Friday, July 27, 2007

A Rocker, A Blogger, a Comic Book Maker; Muslims One and All

I can't help saying it this way, so please forgive the pretentiousness:

What are Muslims like? some folks wonder. Well, remember that nursery rhyme that listed some common folk, as "a butcher, a baker, a candlestick maker"? Well, the "cover" story on WireTap. "a national online magazine by and for young people", in the current edition, profiles three of a different kind of Muslim--a Punk Rocker, a Blogger, a Comic Book Maker:
http://www.wiretapmag.org/race/43176/
The only thing I'd have changed might be:
"In fact, Ashraf's politics differed greatly from his father's, but, he explains..."
to say
"Ashraf's politics has moved to the Left over the years, away from his father's, but, he explains, ..."
Otherwise, Tanzila "Taz" Ahmed and the editors seem to have done a pretty good job. Besides the personal recognition, for which I am grateful and humbled by (despite the tone above ;)), giving air time to Muslims who are going about being who they are in an alternative, confident unapologetic, way is cool. Who'd think that in this day and age, when a magazine sets out to find Muslims who are just like anybody else in society--and isn't that what everybody that wants to humanize Muslims does?--they'd end up profiling a punk rock band called "The Kominas".

Let me respell that for South Asian audiences, the word is one you will be very familiar with; only, you'd most probably just say "Kaminay"--yes, the word we use when we want to say either "scoundrel" or, more literally, "bastards". They have quite a following in punk circle and claim, along with the book that is their inspiration, "The Taqwacores", to be only the first budding in a Muslim Punk spring...

And a couple of things before I stop:

And I have to say, I loved the description of Wire Tap Magazine: "a national online magazine by and for young people". It resonated. I started my writing career as the editor of The Teenager, Pakistan at the age of 17 and at that point, it was one of very, very few outlets for Pakistani Youth (and about the only one in English).

And a shout-out to Eteraz, who pointed Ms. Ahmed to the MPV and me when she reached to him looking for a Progressive Muslim blogger to profile.

Technorati tags applicable to this post: - - - - -

Monday, July 23, 2007

Can a Muslim treat a Non-Muslim like Brother?

I first came across the sentiment I want to talk about in a video of a lecture by Zaid Shakir or someone, in which a young person asks him, after his lecture, if he heard him right when he said that it is our duty, as Muslims, to be kind and just (I forget the exact words) in our dealings with people. The young man's question was whether it was a duty to deal well with Muslims or all of humanity.

And now there's a quite a discussion going on at the Muslim Bloggers Alliance blog (and a cross-post at the author's own blog) about a very similar issue.

The question, in this instance, is whether a hadith (a report of something The Prophet said or did) that says "No one truly believes until he wants for his brother what he wants for himself." applies only to fellow Muslims or to any human being.

While that hadith in itself, since it refers to a "brother", and is easily interpreted to mean a brother in faith, the question is important.

It is very exasperating for people like me to hear things like "we Muslims have far too long advocated an exclusivist philosophy".

Funny thing is, most young American Muslims often dismiss the way Islam was traditionally interpreted and practised (Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali, and the two Shi'a schools) as either "medieval" or "bid'a-ridden". I am not a scholar so I can't speak of whole schools, but I am a person brought up by traditional Hanafi parents (South Asians--who make up a good 30-50% of the Ummah) and who had my early education in government schools in (then traditionally Maliki) Northern Nigeria. And I have always understood "brother" in the hadith in question to mean "the next man". Man. Not Muslim.

And the curriculum in Northern Nigeria, my parents' upbringing--all of that was not put in place because "political considerations have come into play". It was what a *lot* of very traditional Muslims held to be their faith.

I know WHY he did it, but it is very vexing that my brother Naeem has to say things like "...this otherwise excellent posting..." and "Before somebody accuses me of reinterpreting this hadith for my own purposes, they should know that this is the understanding of the scholars from centuries back."

I say that in a lot of these matters, we only need look back half a century to what the conventional wisdom was in the Muslim world. And I am not defending the misogyny, illiteracy, and corruption that a lot of Muslim cultures were ridden with. I am an activist who grew up in Northern Nigeria and Pakistan and have worked in the field of human rights on the ground in Pakistan. I follow affairs in India very closely and have friends and relatives there.

But American and Western Muslim friends have often asked me in the last few years, as I got involved in organizations and efforts that carried the "progressive Muslim" label, "..but, but Islam is progressive in its nature; why do you need to say 'progressive Muslim'?" This kind of issue is exactly why.

I have often had to say to people: Islam told us to be nice to our neighbours. Not to our *Muslim neighbours*. The Prophet and Awliya and Ulema down the centuries have set an example of good conduct and actively looking out for the welfare of even their Jewish neighbours. A story is told of one aalim, of how he had a neighbour, who just happened to be Jewish, who would intentionally disturb him, especially during worship. Then, for a few days, the disturbance stopped. The aalim took it upon himself to find out and discovered that the man was ill or something--I forget the exact details--and took it upon himself to help. THAT was the Islam I was brought up in. And I am thirty-six. My upbringing was not changed because of events in 2001 or since. Today, do most of us even know the names of our non-Muslim next door neighbours?

Islam is by definition progressive and humanistic; but how we often understand it, especially how we have come to understand it in the last 2 or 3 decades, and how Muslims have come to practise it, is not at all humanistic, humane or compassionate. Looking out for your own tribe is not compassion. It is not Ihsan. It is parochialism. Being just only to members of your own tribe is not adl. It is discrimination.

Wa Allah Aalam, but in my very "naqis" opinion, one thing should be pretty obvious to anyone who reads the Qur'an--and most of the folks on that site seem much more formally educated in what we called "Islamic Religious Knowledge" in in the Nigerian educational system. Where the Qur'an wants to refer or address Muslims, it says "Ya Ayyuhal Momineen", or "Ya Ayyuhal Muslimeen". But in other places, it refers very clearly to "Rabbin Nas, Malikin Nas". Do go back and read the verses on compassion. For example:
Surah 60, Verse 8: 8. Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.
Tell me He is not telling you that he will love you for being kind to non-Muslims--who are not belligerent towards you.

In my late 30s, and having lived under more than half a dozen military dictators, all forms of corruption in the Third World, and at the receiving end of the American Media, there is little that surprises me. But I have to admit that it amazes me no end that whether a Muslim should be kind and humane towards non-Muslims is even a question.

Wa Allahu Aalam, indeed!

Technorati tags applicable to this post: - -

Saturday, July 21, 2007

Harry Potter in K-Town!

Here's where the two biggest stories of the day merge; the Harry Potter launch festivities in Karachi, Pakistan get cancelled due to a terror alert:

http://karachi.metblogs.com/archives/2007/07/harry_potter_la.phtml
http://karachi.metblogs.com/archives/2007/07/security_1.phtml

Technorati tags applicable to this post: -

Pakistan's Legal Fight: The Players

Two things. First, take a look at the lawyer in the upper right hand corner of this graphic (from Dawn, the "senior" of Pakistan's two major English dailies):


This is the man who actually led the legal battle to reinstate Pakistan's Chief Justice. I don't know, just something about his gesture of thanking The Almighty says so much. And that he's quite a dapper-looking gent doesn't hurt either.

Second point: who's this Chief Justice of Pakistan? Here's the AFP report, via Dawn:
Even detractors beginning to admire Iftikhar Chaudhry

ISLAMABAD, July 20: With his rambling, legalistic speeches and his lazy eye, Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has become an unlikely hero for opponents of President Gen Pervez Musharraf.

The 59-year-old judge, in his signature black suit, has been showered with rose petals by tens of thousands of cheering supporters on a series of road shows since President Musharraf suspended him for alleged misconduct in March.

On Friday, the Supreme Court reinstated him and overturned the charges against him, sparking jubilant celebrations outside the court.“This man has shown a lot of courage,” said political commentator Shafqat Mahmood.

“If he had any personal mistakes in the past they have been superseded by his exemplary fight back against Musharraf.”

Justice Chaudhry’s journey began on March 9, when television footage showed him being summoned to meet Gen Musharraf, in army uniform, at his residence to answer the charges against him.

It was an unprecedented moment in the country’s 60-year history and sparked outrage among the lawyers’ community.

The charge-sheet against the Chief Justice included claims that he abused his position to land a top police job for his son and get cars he was not entitled to. He was also accused of ordering intelligence agents to spy on other judges.

The judge later said he was detained for five hours and pressured to resign by top intelligence chiefs, but refused to do so. He was kept under virtual house arrest for several days.

Ironically, Mr Chaudhry was one of the judges who validated Musharraf's takeover and dismissal of the civilian government of former premier Nawaz Sharif after a bloodless coup in 1999.

President Musharraf appointed him as chief justice in 2005 and personally swore him in -- providing the only other picture of the two men together, with Mr Chaudhry in ornate ceremonial robes and judge's wig.

But his backers say Mr Chaudhry started to anger the government by breaking with precedent and taking notice on his own jurisdiction of some 6,000 cases, particularly on human rights.

One landmark decision was the overturning of a lucrative sale of the Pakistan Steel Mills to a private consortium last year, which embarrassed its brainchild, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, and sparked allegations of corruption.

Another significant development was the way the Supreme Court used its powers to delve into the forced “disappearances” of hundreds of people, taken away by the all-powerful intelligence agencies as part of the “war on terror”.

Many of the missing people were linked to a three-year insurgency by autonomy-seeking tribal militants in Balochistan, Mr Chaudhry's home province.

The Chief Justice's crusading stance raised fears that he would cause trouble for President Musharraf ahead of presidential and parliamentary elections that are due in the coming months.

President Musharraf hopes to get himself re-elected as president-in-uniform by the outgoing parliament this year, defying the Constitution which says he should quit as head of the military by the end of 2007.

Long-term friend Hadi Shakil Ahmed said Mr Chaudhry had shown the same independent streak when they were both lawyers in Balochistan, where Mr Chaudhry joined the profession in 1974.

“He is a crusader against corruption and a staunch supporter of people's rights,” Ahmed said. “He is a workaholic and totally self-made.” Even some in the government have been won over by his stand.—AFP
Technorati tags applicable to this post: - -

Friday, July 20, 2007

Pakistan Twenty Oh Seven, Twenty Oh Seven

I could start today, given the events in Pakistan, with what Iqbal, one of the greatest thinkers and poets South Asia has produced, said:
Sulthani-e-Jamhoor ka atha hai zamaana
Joe naqsh-e-kuhan thum koe nazar aayay mitaa dho
[Comes, now, the era of the People's Reign
What signs of oppression you see; erase them]
But being the Pakistani elitist liberal that I am, caution and paranoia are my first reactions. What I am reminded of is a poetic piece by a friend of mine, which includes the lines:
Dhar-Dhar shehnaa'ee baajay gee
Jamhoor paree yaan naachay gee
Yehi bhanshanr ab sarkaree hain...
[Everywhere the flutes of joy will ring
Fair Fairie Democracy will dance, here, with joy
These speeches now are the official line...]
and goes on to say
Hum bheek kay ghandhum kh-aathay hain
Hum apnee sohni dharti maain
Apnon kee laashain ugaathay hain
Haan sharm-e-hayaa say aaree hain
Hum pandhraa crore bhikaari hain...
[We live off grain we got as beggars
In this fair beloved land of ours
We reap the corpses of our own
Yes, we are devoid of shame
We are a a hundred and fifty million beggars]
The same friend, having come up politically in a religio-political party in his student days, now says that each of these things (Lal Masjid, the CJ, May 12th...) are distractions from the neo-liberal selling out of the country under an international banker's supervision. Of course, he didn't use the phrase "neo-liberal selling out", but was talking about things like Mr "Shortcut" Aziz's government's total neglect of the sector that is the backbone of the country's economy: agriculture. We Pakistanis used to pride ourselves in the 70s and 80s that no one was dying of hunger in our country--we had our first few farmer suicides (a phenomenon that's been going on in India for while) in the last year or so.

So now the people have a victory. And the rule of law is big in the words of leaders.

Never mind that when the coup originally happened the whole current crop of folks chanting "Rule of Law!" "Rule of Law!!", from New York Times best seller Mohsin Hamid to every Silicon Valley Yuppie were either being supportive or equivocating. The gentleman just reinstated, at some point, took an oath under the constitutional scheme currently in place. One media darling, and especially popular with young yuppies, is Imran Khan. Don't ask me why; he's never won a single parliamentary seat fair and square--the ONE seat his party has was a gift from the establishment; his opponent, the incumbent/natural candidate from that seat and who carries the same family/clan name (Khan Niazi) as him, withdrew in his favour the last weekend before the election] was doing. He's leading a chant of "Rule of Law!", "Rule of Law!!" Here's what he was doing right after the current coup:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/oct1999/pak-o16.shtml

The only clear voice for constitutional integrity was the "liberal"s everyone's bashing nowadays:

http://www.fas.org/news/pakistan/1999/991013-pak1.htm

The full statement from the Human Rights Commision of Pakistan (HRCP) is at right.

That's who we should all be working with and supporting. But what do I know? I am just an elitist liberal from Pakistan.

Having said that (as I did in email, earlier in the day) a friend chastised me for a negative note on the one day that Pakistanis can feel proud.

Thing is, I already wrote a blog post expressing my pride in things Pakistani just a couple of days ago:

I take time out regularly to be proud of things Pakistani--and I often do it "off-season", too, not just when the whole crowd has deigned to join us; see here, here, here, here, and here, for example.

But on today's events, I think it is the duty of those of us cursed with memories to be the ones urging caution. All I can say is that , for example, progressive activists must have felt as proud as all of Persia the day they overthrew the Shah. And the feeling must have lasted, what? a few months? It was just a few days ago that William Dalrymple was saying that "Pakistan today in many ways resembles pre-revolutionary Iran...." and "...[s]ome fear that Islamists could hijack the protests of the lawyers’ movement, just as they hijacked the civil-rights protests against the Shah in Iran in 1979..." [You can read the full article here.]

I don't want to be the wet blanket on happiness. I celebrate today, a victory for the people. Sulthani-e-Jamhoor ka athaa hai zamana and all that. I love it!

But tempering joy with some of what we have learnt in the last 3-6 cycles we have gone through might not be a bad thing. But then, like I said, what do I know? I am just an elitist liberal from Pakistan.

PS: A shout-out to the Teeth Maestro for providing the inspiration for the subject line by pointing out the uniqueness of the date.

Technorati tags applicable to this post: - - - -