khuram

Archive for the ‘Pakistan’ Category

All about Pakistan.

“Independence of Judiciary” or “Judicial Activism of the Worst Kind”:

Posted by khuram on October 19, 2010

Sign up for OKPAY and start accepting payments instantly.
“Independence of Judiciary” or “Judicial Activism of the Worst Kind”:

Story began when former President General Musharraf endorsed a corruption oriented reference against Chief Justice. Apparently Chief Justice was involved in corruption.

President’s intention was quite irrelevant. If there was a corruption charge against Chief Justice then President should have endorsed it. And he did it.

Then Chief Justice acquired overwhelming sympathies of the opposite camp of General Musharraf, the then President. A full-fledged movement/struggle mainly led by lawyers was launched to restore what they called “Independence of Judiciary”.

As a result, that government has gone and Chief Justice got victory over President. Now situation is that Judiciary is dictating and interfering in the functions of Executives (Present President and Prime Minister). It appears that President and Prime Minister are sub-ordinate to Judges.

Anyways, was struggle of lawyers right? In my opinion … No!

In my opinion, lawyers struggle was not right. Their general argument which they published in various street banners was something like:

“In the World History Judge never has been punished.”

This argument was wrong and misleading. In the ancient Iran, punishment of corrupt Judge was that his body skin used to be torn away and then used to be placed on his (Judge’s) chair. Then son of that Judge used to be asked to perform the role of judge while sitting on that chair.

We are all idiots. We took corruption of judges so lightly. Corruption by Judge is in fact the worst kind of crime!

Reference:

Wikipedia describes about a Judge named Sisamnes in article named “Sisamnes” in following words:

According to Herodotus, Sisamnes was a corrupt judge under Cambyses II of Persia. He accepted a bribe and delivered an unjust verdict. As a result, the king had him arrested and flayed (i.e. process of removal of skin alive) alive. His skin was then used to cover the seat in which his son would sit in judgement.

Posted in -Home-, Pakistan, Pakistan Internal Affairs | 2 Comments »

Education System is Fake!

Posted by khuram on July 12, 2010

Sign up for OKPAY and start accepting payments instantly.
Education System is Fake:

Protesters parade a herd of 'fake degree' donkeys through the streets

Fake Degrees of our Parliamentarians is the hot issue of these days. There are lots of condemnations and protests against fake degree holders. There are opinions that donkeys are better than those fake degree holders. Our so highly qualified nation also made fun of CM Balochistan’s statement on this issue in which he said, “Degree is degree; whether it is genuine or fake!”.

Well, people may continue to think that donkeys are better than fake degree holders, but in my opinion … a donkey and a degree minded person are same.

I wrote somewhere else also. I am reproducing it below:

“Degree makes you eligible to apply for the job. It does not even guarantee that your application shall be replied. It also does not give guarantee that you will not be expelled. It makes young people lazy. They tend to look around them who is going to create some economic activity for them to participate. They loose all confidence to create a new economic activity for themselves and for other people. In many big cities, fresh Master degree holders (M.Com, MBA etc.) are given jobs for as low salaries as Rs.7000/- to Rs.8000/-. Especially this commerce and business education is a big fraud with youth. Whole purpose of this education is to ensure regular supply of trained servants for less educated capitalists (Masters). Role of these degree holders is like spare parts of this capital system machine. New spare parts are inducted and then replaced. Good spare parts move to richer parts of this whole machine. This is the all system.

Few days back, I google searched to see exactly why employers demand degree certificates from job applicants. One convincing argument that I found was that presence of degree/certificate gives enough surety that the applicant is determined … he has spent 24/25 years of his life in order to become a good employee. He is submissive and he shall obey the commands of employer. Employers don’t like that employees be able to “plan” the things by themselves. Employers tend to keep planning aspects in their own hands. They prefer and like their own planning. They don’t really need employees competent enough to plan the things. They only need obedient people who have good track record of completing “assignments” in time.”

Education system may be all good in terms of recognition in employment sector. But role of education system is not to spread knowledge. It’s role is to produce obedient people to meet the ongoing demands of employers.

 

Task of education system is NOT to spread knowledge or wisdom. Basically it’s function is to produce a sort of ranking, or some objective eligibility criteria.

We also should understand what “objectivity” or “objective criteria” really mean.

Take the example of some murder case proceedings in a court where Judge personally knows that accused is the murderer. But in case there is lack of evidence, the same Judge will have to release that accused person.

Here lack of evidence means lack of objective evidence.

The need of objectivity arises only in group life. Main usage of objectivity is to regulate and harmonize the group life. People settle their disputes while the criteria for decisions are objective. Here objectivity has no direct concern with the reality or truth. Decisions based on objective facts may be misleading. For example if a judge personally knows that the accused is murderer but he has no objective evidence, he will have to release that person. Here the decision is not based on real situation. Objectivity, for the most part makes our group life more convenient. Just for the sake of this ‘convenience’, the society can prefer objectivity to reality. To base our decisions in a society on reality, which is not supported by objectivity, creates various types of social problems. To worship idols may be objective kind of duty in an idol worshiping country/society but it may not be the real duty for them. If any person in that society denies performing this objective duty and insist on real (which is subjective) duty, that person shall create various types of social problems for himself.

In the same way, this Education System has been designed to regulate group life. Its primary function is only to produce certain eligibility rankings which everyone should easily accept. To acquire your desired ranking, you need NOT to acquire knowledge or wisdom. You only need to show your compliance to rules and regulations of degree awarding authority, which is usually a university. You can show this compliance by rote memorizing certain syllabus books … you can show this compliance by getting your assignments completed by your more talented friends or even by professionals who offer their “professional” services to students. And you also can show this compliance by giving all the fee/dues/fines/other charges to the educational institution.

To make some objective criteria is not any bad thing. But bad thing in Education System is that it makes this criterion in the name of knowledge and wisdom. Whereas fact is that these universities never recognize knowledge/wisdom of people outside of this system. Universities do not award Masters Literature Degree to a real poet/author. He shall never be eligible to get a teacher job in some university even though he is Mirza Ghalib or Shakespeare. Even Micheal Faraday who invented Dynmo Generator … he will not be eligible to get admission in BSc. class. For the reasons that perhaps he is under matric.

In our present world, if real Aristotle comes, he will not be given job of teacher of Philosophy in any university. Even, he will not be given any PhD Degree for the reason he got no Masters Degree. And he will not be given Masters Degree for the reason he possesses no Graduate Degree and so on.

Education System itself is fake. It pretends and promises to give knowledge and Wisdom … but practically it gives only a sort of eligibility ranking.

As Education System is “competent” to draw eligibility rankings … it gets a sort of authority which it uses, misuses and even manipulates. Universities do blackmail intelligent students who lack financial resources to pay their dues. Many types of fines/charges etc. are collected by manipulating compulsions on rich/poor students and their parents. Teachers also blackmail students and demonstrate their authority. They even warn students of destroying their careers.

Education System is conscious of its authority and power. To promote degree culture is in the direct interest of this stupid education system.

That’s why I really liked CM Balochistan’s statement: “Degree Degree Hota hai; Asli ho ya Naqli…!!!” (Degree is Degree; whether Genuine or Fake!)

And I am happy that CM Balochistan cannot be blamed for having/presenting fake degree. Degree paper is important for “ranking” minded people. But this “paper” is NOT important for knowledge seeking people.

This is less “Education” and more of a “System”. The meaning of “System” is nothing more than “lining up as per regulations” and waiting for the promised rewards that may or may not be provided in the end.

From the Internet:

Views of an Educator that Grades are Stupid.

His analysis also reveals that Education System tries to make students submissive as per the requirements of their future bosses. Following is a quote out of his article:

But it also means that the main skill a student is being measured on is the ability to fulfill the expectations of another person.

In one sense, this is valuable — particularly if you’re the boss and you’re looking for somebody who can follow your directions and do what’s expected of them. In another, it’s not — particularly if pleasing a boss isn’t the most important outcome of one’s work.

See also More than schooling
A critique of the modern education system, by Sandeep Pandey.

Following are some quotes from Sandeep Pandey’s article:

The need for such an examination arises because everything does not seem to be going alright with the education system. The ground reality is that in most of the schools and colleges of India, students, teachers and administrators are apathetic towards the process of education, fraudulent ways are beings adopted to complete the process and a large number of educated youth find themselves without jobs.

More precisely, the perceived goal of education to make the individual and the society ‘better’ in some qualitative sense, seems to missing in its current form.

Most of the people will refuse to link the malaise in the system to the basic nature of the system itself, considering it to be a disorder which could be taken care of by implementing a proper machinery. Such assumptions need to be questioned.

When so much resources and the prime time of our children and youth are being given over to the education system, we as a society need to find out the achievement of this system in real terms.

for on close examination this kind of education system itself appears to be at fault.

The roots of our education system are in the Imperial days, where it was essentially meant to produce a class of people who would assist the British in running the administration of this country.

Even today the education system continues to serve the same function.

It produces a salaried middle class which acts as an appendage to the ruling class and helps keep a primarily coercive administrative system in place. Since the nature of such jobs is essentially of clerical type and there is almost no scope to exercise an individual’s creativity. Most people, even those possessing highest of academic qualifications, cannot derive satisfaction out of their jobs. To compensate for their unproductive nature of jobs they have to be paid higher wages than can be earned otherwise.

Since the education system is also designed to produce merely a ‘clerical’ class, upon the completion of their education programmes the youth seek fixed salary and low risk secure jobs.

Since what is needed to demonstrate when applying for a job is the certificate and not actual competence, people have devised ways of completing the process of obtaining the certificates without actually putting in the hard work to go through the entire exercise involved in the process of education.

The teachers are content drawing their salaries. As the number of people possessing certificates, diplomas and degrees has gone up, so has the competition for jobs and the number of unemployed. Since the education system prepares a job mentality in people, a person is called unemployed if he/she is not in a salaried job.

In fact, the education system can be blamed for ruining the best years of our youth, whether unsuccessful or successful in getting a job.

Contrary to the popular opinion that education opens up more job opportunities, it rewards only a minuscule percentage of the population, mostly coming from socio-economically privileged groups. It is only the dream of getting these small number of high salaried coveted jobs that has sustained the view that education opens up more job opportunities. If we consider the hard reality, education system today makes many more people jobless than it is able to provide jobs to.

The sooner we agree to examine the myth that the present education system is a desirable thing, the better it would be for our society. A completely new form of education system with a different purpose altogether, has to be worked out for creating a healthy society.

So long as the primary function of our education system continues to be serving the interests of the ruling class, no change can be expected to be brought about by it. Fortunately we are forced to re- examine our education system because, firstly, it is failing to provide jobs to everybody, and, secondly, to the people it has provided jobs, it is failing to provide satisfaction. In any case, the myth that education opens up more job opportunities needs to be dispensed with.

However, when several groups of people, including school teachers and college students from Delhi, Kanpur and Ballia were questioned on exactly how they were advanced compared to people who did not get a chance to go to school, people were at a loss to come up with convincing answers.

The educated people would readily agree that inspite of enjoying more material comforts they do not think that they have become any more happy than the uneducated people. Also, education does not make any person a better human being. The educated people are not any more sensitive or sympathetic towards other human beings. Neither are they any more honest or responsible.

Education does not free a person of superstition or blind belief in hypothetical concepts of super natural powers. An educated person is seen to be as much of a fatalist as an uneducated one. People possessing highest degrees in sciences are seen to behave in highly irrational and inexplicable ways. A document published when the Kishore Bharati experiment was wound up, points out that scientific rational way of thinking evaporates when economic and political interests of the people come in their way. Hence upon an honest evaluation it turns out that qualitatively there is not much of a difference between the educated and the uneducated people.

The science education in schools and colleges is no less dogmatic than the teachings of religion. What you can do in the name of science is clearly spelled out by the authorities, allowing no freedom for change even in enquiry. It obviously does not conform to the notion of science offering openness of thought and is certainly far removed from the concept of knowledge. It must be recognized very well that modern education system is not a programme of knowledge seeking even though it does maintain an illusion of that in the name of science.

The examinations, for which the skill of writing is necessary, can be passed by reproducing certain information or at the most by manipulation of this information. A person who is the product of modern education system and has completed most advanced of its programmes does not feel contended or knowledgeable enough to be able to provide answers to all queries relating to his/her specialization and certainly not comfortable answering the basic questions about life and existence in the realm of philosophy even though the education system may have honoured them with Doctor of Philosophy degrees. This is yet another proof of modern education system not being a knowledge seeking exercise. In fact, there appears to be a lot of confusion among people on what exactly is the nature of knowledge and the ways of going about acquiring it.

 

Posted in -Home-, Education & Examination System, Pakistan, Pakistan Internal Affairs, Philosophy, Philosophy in Pakistan, Subjectivity/ Objectivity and Scientific Method | 6 Comments »

“Degree is Degree — Whether it is Fake or Genuine!” (CM Balochistan):

Posted by khuram on June 30, 2010

Sign up for OKPAY and start accepting payments instantly.
“Degree is Degree — Whether it is Fake or Genuine!” (CM Balochistan)

Well … I am supporter of this statement … but not in feudal sense.

My following words basically deal with the issues of “Strong Institutions” Vs. “Strong Personalities” and “Competency Vs. Merit”. I will criticize the concept of “Strong Institutions” including “Education System” and will supports CM Balochistan’s recent statement: “Degree is Degree — Whether it is Fake or Genuine”.

One common point of view is that lack of proper institutionalization is the core problem Pakistan is facing these days. Once I dared to disagree with this opinion. I got following response from a friend:

So you think that there is no need for strong institutions like courts, police etc. Strength doesn’t mean anything else than independent decisions, decisions on merit. If you are against decision on merits than you can say that our country needs strong personalities above all rules, above all codes.

My Reply:

Well, I am not against the existence of institutions. But institutions should not be so big fools as to be not able to recognize what could be the real best option in various particular situations. I presented the case of a candidate whose over-all 62% marks (In that case, Passing Marks were 40%) could not save her from being declared FAIL in written exam just because she failed only in one paper (out of 12) on account of one short number. May be you cannot realize the stupidity of examination body (the institution) in this case. One can better realize it if one personally goes through similar instances.

Secondly I am in need to clarify what meaning I take of ‘strong’ person and ‘strong’ institution.

In this connection, we generally denote ‘strong person’ as a person who does not care for rules and regulations for negative purposes or for personal selfish reasons. This is the popular meaning and it is a negative meaning.

But I had not used ‘strong person’ with this negative meaning. For me, ‘strong person’ would be that one who does not care for rules and regulations for good and positive reasons.

Now about strong Institutions:

You say:

“Strength doesn’t mean anything else than independent decisions, decisions on merit.”

Well, if you are talking of ‘strong institutions’ in that sense which you are favoring, then let me point out that under the system of ‘strong institutions’ which you favor, decisions are NOT independent and decisions don’t have the basis of COMPETENCY (here I have replaced ‘competency’ for ‘merit’).

Because in ‘strong institutions’, decisions DEPEND on rigid rules and policies, whereas meaning of ‘merit’ is NOT level of competency but is just ‘level of compliance to written rules and policies’.

I ask you a simple question. There are two students who are doing Masters in Physics. University has designed a predefined syllabus for Physics. First student is research minded and he takes pain in trying to find new facts about Physics. For this purpose he has to spend time in his research activities.

Second student is good crammer of syllabus books. What shall happen in the University exam…??? Crammer of syllabus books shall come on MERIT. On the other hand, research minded student might fail in University exam because he had been full time busy in his research activities.

My question to you is that who is more competent…???

If you say that research minded person is more competent … Then you are in favor of strong personalities because in this case your decision has been INDEPENDENT OF RULES AND POLICIES OF UNIVERSITY.

If you say that person who is good crammer of syllabus books is more competent … then you are in favor of strong institutions because your decision has been BASED ON RULES AND POLICIES OF UNIVERSITY.

In my opinion, research minded person is REAL competent whereas crammer has just come on merit.

My another question to you is that: “Competency Vs Merit” … What do you like…???

Competency can go anywhere … it can set its own direction also … Merit is just a blind chase of rigid rules and policies. Competency is the quality of leaders. Merit is the quality of followers. Leaders are those who show others some direction. Remember that any new direction could not be contained in the way of rigid compliance to previously written rules and policies. Those who are only to follow the already written rules and policies how can they go to any new direction…??? A person who does not go to any new direction, how can he show any new direction to others…??? And a person who does not show the new direction to others … simply he is not leader. Perhaps he is such a ‘manager’ who cannot take many independent decisions … Because his decisions would depend on written rules and policies.

Yes I am against decisions on merit … but in the above mentioned sense. And yes there should be strong personalities … above all rules, above all codes … but they must be allowed to go beyond all rules and all codes only for good and positive reasons. Practically it is possible to be allowed to only head of the institution and/or heads of department/section.

My Friend Replied:

Just consider an example if you have a very good car latest model (institution) with an average driver one who can drive like you and me, and on the other hand if you have very old car with so many faults in it, weak engine out dated model with an expert driver (strong personality), what do you think who will win the race? Now a philosopher will favor the expert and a realistic one will favor the latest model machine. In simple words if you have strong institutions then you can utilize your mind otherwise its useless.

My Reply:

Yes if we make our institutions ‘strong’ (within your meaning) then we would not be in need of competent persons … just like an incompetent driver of a better car can win the race against a competent driver, who drives an old car.

Well … we already have shortage of competent persons … Do you want to cover this deficiency in this way…??? By eliminating the role of any human competency…???

But you have forgotten that the incompetent driver shall be able to win the race only when a competent person would already have invented a better car. Actually these ‘strong institutions’ only make our lives more mechanical. Nothing would happen if you replace all the persons in your ‘strong institution’ with mechanical computer aided robots. So there would be no need of humans in your ‘strong institutions’. I again have given all the philosophical reasons in support of my views. I can give examples of ground realities also where so-called strength of institutions have given the results of miseries for general public and have opened the avenues for corruption in many government departments. Our official taxation laws, for instance, are so harsh that tax liabilities of small businessmen can reach to such amounts, which may be more than total capital employed. For example (real example) a business had to be closed just because that businessman made payments to his supplier in cash instead of through banking channel which was required as per law. Otherwise that businessman had been a regular tax payer and he had deposited all his due taxes. He committed only this procedural mistake i.e. of not making payments to supplier through banking channels. In this way he has attracted penalties amounting to more than the total capital of business.

Since our BLIND ‘strong institutions’ cannot see the on ground facts and they only can follow the written rules and policies … So as a result, now that business has been closed. I myself have won the case (being the representative of department in the judicial proceedings) against that businessman at Departmental Tribunal level. In my private meetings with the advocate of businessman, I admitted that no revenue loss was involved in that case because taxpayer had duly deposited all the payable taxes. Only fault was procedural in nature where no government revenue loss was involved. But the penalties involved for such procedural mistake would amount to more than the capital employed by the business. During the judicial proceedings before the Tribunal, I argued that taxpayer had violated such and such rules and sections of Law so he may be penalized for it. So I myself played the role of ‘strong institution’. In another case, taxpayer had made such mistake which had little effect on government revenue. But he was charged with heavy penalty for the procedural mistake. Case already had been decided in favor of tax payer by the lower adjudication forum. Adjudication officer might be some “strong person” within my meanings … So he had taken the decision in favor of taxpayer because amount of revenue loss was really just minor.

On the next forum i.e. before Appellate Tribunal, I represented the department before Tribunal. I won the case on first hearing in favor of department by arguing that tax payer had violated such and such rules and laws. Again I played the role of ‘strong institution’ and ‘weak personality’… And I promoted real injustice in this way because taxpayer had committed only immaterial type of procedural mistake which would have just minor impact on government revenue. Now that person shall pay heavy fines.

I also knew and Judges also knew that there had been no significant loss to government treasury in that case. But my role and the role of judges had been to just blindly follow the written policies and procedures. And this is what we really did. So how can you say that strong institutions shall solve all the problems of nation…??? Strong institutions themselves are a big problem … because they are blind … because they prevent the personalities from applying their minds for the betterment of country … because institutions possess no working mind … because they possess only mechanical written policies which might not be in the best interest of country in all the situations.

I give another example of a so-called “Strong Institution” which is our prevalent Education System. Yesterday, on a TV program, Mr.Tallat Hussain asked Voice Chancellor, Punjab University, “Suppose a student genuinely gets good marks in B.A (Graduation) exams but after some years it comes out that his F.A (Intermediate) certificate was fake (or his marks in F.A were not sufficient to get admission in B.A.) then what will happen to the status of his B.A degree?”

Voice Chancellor categorically replied, “His B.A degree will become liable to be canceled”.

It’s simple meaning is that Education System, as an institution, is not there to spread any knowledge or wisdom. It only ensures certain good percentage of compliance to written rules and policies. One who manages to get more knowledge/wisdom than offered by the Education System but does not manage to follow written rules and policies of university, SHALL NOT BE AWARDED DEGREE by the University. Sometimes universities bypass their written rules and policies when they award some persons honorary degrees. But in such cases, generally, those personalities already would have proven their competency before whole world. In this way, universities prove themselves BLIND as they cannot see competency outside of Education System as long as the world already recognizes that competency.

In short, I liked yesterday’s statement of Chief Minister Balochistan: “Degree is degree — whether it is fake or genuine!”.

Posted in -Home-, Education & Examination System, Essays on Pakistan, Pakistan, Pakistan Internal Affairs, Philosophy, Philosophy in Pakistan, Subjectivity/ Objectivity and Scientific Method, Theory of Knowledge | 1 Comment »

Why Qualification is a Must for getting a Job…???

Posted by khuram on June 16, 2010

Sign up for OKPAY and start accepting payments instantly.
Yesterday I google searched to see exactly why employers demand degree certificates from job applicants. One convincing argument that I found was that presence of degree/certificate gives enough surety that the applicant is determined … he has spend 24/25 years of his life in order to become a good employee. He is submissive and he shall obey the commands of employer. Employers don’t like that employees be able to “plan” the things by themselves. Employers tend to keep planning aspects in their own hands. They prefer and like their own plannings. They don’t really need employees competent enough to plan the things. They only need obedient people who have good track record of completing “assignments” in time.

Education system may be all good in terms of recognition in employment sector. But role of education system is not to spread knowledge. It’s role is to produce obedient people to meet the ongoing demands of employers.

Posted in -Home-, Education & Examination System, Pakistan, Philosophy, Theory of Knowledge | Leave a Comment »

Sad Event — Death of our National Cricket Coach – Bob Woolmer:

Posted by khuram on March 19, 2007

Sad Event — Death of our National Cricket Coach – Bob Woolmer:
Written on: March 19, 2007

Before the news about Bob Woolmer’s initial unconsciousness, Geo TV was constantly presenting very bad insulting remarks of common audiance about Bob Woolmer, Inzimam and others, including the team as a whole. Those remarks were not making any proper sense and sounded very bad to me. I didn’t watch the match with Ireland, but the highlights were showing that Ireland, although was a new team, but was not any bad team at all. One factor behind our losing the match might be that we under-estimated a good team. Now try to think about all those who were putting insulting remarks against individuals, including Inzimam and Bom Woolmer; were they also not committing the same mistake…??? Were they mistakenly not under-estimating a good Iresh team…??? Then for why they were so badly criticizing the team with third-rate insulting remarks. And why Geo TV was presenting those third-rate comments? I did not see other TV channels, but Geo TV’s behaviour was really very immature.

If we lost the match, then it means that we as a Nation also had lost the match. Why to blame only team? We should try to evaluate our own behaviours and attitudes also. If we are not mature in our thinking and we openly present third-rate comments against our own individuals before International media, then how can we be mature in stadium…??? What International audiance might have got the message out of such remarks that our team was better model than players? Obviously, we do not pay any proper respect to our ownselves. Why should others respect us then…???

Bob Woolmer, our Coach, has died. Now we should stop our useless criticism on individuals. We should take some care of self-esteem of those individuals whose talents have been internationally recognized. If their own nation treats them so badly then how it is possible that they can get any psychological strength, which is vital for their performance…???

Bring the best player before me. I shall tell him, “You are bad player. You cannot play well. You are out of form. Your good days have gone. Your Coach is alien. He may not be sincere with you. Instead of playing, you should retire, etc. etc.” … and then let that player participate in World Cup match. My question is: What shall be his performance…???

Posted in -Home-, Pakistan, Pakistan Internal Affairs | 5 Comments »

How to eradicate Poverty from our Country? And can our Education sector make any Progress if we just Increase Education Budget?

Posted by khuram on December 18, 2006

Mahatir Muhammad’s “Case of Asia” is a good book to understand how practically poverty can be eradicated within few decades from a poor country. Although he expressed his concerns about the setbacks to the Economies of East Asian Countries in late 1990s, but on the whole, he showed his satisfaction over the achievements of his government. Malaysia was a poor country in early 1960’s when Mahatir assumed power. He has discussed his long term planning aimed at how to eradicate poverty from the country. His people were mostly uneducated and did not know even how to do small businesses. His government first tried to understand the composition of country’s society with respect to their economic activities and level of incomes. They found that there was vast disparity in the type of Economic activities and distribution of Income. A sizable population of Malaysia consisted of alien people. Indigenous Malaysian people were in majority however but most Economic resources were in the hands of alien people. Mahatir discusses that his government could adopt such policies as to just re-distribute the economic resources among population through various indirect means such as through progressive taxation etc. But they thought it was wrong to deprive wealthy people off their hard earned resources. They realized that actual problem was not to just redistribute the resources. The issue was to generate new resources. The majority poor population was so ignorant and didn’t even know how to start a small business. Then Mahatir discusses how his government endeavored to introduce business culture in the society. In fact, his strategy was to introduce entrepreneurial culture in the society. His government first encouraged small enterprises through small loan schemes. His government launched a campaign to promote awareness among small business owners about the adoptation and utilization of modern techniques of Accounting and Finance. In this way, at first his government successfully made a sizable number of people the owner of their own businesses. All the economic activities boosted with increased business activities. Secondly his government did concrete efforts for the promotion of Foreign Investment in his country.

The difference between such a strategy and our policy is something like that we also study Accounting and Finance. But in our country, these subject are taught with the view to enable the students to find some clerical or so called Managerial job. Whereas Mahatir’s government launched campaign to make these modern techniques of doing business as part of business culture of country.

And I do not think that education sector can make progress only with the help of additional finance. We are having far more Economic resources than our own ancient ancestors. If they could make many achievements in educational, intellectual and scientific fields, then why we have been unable to do the same things while having far more Economic resources than our those ancestors could have? Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy considers it just a baseless excuse that we are backward in education sector just because of lack of some Economic resources. The question is, after all what we shall do of additional money if we double or triple our Education budget? Obviously we shall open some new substandard schools and universities. As a result, there shall be some more addition of half educated unemployed or under-employed degree-holder youth. There is actually need of many qualitative type reforms in our education system. Dr. Hoodhbhoy says ok that many types of Scientific research studies do require expensive laboratory equipment, but he says that laboratory equipment is not the necessary condition for all types of scientific research. For example, he has classified science into (i) Practical Sciences and; (ii) Theoretical Sciences. He tells us that research work in theoretical sciences do not require the usage of any expensive laboratory equipment. So we would rightfully blame our so called poverty only if we have shown any positive achievement in the area of at least theoretical sciences.

Furthermore, neither our education system is aware of any utility of theoretical sciences, nor our university syllabi include any theoretical science at all. Only emphasis is on just a minor aspect of practical sciences. My friend who did Masters in Botany told me that once university imported some expensive lab equipment from Japan. But that equipment was never used because if during its application some fault comes, it could only be removed by Japanese. So University management thought it better to not use that equipment at all…!!!

So how our education sector can make any progress if we successfully find many oil wells in our country but pay no attention to the qualitative aspects of education system?

Posted in -Home-, Education & Examination System, Pakistan, Pakistan Internal Affairs | 6 Comments »

How a Punjabi can feel over Bugti’s Assassination……!!!!

Posted by khuram on September 1, 2006

How a Punjabi can feel over Bugti’s Assassination……!!!!
(Written on September 01, 2006)

Mr. Bugti has died in an encounter, so shall be remembered for his bravery and commitment to his cause. Though his cause had little to do with the welfare of his people and more to do with his personal prestige and powerful position, yet his death has been resulted in generating more sympathies for the cause of Baloch people.

It is necessary that we must investigate the cause of Economic and educational backwardness of Baloch people. These are my feelings as being a Punjabi. On the other hand, Mr. Irshad Ahmed Haqqani, in his column, has copied a letter of a Punjabi who is resident of Balochistan. Punjabi people are the victim of target killing and Robbery in Balochistan province. There is general environment of hatred for Punjabis among the Baloch people, or at least among the ‘nationalist’ Balochis. The slogan of Balochi ‘nationalists’ is: “Balochistan – the graveyard of Punjabis”. It is important to mention that if Baloch people are poor or backward, then so is the case with those Punjabi victims of target killing … because mostly they also happened to be poor labour class people. So they are becoming victim of a blind form of hatred. It is also important to mention that Punjabis do not hate Balochis or any other in this type of manner or any other manner whatsoever.

Rights of Balochistan have to do with the affairs of federal government and not with the people of Punjab. But indirect role of Punjab does come because of such reasons as: (i) More representation of Punjabis in federal government, (ii) Economic prosperity of common Punjabi as compared to common Balochi. etc.

Federal government allocates resources to different provinces on the basis of population data alone. As being a Punjabi, in my honest assessment, this is a wrong policy. Balochistan is the largest province of country in terms of its area but smallest in terms of population. While allocating the resources to this province, federal government takes decision solely on the basis of population data and simply ignores the implications of vast land area of this province. The simple implication of such vast land area is that it gives the result of very high per capita infrastructure cost. With the view to provide the facility of lets say, a road to less number of people, a long road of many hundred kilometers would be required. So the per capita infrastructure cost has to be very much high in this province as compared to lets say Punjab where far more number of people get the benefit of relatively very short road. So first of all in my opinion, resources should be allocated not just on the basis of population data but should be allocated on the basis of per capita infrastructure cost. Representation of Baloch people also should be increased in federal government due to similar reasons.

Punjabis are generally well off because they have been gifted by nature with five big rivers and fertile agriculture land. Punjabi people are lucky in the sense that they can exercise their proprietary rights over the fertile lands of the province. It means that Punjabi people are lucky because they can exercise proprietary rights over the naturally occurring natural resources of their province.

Balochi people have been unlucky because they have been deprived off to exercise their proprietary rights over the natural resources (natural gas) of their province. Bugti’s assassination has diverted our attention (Punjabi’s attention) towards this form of injustice as well. Balochistan is poor in water resources and fertility of land but it is rich in other form of natural resources as natural gas. If Punjab has the right to take full benefit of its natural resources, then Balochistan also should have full right to take benefits of its natural resources. But just like Punjabi people take the benefit of their natural resources, so it should be the Baloch people who should take the benefit of their natural resources and this benefit should not go in the pockets of their Sardars.

It is also important to mention that Punjabis do not act as parasite for Baloch people in any sense. They make payment for the gas, which they use. This payment however should go to provincial government of Balochistan for the benefit of Baloch people, and should not go to federal government or even the personal treasures of Baloch Sardars. Federal government should take just her taxation out of this income and nothing more.

It is also necessary that constitutional set up should be like a federation with the greatest possible autonomy to Provinces. There should not be any form of injustice by any province towards any other. People of one province should not hate with people of other province on just baseless things like that since Punjabis take ‘electricity’ out of waters of rivers so the water which reaches to next province would lack some important ingredient which is crucial for agriculture etc. etc. If people of other provinces hate with Punjabis on the basis of this type of reasons, then they are also committing injustice towards Punjabis.

Posted in -Home-, Pakistan Internal Affairs | 3 Comments »

Scientific Revolution and Muslim World:

Posted by khuram on August 27, 2006

It had been a great misfortune to Muslim Nation when they themselves denied the permissibility of any kind of freethinking (ijtihad etc.) for their own self and preferred the way of blind ‘taqleed’.

Early Islamic history had been characterized by free and open discussions and of making of new and new ijtihads. The existence of four separate and comprehensive schools of Muslim Fiqh is the clear evidence that early Muslim scholars could freely interpret the teachings of Islam and in such way that their interpretations could be different from those of others.

Originally there was no any such concept as ‘blind taqleed’ in Islam. The concept of ‘blind taqleed’ was actually emerged as a reaction to growing number of different Islamic schools of thought. The time when famous four fiqahs had been completed, the leading scholars then made another ‘ijtihad’ and imposed ban on any further ijtihad. So blind taqleed in this way became the destiny of Muslim nation.

The glorious period of Muslim intellectual achievements was due to a well-known early Muslim school of thought known as ‘Al-Mutazillah’. This school of thought flourished during the early Abbasid era. Al-Mutazilities adopted the method of applying rationality in the process of making interpretations of code of religion. They emphasized that humans were free in making choices for their actions. In this way, actually they denied the notion of any pre-determined fate. The belief in pre-determined fate had not emerged in the early history of Islam, but actually had been emerged during the period of Umayyad Caliphate. Umayyad rulers were not popular among the populace and so they used to persecute the masses with the intention to prolong their rule. In order to put a cover on their acts of massive persecutions. They, with the help of ‘political Muslim scholars’ promoted the belief in pre-determined fate. They, in this way, tried to legitimize their rule and acts of persecutions by saying that all what was happening was because it was already so decided by the Will of God. They asked people to not to protest against their rule, as it would be equivalent to the protest against the Will of God because Umayyad rulers had the claim that their rule was due to the Will of God.

With the fall of Umayyad rule, and with the emergence of Al-Mutazillah school of thought, belief on free human will got popularity among the highly educated class of Muslims. Caliph Mamoon Rashid also adopted this Al-Mutazillah faith. It was Caliph Mamoon who established Bait-ul-Hikmah in Baghdad and appointed many learned Jewish, Sabi and Christian scholars to translate the work of Greek and Indian scholars on vast scale. Now ground was ready to produce great intellectual scholars. So first-ever Muslim philosopher Abu Ishaq Yaqoob Al-Kindi was Mutazilie in faith. Later giant Muslim philosophers i.e. Al-Farabi and Ibn-e-Sina just adopted the same approach and extended the views of Al-Kindi into further depths. With the passage of time, the political control shifted in the hands of Al-Asherites (present day Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal-Jamaat) school of thought. Al-Ashrites were against the views of Al-Mutazillah. The leading scholars of Al-Ashrites faith i.e. Imam Abu-Al-Hassan Al-Ashary and Imam Ghazali favored the notion of pre-determined fate and so they rejected the idea of free human will. Imam Ghazali particularly denied the validity of cause-effect principle by saying that events happen not because of any physical underlying cause but because God Himself directs the events to happen in that way.

As Al-Ashrities assumed political power, they forcefully eliminated the views of Al-Mutazillah by adopting such means as torturing Mutazilities scholars as well as burning up their books in fire. Every kind of intellectual activity was openly disregarded and the long era of faith in blind taqleed initiated.

After the time of Imam Ghazali, only two great Muslim scholars came in Muslim History. First was Spanish Ibn-e-Rushd. This person drew profound influence over the intellectual environment of the West. Actually it was Ibn-e-Rushd who has served the role of connecting bridge between the Muslim enlightenment and Western enlightenment. The light of rationality and wisdom has been transferred from Muslim world to Western world via this great Muslim intellectual – Ibn-e-Rushd. But Muslim society disregarded him and he could not get any popularity in Muslim world. Second great scholar was Ibn-e-Khuldun. Muslim society again ignored the work of their last intellectual scholar and it has been the Western Scholars of eighteenth century who eventually ‘discovered’ the great work of Ibn-e-Khuldun and realized the importance of his work.

A Western Scholar Dr. Sakhaw has written that if there were no Ashary and Ghazali in Muslim world, then many Galileos and Newtons would have come from Muslim societies.

Followers of Hanabilites school of thought like Ibn-e-Hazm, Ibn-e-Tammiyah and the Imam Abdul Wahab etc. all were great anti-rationalists, basically. To them, even any new scientific theory would have been another ‘biddat’, which would deserve forceful rejection or elimination.

The time when West started to accept the importance of rational inquiry into the theoretical matters corresponds to the time when the light of rationality and wisdom had been completely turned off by the combined efforts of Al-Asharites, Hanabilitis and Muslim Sufis.

Role of Al-Asharities and Hanabalies has been discussed. Sufis were also against the method of rational inquiry because they preferred ‘wajad’ to rational thought.

So over-all Muslim intellectual environment had been complete anti-rational in nature throughout the time, which corresponds to the period of renaissance in Western world.

For as long period of time as about 500 years (after the death of Ibn-e-Khuldun in 13th century AD to 18th century AD) Muslim societies either had been stuck in complete blind taqleed or at the most had been trying to figure out or resolve the differences between Sufism and Shriah; where Sufism related to inner aspects (batan) of spiritual life and Shariah related to external compliance (zahir) to the commands of religion as to prayers etc.

In the eighteenth century, Shah Wali Ullah, a prominent Indian Muslim Scholar, after a very long period, accepted the positive role of ijtihad in the modern times and also emphasized the need of presenting Islamic teachings in the shape of rational arguments. Muslim society gave him respect but did not understand his point of view. A century later, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan launched a campaign of introducing rationality in the interpretations of teachings of religion. But mainstream Muslim society rejected his view on religious matters. He however got success in introducing modern Western education in Muslim society.

Allama Iqbal, then, got popularity in Muslims of India but basically he was another anti-rationalist and he did not like that Muslims may study philosophy or literature. After independence, Pakistan produced a Nobel Prize winner scientist Dr. Abdul Salam but he also was disregarded by Pakistani society just because he belonged to a sect, which is considered Kafir by rest of Muslims. A Pakistani writer Mr. Sheikh Ikram writes that we should adopt Western technology but we should not introduce the study of theoretical sciences in the country. What would be its implication? We shall just be a ‘user’ of technology and we shall not be able to invent any technology at our own because of being unfamiliar to theoretical sciences.

There is another poor trend in Muslim societies. This is keeping false pride in the achievements of ancient Muslims in the field of science and technology. There is nothing wrong in keeping this pride, but the wrong element is that contemporary Muslims feel this pride not with any such purpose as to get positive inspirations from their ancestors, but just to get a sort of poor justification for their backwardness in comparison with the Western world. They do not justify their backwardness. They only “justify” the progress of Western world by wrongfully (and passively) thinking that all what West knows today was actually told to them by the ancient Muslim scientists. So contemporary Muslims do not find their happiness in any of their positive achievement, but just in this type of false passive ideas. Another still existing passive attitude of Muslims is that they believe that there is no need to learn about any man made ‘ism’. What they believe is something like that all the possible scientific knowledge is already contained in Muslim sacred books. So the practical meaning of doing ‘scientific research’ for them is that whenever Western scientists shall discover any new scientific truth, they (Muslims) then just again interpret their sacred books in such way as to become able to say that the said new scientific fact was already contained in those books.

Secondly our education system is also incapable of producing any real scientific achievement. It is also worthy to point out that all our education policies are ‘quantity’ oriented and our governments have been just unable to introduce any qualitative policy capable to bring about any intellectual revolution in our education sector. I have my own views over the qualitative aspects of education system and in my work; I have classified our existing education system as ‘static’ understanding improvement model. By the term ‘static’, I mean that maximum goal before our education system is just to convey already existing knowledge to students. This model is ‘static’ because there is no any such goal as to get any intellectual achievement in the form of lets say, formulation of any new theory etc. So under this ‘static’ education system, we cannot expect that any real scientist shall come from it. Only huge number of degree holders shall come from this type of education system. Actually there is need of a comprehensive progressive oriented education philosophy for our education system. But unfortunately there is no awareness, at any level, about this need. There should be ‘ground’ capable enough to produce real intellectual achievements. Our existing education system does not provide this type of ground.

Posted in -Home-, Muslim Philosophy, Pakistan, Philosophy, Philosophy in Pakistan, Philosophy of Science | 6 Comments »

USA – The World Leader not just because of superior Militery Power:

Posted by khuram on August 21, 2006

Sign up for OKPAY and start accepting payments instantly.

In my assessment, USA stands as a world leader not just because of its superior military power. To be a world leader, a country must require having somewhat ‘ideological agenda’, which could organize other major countries of the world under the leadership of that country. And I must make it clear that it is not just philosophical assertion but in fact it is ground reality. About two centuries back when Britain and France were struggling for their colonial expansions, both these countries were doing it for the cause of some ideological agenda. Agenda for Britain was the ‘cause of white man’, and the agenda for France was ‘civilization of un-civilized human populations’, mainly in African countries. In this way, both these colonial powers were actually legitimizing their colonial holdings, in the eyes of other countries.

