Understanding and Countering Religious Extremism: A Discussion Organizedby IPSS (10.00 a m to 12.30 p m; Sunday, 24 August 2008).

(Speaker: Asif Iftikhar, Research Fellow, al-Mawrid, Lahore)I. Introduction:

When radical and militant activists have deontological bases in religion for theirWeltanschauungs and praxes, they are rarely, if ever, inclined to deliberate upon critiques,especially while facing the threats and realities of legal and punitive measures by the governmentand international community. “Chastisement” then may afford them a cause to rejoice in being“persecuted for righteousness’ sake.”

Ceteris paribus

, sans other accompanying approaches,mere administrative and military measures to control or stifle their voice may actually augmenttheir beliefs and ideas just as other factors often do including economic, political, social, andcultural exploitation, marginalization, and deprivation. An effective approach to deal with theepistemic and political diversity should include serious endeavours to fathom the multifacetedfoundations of the reality we are dealing with. A fortiori, if used, legal and punitive measuresmust be part of a thought-out, holistic plan that gives due weight to all relevant factors includingthe significant aspects of religious discourse. For this purpose, superficiality just won’t do(especially of the kind seen in many media campaigns often lacking in research or planning or inboth); for example, no one is easily convinced into becoming a terrorist on religious grounds andno one is easily dissuaded once so convinced.It is important to have a good sense of the foundational sources and discourses that proclaimsanctity for significant praxes of various kinds. The critique then must also be intellectuallysound giving due weight to argumentation from all sides. In this session we shall, Deo volente,look at views on these matters by some leading Muslim scholars of our time, which mattersinclude many incendiary questions as the following:Does Islam give an individual or a group the right to use violence to end wrong? Whatarguments do the militant Islamists have to justify their acts of terrorism and violence? Is thegovernment of Pakistan un-Islamic? When is an individual or a group allowed by Islam to rebelagainst the State? What are the punishments in Islam for those who rebel against the State orcause disruption in society? What exactly is the meaning of

jihad

and who has the right to wageit? What are the limits to proselytization in Islam? What is the actual responsibility of religiousleaders? Does an individual or a group have the right to “excommunicate” a Muslim? What arethe rights of the non-Muslim citizens of an Islamic State? Who has the authority to punish aperson or a group for blasphemy? What steps does the government need to take to end violenceand terrorism now rampant in our society in the name of religion?

For IPSS Political School

Asif Iftikhar

II. Some Pertinent Views:

1. Taking the law into one’s own hands amounts to either

fasad fi’l-ard

(creating disorder) or

muharabah

(rebellion) -- both of which may be punishable by death in Islam.2. The Prophet’s saying (sws) usually cited to give credence to the idea that Islam allows anindividual or a group the use of force to end wrong is actually related to the use of power withinthe confines of the social and legal authority.3. In Islam, there is no concept of

jihad

(

qital

to be more precise -- that is militant struggle in theway of

Allah

) or the implementation of punishments without the authority of the Collectivity.There are only two valid reasons for

Qital:

i) injustice and oppression and ii) Divine Decree.Thelatter ended with the Prophet (sws) and his companions.4. The argument that the government in Pakistan is not Islamic is highly questionable. In anindependent State, any government formed on the basis of

amruhum shura baynahum

(theiraffairs are by consultation among them) -- in modern times through the vote of the Muslimcitizens in an election – may be seen an Islamic government in the legal sense so long as therulers do not unequivocally deny Islam or their faith in it.5. Rebellion against the State (

khuruj

) is allowed -- that is it is permissible not obligatory -- onlywhen all of the following three conditions exist:i) the rulers unequivocally deny Islam.ii) the government is a dictatorship and does not have the support of the Muslims andcannot be changed by their vote.iii) the leader of

Khuruj

is one who, without any doubt, has the support of the majority of the nation.Moreover, in case of an armed rebellion, there is an additional condition: the leader of the

Khuruj

must migrate with his followers to another land and form an independent State.In the absence of even one of these conditions, those leading the

Khuruj

can be sentenced todeath by the State under Islamic law.6. Allegiance to the Islamic State and obedience to its government are obligatory on a Muslimeven if the rulers are morally corrupt. According to a reported saying of the Prophet (sws), hewho detaches himself from the collectivity of the Muslims and dies in that condition dies thedeath of ignorance.7. No individual, group or State has the right to declare anyone a

Kafir

(one who deliberatelydenies Islam; plural:

Kuffar

Takfir

-- declaring someone a

Kafir

is the prerogative of God and

For IPSS Political School

the Prophet (sws) only; declaring someone a “non-Muslim” is the prerogative of the State. Deathpunishment for apostasy was confined only to the direct addressees of the Prophet (sws)

8. The argument of the militant Islamists that their aggression is in self-defence is also dubious.The difference between self-defence and aggression is manifest. Also, the law of

qisas

(Islamic

lex talionis

) is to be implemented by the State not by any individual or group. The aggrievedperson has the right to demand

qisas

, and it is the responsibility of the State to provide him with justice. The aggrieved or his heir also has the authority to forgive the offender and demandpenalty. But there is no room in any State administration for personal vendettas, in which peopletake the law into their own hands. On the same grounds, lynching for blasphemy is absolutelyagainst Islam even if the criminal is caught red-handed. Punishing a person or a group for anycrime against anybody is the prerogative of the State -- which does that through its organ, the judiciary, after determining for sure that the crime had actually been committed and deciding onthe appropriate punishment.9. The rights guaranteed to non-Muslims in the constitution must not be violated by any Muslim.The Qur’an

says:And fulfil the covenant. Verily the covenant shall be questioned about. (17:34)The Prophet (sws) is reported to have said:Beware! He who oppresses a

mu‘ahid

or does him injustice orburdens him more than his strength or takes anything from him without his consent, Imyself shall plead against him on the Day of Judgment. (

Abu Da’ud, Kitabu’l-jihad

)Therefore, as a citizen of an Islamic State, a non-Muslims has the right to demand the protectionof his/her life, honour and property and to demand all his/her fundamental rights including theright to practice and preach his/her religion in a manner that does not cause disruption in society.Even if a non-Muslim is found guilty of some crime, it is up to the relevant legal court to decidewhat punishment is to be meted out.10. The real responsibility of religious scholars and leaders of religious movements is educationand academics. As such, their primary goal should be to develop the minds and change the heartsof people rather than to punish or kill them

III. Recommendations:

i) Education.ii) Administrative Measures

For IPSS Political School