What's new

The Wahhabisation of Pakistan

fatman17

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
32,563
Reaction score
98
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Latest news, sport, business, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

The Wahhabisation of Pakistan

The migration of thousands of Pakistani men to Gulf states since the 1970s has had a huge impact on the character of the country

Manan Ahmed guardian.co.uk, Friday June 27, 2008

"Pakistan is in a leaderless drift four months after elections", concluded Carlotta Gall in the New York Times on June 24. Just two days later, comes news that "Baitullah Mehsud, the head of the Pakistani Taliban" has killed 22 members of an intermediary peace committee between the State of Pakistan and Mehsud. I guess there are some leaders in Pakistan, after all. Pakistan's "Talibanisation" in the northwestern rural regions and the stalled lawyer's movement in the major cities appear, at first glance, to reflect a deep chasm within Pakistani society. This division, if one should call it anything, is routinely understood as a manifestation of moderate v extreme Islam. But that raises the question of why it manifests itself along rural/urban, and class lines.

Extremist ideology, as we have learned in the last 8 years, is just as prone to attract highly-educated members of the professional class as unemployed, frustrated youth. We have to delve deeper into Pakistan's recent past if we are to understand the crisis it faces at the present. Sub-continental history is dotted with intermittent mass movement of people – usually triggered by famine, war or worse – replete with attendant tales of distress and misery. In my reckoning, the early 1970s saw the another key migration that has so far received little analysis. It involved vast numbers of men from the rural and semi-urban parts of Pakistan moving to the emerging oil-based oligarchies in the Gulf.

This economic migration created a backflow of liquid capital to these same villages and towns in Punjab, Sindh and the Northwest Frontier Province. But it also provided a unique vehicle for the transferring of the various strains of Muslim experience into the rather stilted one, currently on everyone's lips – Wahhabism. Between 1975 and 1985, the number of Pakistanis in the Gulf states rose from 205,000 to 446,000, with over $2.5bn flowing back annually. At its height in the mid-1980s, nearly 10% of Pakistan's adult male workforce was employed in the Gulf states.

These migrant workers – over 80% were unskilled or semi-skilled – usually lasted about 4-6 years in the Gulf states and were replaced by other family, clan, tribe or village members. What they sent home – goods and cash – were the dominant factor in bolstering the Pakistani economy throughout the 1970s and 1980s and one of the key factors in Pakistan's turn towards western Asia under Bhutto and Zia ul-Haq. The migration cooled down during the 1990s but since 2000 there has been an increase the flow of workers. Currently, Pakistani workers are heavily employed in Dubai, Kuwait and Iraq. This large-scale migration to the Middle East had significant effects on local economies and production cycles but perhaps more importantly, it has had a sociocultural impact on Pakistan.

Just as significant was the religiosity that came back with the workers. Historically speaking, the Wahhabi reading of Islam had found little purchase on the subcontinent. Mainly because Wahhabi ideology is at odds with practices in Pakistani culture, which cherished its sufi saints. However, this migration allowed a vast population to unlearn their "decadent" and "deviant" practices from the "pure practitioners" in Saudi Arabia, Qatar or the Emirates.

In the southern valleys and northern mountains dupattas were replaced with burkas and sufi shrines with madrasas. This cultural turn dovetailed with Zia ul-Haq's policies of Sunnification and the selling of jihad as a necessary commodity to the Pakistani people.

Palestine, Chechnya and Kashmir became the de-facto topics at every Friday sermon from Doha and Riyadh to Dera Ghazi Khan and Rawalpindi. However, this Wahhabisation, which included a stricter, more literal interpretation of Qur'an, the demonisation of non-believers, antisemitic rhetoric, racism, the desire to "fund" jihads and so on, was never a straightforward process of important. Its progress was gradual and organic in a way that slowly de-legitimised established practices while distorting others: the spiritual guide was transformed into one who cast, or fought, black magic.

It is hard to find a household, a conversation, in current day Pakistan that is free of such concerns. The practitioners combine the zeal of the Wahhabi imam with the bank-teller's command of charges due: $10 for the destruction of a marriage, $20 for an incantation for a ruined libido. All wrapped in literal reading of Qur'anic text.

One cannot go further in examining this process of Wahhabisation without taking into account the impact of this migration of fathers on their families back home. What are the attitudes of this particular generation X towards the state? Can we really begin to look at the success or failure of the lawyer's movement without examining the Gulf Migration? Can we really talk about democracy without taking into account the roles of millions of Pakistanis as second or third rate citizens, with no rights in law as a person, in Gulf states? While many of us attempt to understand modern Pakistan in terms of political theory, or the appeal of fundamentalism in terms of theology neither of these approaches have proven fruitful. It is time that we broadened our scope of inquiry – to examine carefully labour and migration, civil and social structures, law and order, human rights and the effect they have on the many peoples of Pakistan.
 
.
We have said that Americans blame others for their own failures -- I think the piece above is similar -- influnce cannot be denied, but what is happening in Pakistan is the responsibility of Pakistanis -- if Wahabi ideas have picked up steam, they have done so because they have met no opposing ideas or competing ideas.

The Pakistani state is unique inthe world, it does not really believe it has any role to play in the promotion of ideas that bind and give conscious charaxter to the state and peoples.

"Adrift" -- I will make this point again, self created, self directed -- doesn't anyone remember Iqbal anymore. Pakistan has to create it's own identity, it's own idea of who and what she is - now why shud anyone kind Wahabism appealing? look, compared to what?? "Enlightened Moderation" -- and the substance of which is???

In another life I had made the point that for us the most important question of our time is "what does it mean to be a Muslim" -- and the answers to this must be Pakistani answers, what is to be the content of that answer, what ideas will illuminate that content.

Let's do this first thing first - clean house, then if persons are persuaded that wahabism is the way to go, all we can do is attempt to persuade persons by presenting a more persuasive picture of what it might mean to be a muslim.
 
.
Musharraf and many Muslims claim that there were no large scale forced conversions in India. The Sufis were mainly responsible for the large scale conversions.

Now we have a situation in India where a newly minted Imam declares all Muslims of a village as Kaafirs! Why? Because they attend a prayer ceremony for a recently dead villager headed by a Sufi! And to top it all, he declares all mariages as Haraam and declares that they are indulging in Zina (never ceazes to amaze me, this fascination with fornication.) and have to convert back to Islam and remarry.

So was the Islam these folks converted to, the real one? Or the new Wahabi version of it?

If the Islam practiced by the Sufis was not real (and decadent and all the other things the Wahaabis claim) then the vast majority of Muslims in India (and I believe in many other countries) never converted to the "correct" version of Islam!

Was there a difference between what was promised to them and the reality?
 
.
Goddamned Saudis.
Their cheap ideology would be festering in their own country if it wasn't for the billions in oil money.
 
.
If people took the time and studied the koran, you will find that every whabbi argument can be destroyed easily.
 
.
Musharraf and many Muslims claim that there were no large scale forced conversions in India. The Sufis were mainly responsible for the large scale conversions.

I think you find its not just a "claim" but a fact.
Simple logic says that if the muslims where intent on forced conversion there would be no hindus in india after the hundreds of years of muslims control.



Now we have a situation in India where a newly minted Imam declares all Muslims of a village as Kaafirs! Why? Because they attend a prayer ceremony for a recently dead villager headed by a Sufi! And to top it all, he declares all mariages as Haraam and declares that they are indulging in Zina (never ceazes to amaze me, this fascination with fornication.) and have to convert back to Islam and remarry..

You have your bal thackarays and we have these guys.

So was the Islam these folks converted to, the real one? Or the new Wahabi version of it?..

Who was around first...the sufi's or the wahabis.....i think you will the wahabis have been about for just over a hundred years while sufis go back to the early advent of islam.
 
.
I think you find its not just a "claim" but a fact.
Simple logic says that if the muslims where intent on forced conversion there would be no hindus in india after the hundreds of years of muslims control.

You have your bal thackarays and we have these guys.

Who was around first...the sufi's or the wahabis.....i think you will the wahabis have been about for just over a hundred years while sufis go back to the early advent of islam.

But the Sufi version is fast losing ground to the Wahabi version.

Even during the earlist times, there were the hardline and the softer versions of Islam and some Sufis were in fact very hardline especially in Punjab.

The hardline version is indeed closer to the Quranic teachings. That is the very point of Wahabism: To go back to the Quran and disregard any influences even the Hadhith AFAIK.
 
.
But the Sufi version is fast losing ground to the Wahabi version..

Not really......the majority of muslims ,90% in my opinion follow the sufi style.
The saudi's have pumped billions so people follow the wahabi cult,but it has not really worked.
Yes there have been a few converts to the saudi cult but not in massive numbers.
It was a big thing during the 90's where the wahabis where on the rampage,but there has a been a counter attack by the sufi/sunni during the last 6/7 years



Even during the earlist times, there were the hardline and the softer versions of Islam and some Sufis were in fact very hardline especially in Punjab...

There is always going to a right wing and left wing in islam.....the problem is when extremist take power,its a bit like the protestant and catholic church's being taken over by the KKK.

