What's new

Ulema and terrorism

Mujahid

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,270
Reaction score
0
The proceedings at the Deobandi ulema’s recent conference in Lahore must be studied less for its expected refusal to condemn suicide bombings and more for the insight it gives into the psyche of a large section of our powerful ulema community.

Of equal significance are the fissures that came to the fore between hardliners and harder-liners. Evidently, the latter carried the day.

It was gratifying that at least some ulema — among them Maulana Samiul Haq — were cognisant of the negative impact which acts of terrorism were having not on the nation but on the Deobandi image.

While the delegates did indeed plead with the militants to adopt peaceful and democratic means for the establishment of Sharia in Pakistan, a majority of the ulema, according to Nasir Jamal’s reportage (Dawn, May 2), said terrorism would continue to haunt Pakistan as long as “factors and causes” responsible for it continued. What was mind-boggling, however, was the principle some ulema propounded to establish a link between terrorism and government policies.

Briefly, the ulema at the Lahore moot said that the government’s foreign policy was pro-America, and this obedience to commands from Washington in their opinion was the reason behind the militants’ war against the government. That this war against the government and the army translates itself into a war on the state of Pakistan itself was an issue into which the ulema chose not go.

If one were to accept resort to terrorism as a justifiable means for registering dissent against government policies, then every country in this world must be ravaged by terrorism, because there is no government on the surface of the earth whose policies do not have critics. Let us, for instance, see the situation in two of Pakistan’s neighbours — Iran and India — where government policies have diehard foes.

The nuclear deal between America and India was first agreed upon in principle when Manmohan Singh met George Bush in July 2005. It took more than three years for the treaty to go through the various phases of America’s complex constitutional process and approval from the International Atomic Energy Agency and the nuclear suppliers’ group.

The treaty evoked opposition from key members of the Senate and House foreign relations committees, but to my knowledge no senators or congressmen or lobby groups resorted to terrorism or to threats of terrorism to express disapproval of this aspect of the Bush government’s foreign policy.

In India the treaty aroused intense opposition, not only from the traditionally anti-American parties of the Left but also from the extreme rightwing Hindu parties, including the Bharatiya Janata Party. The press was equally divided, and influential sections of the print and electronic media came out with highly technical opinions from nuclear scientists who argued that the treaty undermined India’s nuclear programme.

The opposition finally called for the Manmohan government to obtain a vote of confidence, and it goes without saying that the vote saw a phenomenon we in Pakistan are quite familiar with — MPs were bought and convicts brought from prison to cast their votes. All along the intensely emotional debate, no party or group started killing India’s own citizens and blowing up markets and schools and temples and mosques because they thought the Manmohan government had sold India to Washington or to its corporate sector.

To our west, we have a theocracy in Iran, almost as obscurantist and ruthless as Ziaul Haq’s tyranny. The clerics have imposed an ideological dictatorship on Iran, the Internet is censored, foreign channels are banned or shown selectively, there is no opposition press and even government newspapers are often banned when they deviate from the official line.

The economy is in a mess, and crude-producing Iran imports half its oil because of lack of refining capacity. The parliamentary opposition does manage to put its views across, but the real opposition has gone underground. But no opposition group has started killing Iran’s men, women and children and blowing up shopping plazas in Tehran and bombing schools in Isfahan or mosques in Mashhad because President Ahmadinejad is pursuing wrong policies.

It is, however, in Pakistan that some sections of the ulema think that killing our own people is a justified way of expressing dissent against the government’s policies.

Mind you, the government’s perceived pro-American policies do not have opponents merely in the religious right. Even liberal sections of opinion — the recently formed Workers Party Pakistan, for instance — are sharply critical of a continuation of Pervez Musharraf’s war on terror by the PPP-led government. But none of these political parties and elements has justified blasts in Moon market or the blowing up of mosques or a girls’ university to register their protest against the government’s foreign policy.

The religious touch to the ulema’s anti-Americanism is laughable. Just the other day, they were head over heels in love with America, and any opposition to the CIA’s overt and covert operations in Afghanistan was considered heresy because there existed an “indissoluble unity” among the People of the Books.

The ulema know the hurmat Islam attaches to human life. In case some of them have forgotten, the blast in the Rawalpindi Askari mosque on Dec 4 last killed, among others, 16 children.

P.S: For some mysterious reason, ideologically motivated governments, movements and individuals, whether religious or secular — Nazi, Zionist, Taliban — are singularly devoid of the milk of human kindness. The attitude of a large number of Pakistani clerics today reminds us of the Christian church’s cold-bloodedness in burning purported heretics at the stake in medieval Europe.

