The illness of our soul

Since Imran Khan talks about absolutisms, shunning the complexities of relativism, and since he is the rising star in this firmament, would it not have been in the fitness of things for him to give a statement to commemorate Taseer and the principle Taseer stood for?

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | Int'l Desk
Source/Credit: Pakistan Today | View
By Ejaz Haider | January 5, 2012

Taseer is dead, in a physical sense. But in his death he survives because of the principle he stood for

I asked a Barelvi friend why we say Assalamo Alaikum? He said because it means peace be upon you. And why do we say that? He said because Islam salamati ka deen hai. I said I agreed with him but then what were the Barelvi crowds at Data Sahib and elsewhere doing on Jan 4 asking that Mumtaz Qadri be released for gratuitously and cold-bloodedly murdering Salmaan Taseer?


He said Taseer had committed blasphemy. I see. And how does he know that? Because Taseer opposed the blasphemy law in support of a non-Muslim woman, he replied. Ok, and what makes him, the Barelvi interlocutor, an expert on the law, its intent, its uses and abuses, the Islamic jurisprudence and much else that would allow him to offer an informed view? His retort: so many people could not have been wrong. I told him to read history to see how many times so many people have gone wrong.

How exactly did Taseer blaspheme, I said, by asking that the law be rationalised or because he supported a Christian woman? There was hemming and hawing. I persisted. Does Islam forbid public discussion of laws that are man-made? Is it enough to get killed for seeking justice for someone who has been sentenced by a lower court but could well be let off by a higher one?

He got irritated. What’s the point of all this, he demanded. The point should be clear, I said. No act of violence is an act of salamati (peace). Qadri, who killed Taseer, should be tried on two counts – for murder and also for tarnishing the image of Islam itself. Moreover, how does Islam, or for that matter any moral-religious creed, allow anyone to be both judge and executioner? Under what authority did Qadri arrogate to himself the right to judge Taseer and then without giving him the benefit of defence, execute him?

No matter how one looks at it, and I have not even gone one per cent into the legal-moral-logical complexities of what happened in Islamabad that fateful afternoon more than a year ago, Qadri’s act cannot be justified; there were no extenuating grounds for his dastardly act and his supporters, frothing from their mouths, are a bunch of dangerous dimwits.

That such crowds are now to decide the fate of this country, or think they can, should make our spines tingle with fear. On Jan 4, when some rights activists like friend Marvi Sirmed went to Kohsar to hold a meeting in memory of Salmaan Taseer, a group of beards appeared, threatening to kill those commemorating Taseer. They were escorted by armed policemen. The mourners had to disperse. The hooligans were victorious. Would the redoubtable Dr Rehman Malik, of the honorary-degree fame, in equal measure of which fame the infamy goes to the Karachi University, stand up and tell us why the police did not entertain the backsides of these beards for doing something so clearly illegal?

Let me recall. Taseer was a Pakistan Peoples Party leader. He was the PPP governor, even though he was nominated to the office by then General-President Musharraf. The last time I saw the map of Islamabad, I found Kohsar Market fairly close to the seat of the federal government. What stopped the Islamabad police from dealing with this bunch of potential murderers?

I know for a fact, and have written about it, that Rehman Malik D-infamous-Phil has been lackadaisical, to put it charitably, about nailing Qadri and his supporters. But should he get all the blame? It seems no one was prepared to stand up for Taseer, his act of bravery and his conviction except a handful of those who can see the tidings. Since Imran Khan talks about absolutisms, shunning the complexities of relativism, and since he is the rising star in this firmament, would it not have been in the fitness of things for him to give a statement to commemorate Taseer and the principle Taseer stood for?

Unless I completely missed it, and I am ready to apologise if I did, there was nothing from PTI or Mr Khan about Taseer. Of corruption Mr Khan never tires of talking and it’s good that he doesn’t, even though his assertions be rather simplistic. What about this total corruption of the religion of peace by misplaced, violent hordes, if not the corruption of the soul that seems to have entrenched itself within society in a way that leaves little to no room for any peaceful dialogue?

Pakistan faces many challenges. But one of the biggest is dealing with the remarkable absence of self-reflection in a rising majority that would even hound out Islamic scholars, let alone those who do not wear that badge of honour. How does a society advance itself and deal with complexities if it reduces spaces for dialogue? The Barelvi hordes that bay for the blood of anyone who wants to debate the abuse of Blasphemy Law have been killed by Deobandi hordes. Both use the principle of exclusion to kill those who want to question and argue.

It was a sad moment indeed that Qadri’s supporters gathered at the shrine of Data Sahib, the patron saint of Lahore, and demanded that which no decent society, if it wants to survive, can concede. And yet, we have seen this government constantly throw in the towel and let those who want to speak out be consumed by the hate-filled agenda of these hordes.

If the idea is to let these principles be sacrificed at the altar of petty politicking then the government of the day is deeply mistaken. Civilian governments survive in and through democracy. Democracy is about argumentation and negotiations in a non-violent mode. How can any government survive if it allows the shrinking of the very spaces that it needs for its own ultimate survival?

Taseer is dead, in a physical sense. But in his death he survives because of the principle he stood for. A year has passed. His family, and those of us who believe in basic human decencies, await justice.


The writer is Executive Director of Jinnah Institute. The views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect JI’s policy


Read original post here: The illness of our soul