients of martyrdom - those who receive the proclamations from the three types of producers and then spin them off to justify their own actions - are also of three types: the military, the militant wings of political parties and outright terrorists.  It is understandable that the military would use the notion of martyrdom as a motivation for claiming the higher moral ground in a conflict and war.  It is equally understandable the militants and terrorists use this as a brainwashing tool to enlist recruits for their own nefarious purposes.

A recent example of this latter usage by militant clients was stunning:  A teenage boy, a would-be suicide bomber, was apprehended by authorities in Pakistan.  He was wearing a metal plate around his privates, so that his physical ability would be intact after he became a martyr.  This would be laughable, if not involving such a deadly serious business.  But it exemplifies the collusion between the clients (militants) and producers (mullahs).

Other recent examples of using the martyr-making industry are equally ridiculous.  A famous mullah-politician proclaimed that even a dog killed in a drone attack would be a martyr.  This has triggered many jokes about dogs heading to Pakistan's tribal areas where drone attacks often occur, as well as about dogs making queries about the number of virgins they will get in heaven.  Another mullah-politician proclaimed that a terrorist responsible of killing dozens, if not hundreds, of innocent people is now a martyr because he died in a drone-based missile attack.  Again, it would be laughable if it were not linked the lives and families of about 40,000 Pakistanis who died in random suicide attacks over the past decade.

It is not likely that this martyr-making industry is going to stop any time soon, unfortunately.  As long as the producers and clients have their personal and vested interested served, the industry will continue unabated.

For an average person, the solution is simple: get educated on the issue.  Everyone has access to the ultimate Moral GPS: the Holy Quran.  Read it for yourself and make up your mind about where you stand!