DAWN.COM | Editorial | Ulema and terrorism
 
. . .
Deobandi Ulema were against the creation of Pakistan 60 odd years ago now they are against the very existance of Pakistan
 
.
^^^This has nothing to do with Deobandi-Wahabbi issue. Just because the Pakistani security establishment used these sects for their own goals and are now have become a pain for them doesn't mean the Deobandi school of thought is to blame.

You have to differentiate between those (so-called) ulema that use each and every issue for political purposes regardless of which school of thought they follow. This is the main problem. You have groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir which are equally problematic but done adhere to any school of thought.

And its true that a majority of ulema (most of who have passed away) where against the creation of Pakistan and had some valid reasons for that, mainly that as long as freedom of religion is enshrined in the new constitution there is no need for a separate country. Some would say that they have been proven correct as well. But that doesn't mean that the present day so-called Deobandi ulema in Pakistan are in any way connected to those souls.

Most of these politicking mullas were empowered by the repeated use of Pakistani military dictators or civilian rulers to take on the crutch of Islam for their political legitimization. This continues to happen even today with for e.g. PML-N hobnobbing with LeJ activists. The root cause is again using Islam for political gain.
 
.
I think Deobandi Ulemas in 2008 have already issued a Fatwa against the terrorism in India.
 
.
June 2, 2008
Darool-Uloom Deoband issues fatwa against terrorism

Rhys Blakely in Bombay

An ultra-conservative Islamic seminary that has inspired extremist groups including the Taliban has issued a fatwa against terrorism, in what is believed to be the first edict of its kind.

The Darool-Uloom Deoband, a 150 year-old India-based institution that holds influence over thousands of smaller Islamic schools across the subcontinent, many of which have attracted British students in recent years, issued the fatwa at an outdoor peace conference attended by thousands of clerics and students in Delhi.

The organisation, which condemned terrorism as the “most inhuman crime” has a reputation as one of the global centres of Islamic theological debate. Its base in the northern Indian town of Deoband has become synonymous with dogmatic and violent fundamentalism.

Most of the Taleban leadership attended Deobandi-influenced seminaries based in Pakistan. The movement has been recognised by analysts as a key force behind jihadi madrassas — traditional schools that promote terrorist violence — in several countries, including the UK.

“The religion of Islam has come to wipe out all kinds of terrorism and to spread the message of global peace,” the Darul-Uloom grand mufti Habibur Rehman said in the fatwa.

“Islam rejects all kinds of unjust violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder and does not allow it in any form”.

Analysts said the move was significant, partly because several previously divided sects chose to ratify the condemnation of violence.

The closely-watched Deobandi group had denounced terrorism in a landmark move in February. “Islam has taught its followers to treat all mankind with equality, mercy, tolerance, justice … all kinds of violence and terrorism in the strongest possible terms,” it said.

Other speakers at Saturday’s event criticised what they termed a “sinister campaign” to malign the “Islamic faith...by linking terrorism with Islam and distorting the meanings of Quranic Verses and Prophet traditions”.

However, some of the largest cheers came from the all-male crowd when the United States and its policies were criticised.

The deputy rector of the Darul-Uloom, Hazrat Maulana Qari Sayed Mohammed Usman, said: “Whenever Christian and American interests are hurt in any part of the world, they take prompt action to set things right even at the cost of human lives. They maintain silence though when Muslims are the victims.” He went on to criticise the US for its support to Israel.
 
.
^^^This has nothing to do with Deobandi-Wahabbi issue. Just because the Pakistani security establishment used these sects for their own goals and are now have become a pain for them doesn't mean the Deobandi school of thought is to blame.

You have to differentiate between those (so-called) ulema that use each and every issue for political purposes regardless of which school of thought they follow. This is the main problem. You have groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir which are equally problematic but done adhere to any school of thought.

And its true that a majority of ulema (most of who have passed away) where against the creation of Pakistan and had some valid reasons for that, mainly that as long as freedom of religion is enshrined in the new constitution there is no need for a separate country. Some would say that they have been proven correct as well. But that doesn't mean that the present day so-called Deobandi ulema in Pakistan are in any way connected to those souls.

Most of these politicking mullas were empowered by the repeated use of Pakistani military dictators or civilian rulers to take on the crutch of Islam for their political legitimization. This continues to happen even today with for e.g. PML-N hobnobbing with LeJ activists. The root cause is again using Islam for political gain.


Yes, instead of generalization one should be rational and don't play politics. And also the extremism of all kinds should be condemn.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom