Tweet
SHOULD PUKHTUNKHWA BE A SHARIAH STATE??
Shariah was a very successful and progressive legal and social system in the tribal society of Arabs in the beginning of the 7th century but it does not mean that Shariah could play the same role in all societies irrespective of their levels of social development, cultures and other national characteristics.
If we look back into the history of the world we will be able to see very clearly that every period, whether it is tribal, feudal, and capitalist or socialist has its own set of laws, moralities and other rules of governance. The social system of one period does not coincide with that of the other. Therefore it is not possible to implement the legal system of a tribal society of the 7th century living in Maccah and Madinah, on the present day Pukhtun society which has nothing in common with that period of time.
At present there are 57 Islamic states out of 189 and none of these can be presented as a model state of Shariah. Like for example Saudi Arabia claims to be the Islamic State. Islam is totally against the kings and princes and hairs to the thrones while Saudi Arabia is a kingdom. These kings and Princes have nothing to do remotely with Islam. The very foundation of the Saudi Kingdom unislamic.Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) preferred Abubakar Sidique on Ali. Even Ali was His cousin, Son-in -law and a noble Qurish. Is there any such example in SaudiArabia?Idon'tthinkso. Prophet and his four Khalifs (Khulafi-Rashideen) looked down on wealth and worldly riches. While Saudi Kings and Princes lives in gold palaces and are living luxuries lives. Currently I am living in Saudi Arabia and I feel it is still slavery system, as they called it Shariah state. Being a human I am not satisfied with this system as a way of life.
Iran is another Islamic country which claims to be Sharia
State. They follow rules somehow different than Saudi Arabia. Though they are little bit more democratic than Saudis. Both countries consider each other Un-Islamic or at least some of the laws. In Iran though women might have few rights, while in Saudi Arabia, they can't even drive. Which country is true Sharia State? There is no other country in the Islamic world right now to be called Sharia State in the real sense. After the golden era of the Khulfai Rashideen Islam was totally politicized and used by various groups for their own purposes. Different people like Taliban being one example misused or should I say distorted Islam for their own agendas.
The point is; how to have consensus about Sharia? Muslims are not agreed and even if they are agreed on the system which is derived from the Sunni jurisprudence is subject to discussion and disagreement. Muslims are divided in sects and sub-sects. Sunnis and Shias are the major sects while Wahhabis, Salafis, Deobandis, Ismailis; Sufis etc. are the sub-sects of Islam. No one is ready to listen to the other group and they consider each other wrong. Because Muslims don't have any authority like Catholic Pope or Arch Bishop of Canterbury to issue decrees and verdicts about certain religious rules /codes. It is impossible to bring them on the same page which is making this issue of consensus more complicated. But most of all we are living in the age of reason and our world have become a global village. We cannot shun modern technology and scientific inventions. Ask Muslims, and majority of them won't be ready to abandon TV, Radio, Theater, Photography and other means of entertainment. Keeping them is Un -Islamic if I am not wrong.
What about human rights? We cannot close our eyes on this issue either. We cannot ignore it if we want to be the member of the International community. I am not saying that Islam has no human rights but there are things which are considered harsh in the International human right laws right now. For instance, chopping of hands or stoning, lashes, restrictions on women etc.
It means that there is no place for Shariah to be adopted as a way of life or a social system to deliver for any society in the modern world.
As a Pukhtun nation we have had the experience of Shariah in different parts of our motherland at different times.
In the 3rd decade of 19th century a considerable part of the present Pukhtunkhwa was declared to be a Shariah state under the leadership of Sayyed Ahmad Shaheed Barelvi and within a short period the Pukhtuns turned against the laws imposed by the Mullahs and got rid of them in the result of an armed uprising by all the concerned localities. Sayyed Ahmad Shaheed Barelvi himself succeeded in saving his life and running away to Balakot where he was martyred in an encounter with the Sikh army.
Similarly, in the recent past we have seen two periods of Shariah. The first one under the leadership of the so called Mujahedeen and the second was under the Taliban`s head Mullah Umar. Both of them delivered no goods for the Pukhtun society to be appreciated.
Besides, just a few months back for a very short period the people of Swat suffered a lot under Shariah imposed by Taliban and took a sigh of relief when they saw the army conducting a true operation against the imposers of Shariah.
In the elections of 2002, Pukhtuns voted in favor of the religious political parties for the first time in reaction of being disappointed from the traditional political parties. But after 5 years of their rule in the province, they were rejected altogether in the elections of 2008 and people opted for the traditional political parties.
One other thing, why Sharia for the Pukhtuns only? Why not for Pakistan which was built on the name of Islam? Pukhtun are good Muslims than all others already. I think we had enough of the Taliban and this is the time to get rid of them for once and all.
In the light of the above mentioned facts one can easily conclude that Pukhtoonkhwa could never be a Shariah state.