The hardline version is indeed closer to the Quranic teachings. That is the very point of Wahabism: To go back to the Quran and disregard any influences even the Hadhith AFAIK.

The only problem is it makes no sense.......I met a wahabi preacher who was telling me that we need follow the koran and follow the way of the prophet .....i just love it when people state the obvious and make it out as if its some sort of revelation.
I will just quickly summarize our conversation.

TV is the work of the devil and those appearing on tv where non muslims.
So osama is a non muslim then is he..?.........the wahabi went quiet.

I asked the wahabi why he had a mobile phone......the prophet pbuh never had a mobile phone.

Why are you driving a car i asked the wahabi.....the prophet had a camel,should you also not travel by camel as this is what the prophet did..?

The hardline version makes no sense.
 
.
Not really......the majority of muslims ,90% in my opinion follow the sufi style.
The saudi's have pumped billions so people follow the wahabi cult,but it has not really worked.
Yes there have been a few converts to the saudi cult but not in massive numbers.
It was a big thing during the 90's where the wahabis where on the rampage,but there has a been a counter attack by the sufi/sunni during the last 6/7 years

There is always going to a right wing and left wing in islam.....the problem is when extremist take power,its a bit like the protestant and catholic church's being taken over by the KKK.

The only problem is it makes no sense.......I met a wahabi preacher who was telling me that we need follow the koran and follow the way of the prophet .....i just love it when people state the obvious and make it out as if its some sort of revelation.
I will just quickly summarize our conversation.

TV is the work of the devil and those appearing on tv where non muslims.
So osama is a non muslim then is he..?.........the wahabi went quiet.

I asked the wahabi why he had a mobile phone......the prophet pbuh never had a mobile phone.

Why are you driving a car i asked the wahabi.....the prophet had a camel,should you also not travel by camel as this is what the prophet did..?

The hardline version makes no sense.

I agree. It is so full of holes as you pointed out.

But did you manage to convince the Wahabi? I guess not.

They will not be convinced by words alone. And it is going to be a generational struggle.
 
.
with due repect to all lerned colleagues - we really need to read the article once again. its not about wahabism or sufiism, we need to (as pakistanis) finally decide what our identity is. are we part of the greater middle-east (arabic background) or are we part of the sub-continent. i think it is quite clear!. we belong to the indian culture which allows one to be either hindu, sikh, muslim or christian. what that means is that the majority of muslims of the sub-continent are moderate in their islamic views and we cannot allow saudi arabia to have a free hand in changing our world view notwithstanding the lure of the petro-dollars they are pouring into this country. it is really ominous the $$$ being invested by saudi, uae and qatari businessmen in real-estate and power sectors.
the other reality is also very clear, any notions of re-uniting the "greater india" are non-existant. pakistan is here to stay just like india, bangladesh etc.
 
.
I sometimes get the feeling that, in order to distinguish itself from India, Pakistan has been rejecting anything and everything which it shares with India culturally.
 
.
I sometimes get the feeling that, in order to distinguish itself from India, Pakistan has been rejecting anything and everything which it shares with India culturally.

true! it needs to change.
 
.
with due repect to all lerned colleagues - we really need to read the article once again. its not about wahabism or sufiism, we need to (as pakistanis) finally decide what our identity is. are we part of the greater middle-east (arabic background) or are we part of the sub-continent. i think it is quite clear!. we belong to the indian culture which allows one to be either hindu, sikh, muslim or christian. what that means is that the majority of muslims of the sub-continent are moderate in their islamic views and we cannot allow saudi arabia to have a free hand in changing our world view notwithstanding the lure of the petro-dollars they are pouring into this country. it is really ominous the $$$ being invested by saudi, uae and qatari businessmen in real-estate and power sectors.
the other reality is also very clear, any notions of re-uniting the "greater india" are non-existant. pakistan is here to stay just like india, bangladesh etc.

That's a great point fatman. But I don't think it is very clear to all pakistanis that they belong to the subcontinent. This is an identity crisis that Pakistan faces and may continue to do so for a long time.

Bhutto said after 71 that Pakistan will turn its back to India and become a part of West Asia. He organized the Islamic conference and tried to make Pakistan a West Asian country! What came of it? Nothing much. You are not a West Asian country, nor a Central Asian one.

We, the people of the subcontinent shared our past and will share our future. As independent nations but we are still bound by a common thread.
 
.
I agree. It is so full of holes as you pointed out.

But did you manage to convince the Wahabi? I guess not.

They will not be convinced by words alone. And it is going to be a generational struggle.

But it did make him look stupid......
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom