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!

Intolerance as Evidence of Impotence?

The news headline took my breath away: "The Taliban Threaten to Kill Imran Khan." The obvious irony is that Imran Khan has been the staunchest supporter of causes enshrined by the Taliban.

A scratch below the surface revealed the twisted logic used by the turbaned bullies.  Imran Khan has labeled himself as a liberal - a big no, no.  Even worse, he supports elections and democratic processes - these acts characterize him as an "infidel." The arguments are mind-boggling and show how far they have departed from any rational thinking.  More importantly, however, they have diverged very, very far away from Islamic concepts and the basic constructs introduced in our Moral GPS.

But then again, these are symptomatic of a broader malaise of intolerance that is gradually pervading many Islamic societies.  This is patently obvious in Pakistan, the second most populous Islamic country behind Indonesia.  Streaks of this intolerance have also emerged in other countries including Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Iran, etc.

Intolerance manifests in many forms: creating social roadblocks, putting economic hurdles, damaging public and private property, and in its most extreme version, threatening the life and liberty of others.  All of these are in direct opposition with the basic and fundamental constructs of Islam.  We are reminded numerous times in the Quran that we are not responsible and answerable for others' action, and we are not expected to force anyone to follow our ideas.

The most damaging notion to today's Islamic societies is the extreme form of tolerance in which anyone deemed in opposition can be conveniently killed.  The supposed reasons for such behaviour range from insults to Islam and its iconic figures to having violated the "honour" of a family or a clan.  There is not even the slightest form of justification that can be extracted from the Quran or Islamic jurisprudence.

So, what then drives people to kill those opposing or not meshing with their own views?

I would argue that there is a certain subconscious notion of inherent societal weakness.  This is partly fed by a colonial history of almost all Islamic nations.  And it is amplified by the perception, and the reality to large extent, that Muslims are the underdogs and facing global prosecution for being violent.  Such levels of 'impotence' can lead societies - particularly segments that are ill-educated or illiterate - to create outliers that are prone to violence as a knee-jerk reaction.  This violence is then generally condoned by the society, partly in response to the bullying tactics of a violent few.  It is curious that the Islamic scholars choose to stay mum on these issues.

How do we pull out from the vicious circle?  One obvious solution is to be better-informed about Islam and what the Quran teaches.  The basic concepts of who is an ideal Muslim and the associated personal characteristics have to be better understood.  And, of course, the level of education needs to go up drastically.  The catharsis of the Islamic societies must originate from within and be driven by people who understand basic Islamic constructs.

Good Concept - Bad Implementation

Here is the question: Can a principle or concept be brilliant, but its implementation flawed?  The general answer is: Yes.

We come across many examples in our day to day life of this duality.  Many people try cookbook recipes for baking a cake.  Not everyone's cake comes out perfect.  Let's take it a step further: let's assume some people never read the recipe but look at the picture of the cake in the cookbook and try to bake it.  Of course, when the cake is completely screwed up they can't blame the cookbook.

Let's take another everyday example.  Many people show up for a written driving exam without having read the driver's handbook published by the government.  They may pretend that by observing traffic on the street they have learnt enough about the rules of the game.  Once again, they can't claim that the written exam is faulty, or worse that the handbook - which they never really read - is wrong.

I could go on with other examples, but perhaps you catch my drift.

The Islamic society today is also a very good example of people who haven't read the instruction manual but blame Islam as being backwards, or extremist or close-minded, or archaic (there is a wide choice of titles commonly peddled these days).  Worse still, many blame the Quran as also being out of date or simply irrelevant.

There is a double-whammy hidden in this.  On the one hand, these "enlightened" folks have not bothered to read the instruction manual that was provided as a timeless moral GPS unit; their understanding of what is in the Quran is second-hand or often based on popular media's depiction.  On the other hand, this blame game takes them farther and farther away from the actual solution - that is, understanding how this moral GPS works and actually putting it to use.

The simple fact is that human interactions and societal linkages do not change substantively over time - these interactions are the major subject of the Quran, which provides fairly explicit guidance on how to manage these.  The key approaches outlined therein can be better understood if we reflect on the truism that history repeats - it is as applicable today as it was five or ten centuries ago and therefore Quran's finding are no less contemporary today than they were originally.  Nations and countries prosper, gain power, abuse power, fall into degradation and whither with quite predictable patterns.  The qualities that lead nations to the rising part of this bell-curve are also common: honesty, openness, innovation, hard-work, dedication to a cause, fiscal prudence and having internal peace (for those of you who read my earlier blog "Who is an Ideal Muslim?", this may sound familiar).

The Islamic countries - 56 the last time I was counting - can also prosper if they also adopt these qualities.  The irony is that all these instructions are already there in moral GPS and its at our fingertips.  But we have blind-folded ourselves and let half-literate mullahs define and interpret the Quran for us.  Certainly a bad choice.  The current situation of depravity, impoverishness and utter chaos in the Islamic world can only turn around when our thinking about the Quran will change.  Secondary impacts, like democracy, rule of law, basic justice and economic prosperity, can only take hold when the fundamentals of society are sound.

A Tale of Two Cities

This tale has two unlikely cities: Tuscon and Islamabad.  Cities that sit in the shadows of towering mountains - Mount Lemmon and Margalla Hills.  They are unlikely to be compared under normal circumstances.  But we live in abnormal times -- religious and political extremism abounds.  Rightist forces in all societies are resurgent and carrying significant political capital.

The two cities are linked together by two horrific acts of violence against politicians.  People generally don't fall in love with politicians, and often it is easy to despise them.  People in this line of profession do a lot of wheeling and dealing - both in public limelight and in shrouded backrooms.  But it is impossible to justify violence against them in democratic environments.

The incidents I refer to were separated by barely four days: On 4 January, the Punjab Governor Salman Taseer was assassinated by a member of the elite police force - Malik Qadri.  On 8 January, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was critically injured by a gun-toting nut-case - Jared Loughner.  In the latter case, Loughner proved more deadly because he managed to also murder six other people including a 9-year old girl and a judge.

The similarities in what took place and what it means to politics in the US and Pakistan is uncanny.  In both cases, zealots carried the day by successfully carrying out acts of violence.  These acts, among other things, were meant to frighten political oponents and to "send a message."  In both cases, a consequence will be muffling of opposing political voices.  One might hope that the US polity is strong enough to rebound eventualy, although I have my doubts given some recent trends.  For Pakistan, the situation is much more dire.  The implicit encouragement for political violence -- as manifested in the shape of hordes of narrow-minded zealots openly supporting the act of Mr. Qadri -- can open the door to perpetual unrest, and in the worst case, a civil war.

In both cases, cooler heads need to prevail and the voice of reason needs to overcome extremist perspectives.  The partisan and polarizing rhetoric must be toned down.  We see some signs of that in the US, with the likes of former president Bill Clinton taking an outspoken stance on this.  How effective he will be remains to be seen.  We don't see any signs yet of such conciliatory efforts in Pakistan - rather, the voices of reason seem to have gone silent (in fear, perhaps).

The situation in Pakistan is quite ironical.  The assassination is seen by some as an act that somehow "protects" Islam.  That couldn't be farther away from the truth.  In my previous blogs (see "A Note to Islam's Apologists" and "Who is an Ideal Muslim"), I have written about how Islam's basic concepts and fundamentals revolve around peace, humility and harmony.  The Holy Quran explicitly prohibits fasad - a state of anarchy and violence.  It reprimands those who try to wrap fasad inside the foil of religion; that state is deemed worse than murder.

It is challenging to devise ways to have an open dialogue on issues that involve religion.  In many cases, the ones that need to be engaged in an open dialogue are also the ones who are emotionally attached to their religious (or sometiemes political) views - often to the extent of being blind to any logic or rational conversation. 

In the case of Islam (and the situation created in Islamabad), we must therefore revert to the logic and reasoning that is embedded within the Holy Quran.  The divine word can hopefully carry the day.

A Note to Islam's Apologists

We certainly live in interesting times.  There is a new breed of thinkers in the Muslim community who are quite ashamed of being Muslims.  Or more correctly, they believe that Islam is at the root of most of the problems we see in the Muslim world.  There must be some fundamental design flaw, they argue, in Islam itself and that's why we see all Islamic countries in decline in terms of education, research, economic development, political freedoms and societal development.  They take the argument a step further: Islam is archaic and must be "fixed" to align it better with contemporary thinking about religion (i.e., delegating it to a personal hobby).

Let's face it:  the criticism of Muslim countries and societies is quite true (please read my earlier blog: A Moral GPS in Pakistan to understand the underlying causes of these societal problems).  Many historians have analyzed the root causes of this decline observed over the last couple of centuries (I urge you to read "What Went Wrong? The clash between modernity and Islam in the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis).

But the conclusion drawn by these apologists is absolutely wrong.  We are faced with these problems not because Islam is faulty in its design, rather we have stopped implementing it as it should be.  In our societies, we have the extremes of "liberalized" apologists who do not understand the fundamental concepts on the one hand, and of "radicalized" extremists on the other hand who want to simply burn everything that doesn't match their world view.

Let's focus on the apologists and analyze some the arguments they put forward.

The first key argument they use is that Islam is not a religion of peace and engenders hatred, which leads to violence.  I offer that Islam is no more pacifist or violent than any other religion.  In the last two thousand years, hundreds of wars have been waged by followers of all religions in their defence as well as while invading other territories.  If we follow this bizarre logic of religion triggering violence, then Christianity would top the list when you consider the two World Wars.  Many of the recent and extremely violent conflicts - like the massacre and genocide in Rwanda (1994) - had no Muslims involved at all.  So, violence is not the exclusive domain of any religion.

The present state of violence and intolerence can be traced to illiteracy, poverty and political oppression.  Another scratch below the surface will lead you to the recent colonial history, which can also be found in many African countries with negligible Muslim populations but same societal problems.  In this milieu of problems, illiteracy and educational deprivation stand out quite tall and are directly related to people's inability to understand and follow Islam correctly.  These same illiterate masses are also easily incited to political violence of various kinds, often thinly wrapped in religion.

The second argument is that Islam's doctrine is outmoded and doesn't match the 21st century's demands.  This is based on the very fundamental confusion in the minds of these apologists:  they somehow mix up Islam's teachings with the interpretation of the Sharia law.  The former is a broad set of principles and beliefs for both individuals and societies in how they interact with each other (please read my earlier blog: Who is an Ideal Muslim?).  The latter is a form of law based on interpretation of those principles - and which can evolve through the consensus within Muslim societies.  The apologists look at the recent misguided attempts to enforce an "Islamic justice system" in some countries and reach the false conclusion that Islam must have an oppressive and restrictive doctrine.  In reality, however, Islam's constructs are progressive and evolutionary - unfortunately, we have significantly faltered in implementing them during the 19th and 20th centuries.

The third important argument used a lot by the apologist "intelligentsia" is that religion is an individual's private affair and should not be connected to any social or societal constraints.  This is a ridiculous argument that stems from an inability to understand the purpose and intent of religion.  Religion - and this is true for all branchings of the same Abrahamic religion - aims to create a societal model in which people interact with each other in a compassionate and fair way.  It also allows for an individual's growth on intellectual, economic and social grounds; put differently, religion does not aim to create drones that are equal in all respects. 

Such a societal construction based on compassion and justice cannot be undertaken by chopping off the most fundamental sense of being that we have achieved through religion.  Interestingly, Christianity -- even after it has drifted very far away from its original paradigm -- provided the building blocks used by the North Americans to climb to global supremacy we observe today.  Basic questions - like why humans are on this earth, what is the ultimate design for a human society and what is the purpose of life - cannot be answered purely through empirical discovery.  It is a bit silly to pretend that philosophy and logic alone can provide these answers - and that the answers will have no bearing on the society so constructed (Soviet Communism is the classic example of such a failure).  Religion is more than a hobby to be practised once a week or in times of desperation.

I ask Islam's apologists to spend some time and effort on their own to learn what Islam actually is.  One should not parrot off statistics and faulty arguments that are borrowed from elsewhere.  This is again an invitation to learn and use the Moral GPS we have been given.

Is Pakistan's Flooding a Curse or a Blessing?

Let's start with a more fundamental question:  Does God offer punishments for all bad deeds in this world?  Are nations always collectively "punished" for their waywardness?

The short answer is: No.  While many nations were distroyed completely in pre-Islamic history, there has been no complete destruction of any nation in the last millennium.  From a theological standpoint, utter destruction took place because a prophet was present in those nations - like Lot's or Noah's nations - and they had refused to yield to any amount of guidance and moral advice.  That process of ultimate national destruction stopped when Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) closed off the cycle of messengers guiding nations directly.  As there are no more prophets emerging in societies, ultimate destruction has also been forgone.

However, we still do see all kinds of natural disasters and calamities hit countries and nations.  One can argue that these are an indication of the wrath of God - I would beg to differ.  Similar arguments were made about the earthquakes that hit San Francisco (1989) and Los Angeles (1994) as the God's wrath against the gay community and the film/porn industry, respectively.  I find these arguments weak because neither of those social aberrations have gone away as a result of those two earthquakes.  In other words, we cannot assume that God's wrath is so imperfect that not only it does not remove a perceived or real social problem but actually amplifies it.

An alternate explanation is that natural calamities can be seen as a wake-up call, and hence an opportunity.

Let me make the case for Pakistan's floods.  I see four very distinct opportunities.

First, it brings the societal evils and problems into a sharp focus (please refer to my earlier blog on a break-down of these: A Moral GPS in Pakistan?).  That, by itself, offers a way to re-think how we behave as a society.  At a minimum this dialogue opens the door for a discussion on ways to fix some of the societal problems.

Second, the flooding has helped create new social welfare structures and an opportunity to offer social service to the millions who have been displaced.  These new structures are outside the usual governmental circles, and often, a bit chaotic.  But such institutional arrangements, Imran Khan's flood relief fund being an example, can indeed serve some long-term functions in the society.  These also bring about a sense of social cohesion which is otherwise missing.

Third, there is an opportunity to reform our feudal land distribution model.  With major displacements in the agrarian population, the situation is ripe to re-think the whole structure through a land-reform process.

Fourth, the natural ecosystems would likely undergo a significant replenishment in the aftermath of the flooding.  This includes provision of valuable minerals and silt particles, which are critical for land fertility.  Similarly, a lot of aquifers in the flooded regions will be replenished.

Will any of these opportunities be actually availed in Pakistan.  My own guess is that the first two will be capitalized on significantly.  There is little chance that the third one will even be considered.  And the fourth one does not require any human intervention.

So while the destruction of lives and property in this national tragedy cannot be minimized, we have to see the silver lining of these gray clouds.  And we should be looking for best utilization of the opportunities we have been offered.

Some Misconceptions about the Holy Quran

One side effect of being distant from the Holy Quran is that Muslim societies, in general, have developed quite a few misconceptions about what the Holy Quran is, what is the purpose and how to use it.  Let me attempt to clarify some common ones.

The Holy Quran is a collection of speeches, or sermons, delivered to Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) at various times, often in response to a particular situation or to address a certain issue.  This constuction is unlike ordinary books.  This is done in a way that the overall message remains quite universal and the guidance provided is not time-bound.  In other words, the messaging is still contemporary and "fresh" - and by all appearances, it will stay that way in the future as well.

It is very clear that Arabic was chosen as a language deliberately because it is a vast language and is comprehensive enough to convey complex subjects in a very compact way.  Many words and expressions in Arabic contain multiple meanings, leading to a very rich linguistic description that spans a broad range of interpretation according to any circumstances - cultural, geographical or societal.

The Holy Quran is essentially a book of moral and ethical guidance to peoples and societies.  It is not a book of sciences, whether it be physics, chemistry, biology, geography, or geology.  Although it uses examples of scientific discovery (e.g., iron ore extraction, planetary movement, etc) and brilliant insights (e.g., embryonic development) the purpose is not to serve as a scientific handbook from which scientific discoveries can be derived.  Many Muslims accept the fallacy that Quran contains knowledge on every aspect of human knowledge; this comes from not understanding why the Holy Quran was delivered to us, i.e., as a Moral GPS.

The Holy Quran is not a book of history.  Again, it points to many historical events to make certain points about societal problems and their consequences.  It also corrects the historical inaccuracies that have crept into other "edited" divine scriptures.  Most notably, many descriptions relating to previous prophets in the Bible and Talmud have been corrupted to show that those people had many moral weaknesses and flaws; that is done partly to justify moral depravities found in those societies.  So, the Holy Quran sets the record straight - but again the purpose is not to become a history book.

The most significant misconception amongst a vast majority of Muslims is that because they have heard bits and pieces of the Holy Quran in TV shows, Friday sermons and school, they really know the Quranic message.  These commonly-used verses comprise perhaps 5% of the whole book.  It is like claiming that a person can become a doctor by reading a selection of few paragraphs from a medicine text book.  I can speak from my own experience that my misconception was only corrected after I read the whole book.  The message in the book is holistic and comprehensive, and can be really understood by reading all of it. 

An even more dangerous trend is pick out one or two verses and interpret them out of context.  The worst examples of this can be observed by the usage of a few select verses by extremist groups to serve their own nefarious purposes.  Not only is the Holy Quran contextual, but it is holistic as well - you need to get the big picture in order for it to really serve as the Moral GPS.

Finally, many Muslims shy away from reading the Quran on the pretext that either it is too complex or that reading it will somehow put undue constraints on their lifestyle.  The former pretext is entirely incorrect.  The Holy Quran has been translated into every known language, so are books of "tafseer" which provide historical and circumstantial context.  One can easily pick up any of these translations, for non-Arabic speakers, and follow the book on their own.  For Urdu speakers, I would recommend going to Quranurdu.com for many text and audio resources.  The latter pretext is also wrong but the concept is correct - the purpose of reading and understanding the Holy Quran is precisely to change your life from inside out.

So, please take this as an invitation to discover the Holy Quran on your own.  Every time you read it, you will get new insights into its guidance and message.  That is the beauty of the book that gives you arguments and guidance that can fit both deep spiritual aspects as well as common day-to-day issues.

Who is an ideal Muslim?

In today's hyper-connected world, it is as easy to disinform as it is to disseminate facts.  Interestingly, the popular media projects a lot of incorrect stereotypes about what Muslims are like and why everyone should be afraid of them.  Unfortunately, many of us who are Muslims accept these arguments at their face value.

We have to scratch below the surface and try to understand the kind of person an ideal Muslim is meant to be.  In the segments below, I try to summarize the most common and prevalent characteristics of a Muslim as defined in the Holy Quran.  These are listed here in no particular order:

Honesty:  Honesty is a very basic pillar of a society and no society can thrive without it.  In a legal sense, honesty relates to utilization of factual information in an upright manner.   In a societal sense, honesty relates to all aspects of human interactions – ranging from business dealings to the very personal ones.

Humility:  A primary personal trait is humility, which is an explicit antithesis of arrogance.  This stems from the fact that each person is subject to a higher moral authority of God – a most common way of demonstrating humility to God is through prayer.  The absence of arrogance – a trait very hard to find in the Muslim world today – in turn defines social interactions in societies and is the basis for kinder interactions amongst members of a society.

Peacefulness:  It is very clear that the Holy Quran’s instructions to people are to stay away from creating chaos and unrest in societies, or between societies.  Individuals are expected to stay away from even minor discord, but certainly away from unjust bloodshed.  It is unfortunate that most Muslim societies today have forgotten this very basic tenet and people are very trigger-happy to jump into "action" at the slightest provocation -- the result is that many Muslim societies are characterized as violent.

Belief in Divinity:  Individuals have to believe that there is a need for divine guidance and in fact that guidance is available to us in the form of divine scriptures.  This belief leads to a number of related aspects: belief in the oneness of God; belief in that God has established a mechanism for delivery of his message through human beings of extraordinary character; and belief that justice and accountability require a post-life assessment combined with rewarding/punishment arrangements.

Faithfulness:  This is a pretty broad concept, so we can slice it down to better understand it.  In a limited sense, faithfulness applies to all human relationships – between husband and wife, between family members, between colleagues, and between leaders and followers.  In a different sense, it can also be described as faithfulness to ones beliefs.  This means that what our belief should drive our personal agenda in life.

Fiscal Prudence:  It is expected that an ideal person would have a balance between philanthropy and cautiousness.  The Holy Quran establishes mechanism for obligatory and optional charity, including describing ways in which it is meant to help with societal cohesion.  Equally, there is a strong caution against excessive spending and reckless showmanship.

Let me close off with three thoughts to ponder upon:

First, a person who has the combination of the above characteristics will be a formidable personality and character.  She or he would be able to command leadership in all aspects of societal development and growth. 

Second, the list above -- abstracted from the Holy Quran -- does not include mention of how long the beard is, or how high are pant sleeves above ankles, or what kind of rituals to perform in our day to day lives.  It should be a good indication that we are buried neck-deep in rituals that have little or nothing to do with our character as Muslims.

Third, we need to look in the mirror and assess where we are lacking.  There is no doubt that we as a society fall very short of these ideals.  Fixing these character flaws can start with the "man (or woman) in the mirror" -- fortunately, we have the moral GPS available to guide us in this endeavour.

Do Societies Need Moral Guidance?

Other related question that one might ask:  Can all people not identify basic moral values on their own?  Through trial and error, or perhaps through some chain of logic?

These questions are ostensibly innocent.  But they also open the door to tremendous and most fundamental elements of our belief system.  To answer those questions, we need to first understand why do humans exist and whether their presence is driven by a simple evolutionary process.

Without getting bogged down into a discussion on the nature of biological evolution, it is important to point out that many philosophers and thinkers have agreed about the unique nature of humans as thinking and moral beings - even atheists and agnostics agree with this point of view.  We as Muslims (as well as Christians, Jews, Hindus and Budhists of various stripes) have additional notions of responsibilities bestowed on us as sentient beings, and a sense of accountability that stretches beyond our own mortal life. 

A number of secondary points emerge if we agree that we --as individuals and as societies -- have certain responsibilities given to us and that we will be evaluated on how we manage them.  I realize that many with the atheistic persuasion will not be convinced with this argument, and that is not my intention anyway.

In a fair, just and balanced universe we cannot be held accountable without receiving adequate resources to act on our responsibilities - particularly considering that many of our societal responsibilities are purely moral in nature.  If we are responsible beings then we must also by provided with a user's manual so that we can determine the correct modus operandi.

And that brings us back to the topic of this blog.  There is no evidence that people can arrive at a code of morality entirely on their own and by following some logical steps.  My argument rests on two pillars. 

First, history has a number of examples in which "logical" thinking has led to bizarre and horrific experiments with society.  The communist philosophy created by the likes of Karl Marx and perfected by Vladimir Lenin is the most prominent one in recent history.  The misery of many millions and a near-complete collapse of the philosophy within a century is a clear example of disastrous human-led creation of societal moraliy.

Second, all societies that appear to be successful today have the basis of their morality embedded in divine inputs.  To use Samuel Huntigton's approach the following civilizations can all track their roots to divine scripts: Orthodox, Christian (Western), Hindu, Muslim, Sinic (Chinese), Japanese, and African.  Those divine scripts may have faded in history or become grossly distorted over time, but their origin remains clear.  Put differently, the moral underpinnings of currently "successful" western civilization can also track its roots to Catholic and Anglican churches.  Again, I will avoid getting bogged into a (separate) debate on the current state of that morality.

In my view, we not only need guidance that is divine in nature but we will surely fail without it. (You can track back to my blog on 12 September 2010 to catch a fuller description of these failures).  We are also blessed in that the Holy Quran provides an un-altered and precise moral GPS to all of us.

Quran as the Moral GPS

The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a space-based global navigation satellite system that provides reliable location and time information in all weather and at all times and anywhere on the Earth.


A 'Moral GPS' is the one that provides a sense of being - not just in a spatial sense but also how we relate to the society around us - and a sense of temporal awareness in all conditions and times.  Such directional guidance is essential for humans and does not get defined through pure trial and error.  The Holy Quran is a user's manual that provides such guidance.

Let us review why the Holy Quran can be justified as a moral GPS for us.  Please consider the following characteristics:

Societal Contextualization:  The guidance provided by the Quran is contextualized by indicating its signficance to the wellbeing of a society.  The 'normal' moral values, as considered in most societies, are explained in terms of the benefits they bring, or in the converse, the societal problems that would be created in their absence.  For example, unfair business practices like over-pricing and fraudulent sales can amplify in a society and create a disproportionate distribution of wealth.  There are many examples of social revolutions, for example the French revolution, that had their roots in unfair wealth distribution.  While creation of wealth in itself is endorsed strongly in the Holy Quran -- a concept that does not fall too far from the capitalistic approach -- it defines the standards that must be applied.

Framework for Justice:  The Holy Quran informs us about the generally accepted standards of justice in legal and societal terms.  At the same time, it points out that these frameworks can expose us to justice only in a limited way.  Many of our actions go unnoticed and do not garner rewards or punishment within the society, as the case may be.  More importantly, the consequences of our actions have knock-on impacts that extend considerably beyond our lifetimes.  It, therefore, argues that true justice and fairness require a long-term review process, which is introduced in the Holy Quran.

Governance Constructs:  A number of directional guidelines are provided to define the societal needs for governance and basic principles for their implementation.  The Holy Quran reinforces the basics of democracy and focuses on using consensus to prevent societal discord.  Interestingly, a number of social welfare concepts, commonly relied upon in developed countries, are presented.

Openness and Transparency:  The Holy Quran stresses on openness and transparency in socieities.  It defines the standards for sharing of information as well as constraints in communication; for example, strongly-worded instructions to stay away from slander.  At the same time, the Holy Quran also exposes itself to transparency and openly invites its readers to think about and question the concepts it has introduced.  This notion is somewhat contrary to the popularly held belief that raising questions in an effort to understand the message of the Holy Quran is somehow sacrilegous -- our instructions are to ponder upon the guidance being provided as well as the reinforcing indications we see from the universe around us.

Reinforcement of Existing Moral Standards:  The Holy Quran endorses the standards found in many societies and often conveyed through holy scriptures.  Despite the editorial changes introduced in many scriptures, the moral aspects are typically retained intact.  That is particularly true for ancient scriptures, like the one preserved in Hinduism.  More 'recent' scriptures, like the ones included in the New Testament, contain essentially the same concepts -- albeit the contextualization and implementation instrucations are off-course as per the Holy Quran.  The Holy Quran clearly claims that it has been published to reinforce those concepts and to rectify the implementation details.

Lastly, it is important to remember that the Holy Quran is the only divine scripture that has survived the ages without any deviation in its text.  Historians and clergy would readily admit that the other scriptures - the Tora, the Old Testament, the New Testament, Geeta -- have benefited from 'editorial improvements' over the ages.  This puts the Holy Quran in a superlative position, particularly because we are invited to understand its message, ab initio if needed.

A Moral GPS in Pakistan?

The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a space-based global navigation satellite system that provides reliable location and time information in all weather and at all times and anywhere on the Earth.

A "Moral GPS" is one that provides a sense of being - not just in a spatial sense but also how we relate to the society around us - and a sense of temporal awareness in all conditions and times.  Such directional guidance is essential for humans and does not get defined by pure trial and error.

This blog focuses on moral guidance provided in all religious - particularly that in the Holy Quran.  Why the Quran?  Because it is the only text that remains unedited and unmodified.  In broad strokes, it reinforces and consolidates the messages in the old testament and the new testament.

Why do we need a moral GPS in Pakistan?  Let us start by an analysis of the moral decrepitude observed in Pakistan.  Interestingly, what is considered "normal" has shifted enormously within our lifetimes.  No one blinks an eye on corruption, which pervades each and every aspect of the day-to-day life and extends into the top-most echelons of policy, planning and politics (even sports are not immune).

There is a great deal of restlessness due to the lack of simple human security -- terrorism, armed robberies, public murders, targeted killings, mass rapes, etc. -- do not seem to trigger any strong reaction beyond lip-service and living room conversations.

Interestingly, the middle-class has disappeared -- what is left now is the super-rich and the poor.  Lack of economic development and continuous interruptions in various democratic processes by interlopers like Zia and Musharraf have run the country into the ground.  These interventions also create enough of a negative societal inertia that drags any democratic government into the pits as well, which is what we are witnessing right now.

This whole situation fits very well with the description provided in the Holy Quran.  Both in direct reference to muslims and in indirect pointers towards other historical events, it is apparent moral depravation in nations leads to their humiliation at the hands of stronger powers, coupled with strife, anxiety and poverty.

Many point to the numerous mudrassahs, countless mosques and eloquent moulvis in Pakistan.  Since these ostensibly Islamic institutions are so widespread, it leads to the fallacy that there must be something fundamentally wrong with Islam.  The simple explanation is that these mudrassahs are not teaching Quran (other than parroting the Arabic text) and focus on books of Sharia belonging a particular brands of Islam; I personally dislike all brands.  Even if you ignore the fact that the kids going to these places are the ones who fail otherwise in the society (and may be intellectually-challenged), they are being fed a narrow interpretation of Islam.  So, there is no benefit to the wider society.

The educated and well-off part of the Pakistani society is no better.  The ethics and moral norms fit very well with the societal patterns described earlier.  You can hardly find anyone who has actually tried to understand the translated version of the Holy Quran.

So, we shouldn't be surprised if the core of the society -- normally built on basic moral and ethical standards -- is rotten.  Unless we can fix that, there will not ever be a positive outcome of development schemes, liberalization of media, creation of civil society groups and influx of foreign aid.  These are all band-aids stuck on a festering cancer.

There appears to be a general consensus that a fundamental change is needed in the Pakistani society.  This is coupled with the understanding that we are nearly at bottom and can only go up.

A lot of views pervade on how to fix this problem.  Here is mine:  we need to understand the message of the Quran in a very direct way and apply it to improve ourselves as human beings.  Getting there would require some basics:  reasonable levels of literacy, loosening of the vice-like grip of the theocracy, open debate on issues, and highlighting "bright spots" in our society.  These changes will not happen in a day or a year, or perhaps even a decade.

Fortunately, we do have a moral GPS in our hands.