SHOULD PUKHTUNKHWA BE A SHARIAH STATE?? | Pukhtoonistan Gazette
Shariah was a very successful and progressive legal and social system in the tribal society of Arabs in the beginning of the 7th century but it does not mean that Shariah could play the same role in all societies irrespective of their levels of social development, cultures and other national characteristics.
If we look back into the history of the world we will be able to see very clearly that every period, whether it is tribal, feudal, and capitalist or socialist has its own set of laws, moralities and other rules of governance. The social system of one period does not coincide with that of the other. Therefore it is not possible to implement the legal system of a tribal society of the 7th century living in Maccah and Madinah, on the present day Pukhtun society which has nothing in common with that period of time.
At present there are 57 Islamic states out of 189 and none of these can be presented as a model state of Shariah. Like for example Saudi Arabia claims to be the Islamic State. Islam is totally against the kings and princes and hairs to the thrones while Saudi Arabia is a kingdom. These kings and Princes have nothing to do remotely with Islam. The very foundation of the Saudi Kingdom unislamic.Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) preferred Abubakar Sidique on Ali. Even Ali was His cousin, Son-in -law and a noble Qurish. Is there any such example in SaudiArabia?Idon'tthinkso. Prophet and his four Khalifs (Khulafi-Rashideen) looked down on wealth and worldly riches. While Saudi Kings and Princes lives in gold palaces and are living luxuries lives. Currently I am living in Saudi Arabia and I feel it is still slavery system, as they called it Shariah state. Being a human I am not satisfied with this system as a way of life.
Iran is another Islamic country which claims to be Sharia
State. They follow rules somehow different than Saudi Arabia. Though they are little bit more democratic than Saudis. Both countries consider each other Un-Islamic or at least some of the laws. In Iran though women might have few rights, while in Saudi Arabia, they can't even drive. Which country is true Sharia State? There is no other country in the Islamic world right now to be called Sharia State in the real sense. After the golden era of the Khulfai Rashideen Islam was totally politicized and used by various groups for their own purposes. Different people like Taliban being one example misused or should I say distorted Islam for their own agendas.
The point is; how to have consensus about Sharia? Muslims are not agreed and even if they are agreed on the system which is derived from the Sunni jurisprudence is subject to discussion and disagreement. Muslims are divided in sects and sub-sects. Sunnis and Shias are the major sects while Wahhabis, Salafis, Deobandis, Ismailis; Sufis etc. are the sub-sects of Islam. No one is ready to listen to the other group and they consider each other wrong. Because Muslims don't have any authority like Catholic Pope or Arch Bishop of Canterbury to issue decrees and verdicts about certain religious rules /codes. It is impossible to bring them on the same page which is making this issue of consensus more complicated. But most of all we are living in the age of reason and our world have become a global village. We cannot shun modern technology and scientific inventions. Ask Muslims, and majority of them won't be ready to abandon TV, Radio, Theater, Photography and other means of entertainment. Keeping them is Un -Islamic if I am not wrong.
What about human rights? We cannot close our eyes on this issue either. We cannot ignore it if we want to be the member of the International community. I am not saying that Islam has no human rights but there are things which are considered harsh in the International human right laws right now. For instance, chopping of hands or stoning, lashes, restrictions on women etc.
It means that there is no place for Shariah to be adopted as a way of life or a social system to deliver for any society in the modern world.
As a Pukhtun nation we have had the experience of Shariah in different parts of our motherland at different times.
In the 3rd decade of 19th century a considerable part of the present Pukhtunkhwa was declared to be a Shariah state under the leadership of Sayyed Ahmad Shaheed Barelvi and within a short period the Pukhtuns turned against the laws imposed by the Mullahs and got rid of them in the result of an armed uprising by all the concerned localities. Sayyed Ahmad Shaheed Barelvi himself succeeded in saving his life and running away to Balakot where he was martyred in an encounter with the Sikh army.
Similarly, in the recent past we have seen two periods of Shariah. The first one under the leadership of the so called Mujahedeen and the second was under the Taliban`s head Mullah Umar. Both of them delivered no goods for the Pukhtun society to be appreciated.
Besides, just a few months back for a very short period the people of Swat suffered a lot under Shariah imposed by Taliban and took a sigh of relief when they saw the army conducting a true operation against the imposers of Shariah.
In the elections of 2002, Pukhtuns voted in favor of the religious political parties for the first time in reaction of being disappointed from the traditional political parties. But after 5 years of their rule in the province, they were rejected altogether in the elections of 2008 and people opted for the traditional political parties.
One other thing, why Sharia for the Pukhtuns only? Why not for Pakistan which was built on the name of Islam? Pukhtun are good Muslims than all others already. I think we had enough of the Taliban and this is the time to get rid of them for once and all.
In the light of the above mentioned facts one can easily conclude that Pukhtoonkhwa could never be a Shariah state.
SHOULD PUKHTUNKHWA BE A SHARIAH STATE?? | Pukhtoonistan Gazette
Comment