In the later periods of colonization, Britain adopted the slogans of ‘liberalism’, ‘democracy’ etc. as their political agenda with the view to legitimize its colonial holdings.

What is Legitimization?

Legitimization is the NEED of any government or head of government. In the contemporary world, this ‘legitimization’ mainly comes from democratic vote. When some political group gets this democratic vote, its position as true head of state becomes UNQUESTIONABLE in the eyes of not only country’s own population, but also in the eyes of governments of other countries of the world.

This ‘legitimization’ exists even in absolute dictatorship or monarchy, but in somewhat different form. A monarch king usually legitimizes his kingship by manipulating the religious beliefs of the population of his own country. In the ancient Greek world, Alexander, for instance, ‘legitimized’ his superior position by calling himself as ‘son of Zeus’ (i.e. an ancient god). Similarly, the Faros of ancient Egypt also legitimized their kingships in same manner.

Above are the examples out of ancient times. In the medieval times, Catholic Church happened to have effective political control over virtually whole of Europe. And Church also legitimized its political control by manipulating the religious beliefs of people. Japan’s monarchy is among the most ancient monarchies of world. To obey or to give best of respect to Japan’s Emperor is actually included in the beliefs of Shinto religion i.e. the dominant religion of Japan. So the authority of Emperor had ever been unquestionable in Japan. If authority is ‘unquestionable’ it means that authority is ‘legitimate’.

Dictators of contemporary world also try to legitimize their authority on religious grounds. In our country, Gen. Zia’s referendum was the most direct attempt to use religion with the view to get legitimate authority. Kings of Saudi Arabia call themselves ‘Khademein-e-Harmain Sharifain’. On the other hand they are ready to hand over all their affairs to Americans but still they need to have somewhat legitimacy in the eyes of Muslim population as well as in the eyes of other Muslim countries. Very ironical reality is that after the second world war, it happened to be only Arab countries which have lost their territories in wars and have been unable to re-gain those territories. Other exception may be Afghanistan.

Gen. Musharraf has legitimized himself in a different way. At very first instance, he came up with his ‘seven point agenda’ (note this is another form of ‘ideological agenda’). In this way, he successfully legitimized his authority in the eyes of upper and middle, educated class of country. Secondly, he got the chance of legitimizing himself internationally by accepting a crucial role in the so-called ‘war against terrorism’.

In the same way, USA also is in need to show its commitment to such ‘ideological agenda’, which should have some appeal to other major countries. USA’s one such ‘ideological agenda’ is the slogan of ‘global peace’. The slogan of this ‘global peace’ should be heeded in depth. Throughout the known history, humans have been divided in many political groups. Those groups always have been in the state of military wars with other groups. World, in its whole history, never have experienced any effective ‘international law’. Here I would like to refer to the ideas of Bertrand Russell who considered the absence of any international law as ‘international anarchy’. He put forwarded these views just after the end of Second World War. By that time, the whole world was quite fed up of continuing international wars. Although the world was divided in two major power blocks but still then both these blocks did not want to indulge themselves in any physical war. Both these power groups were in NEED to set up some international peace forum where they could settle their routine disputes without involving themselves in major physical wars. So the emergence of ‘effective’ United Nations was the need of the day. After it, the world also experienced the so-called ‘cold war’. It was generally anticipated that the ultimate consequence of this cold war would be more dangerous because any major war between such two powerful groups could end up in massive scale atomic war, which might result in complete destruction of contemporary human civilization or even humanity as a whole. So in those days, Bertrand Russell was one of the main proponents of the idea of uni-polar world regime. He elaborated this idea in details in his writings. His point of view was something like that to end up the prevalent fear of complete destruction of humanity as a whole; the world should organize itself under the leadership of a single super power country. That single super power country should possess complete monopoly in the possession of world’s main military assets. That super power country should act like a world policeman with the view to enforce a uniform universal law.

While comparing USA and USSR, Russell’s opinion went in the favor of USA as a ‘better’ international policeman. Russell took the side of USA on such grounds that USA was the supporter of such ideas as ‘freedom of thought’, ‘equality’ etc. as compared to USSR.

On this question that how actually the whole world could organize itself under a single leadership, Russell’s reply was that it could happen either as a result of another world war or it could happen as a result of agreement between the then two major power blocks. Russell could not survive to see how it actually has happened but it is a fact that it has happened in whatever way.

Now USA’s practical role is not different to what Russell assigned to his ideal single super power. Meaning of ‘global peace’ is that if all the alphabets are considered to be all the countries of world where ‘U’ would stand for USA, then country ‘A’ should not fight war with country ‘B’ or ‘M’. Similarly country ‘P’ also should not fight war with country ‘X’ or ‘Z’. In this ideal ‘global peace’, only country ‘U’ should fight wars with any other country. And country ‘U’ should fight wars with other countries with the view to ensure that other countries may not fight wars against each other.

In this way if country ‘U’ punishes country ‘M’ then it would NOT go against the basic idea of ‘global peace’. But the underlying purpose of ‘global peace’ is preservation of human civilization and humanity as a whole. So in case country ‘U’ punishes any other country in such a way which would become a serious threat to the preservation of human civilization and humanity as a whole, then at this point country ‘U’ would be crossing its those limits which were acceptable to all the other major countries. At this point, other countries MUST stop the hands of USA.

And yes just like USA, other major nations also believe in ‘human rights’ not in its true essence but just in the form of a clever slogan. If USA violates ‘human rights’ in Afghanistan or in Iraq, other major nations shall not take any serious notice of these cruelties. In these cases, the aggrieved nations should try to promote the idea of ‘human rights’ in its true essence. At some point, other nations would feel guilty over their present negligence.

Posted in -Home-, International Affairs, Pakistan | 10 Comments »

Enlightened Moderation

Posted by khuram on August 19, 2006

The notion of ‘Moderate Islam’ has been emerged as a reaction to the so-called ‘Extremist Islam’. Some half educated Muslims believe that all the miseries and all the difficulties upon which the whole Muslim Ummah has been trapped, has only two reasons namely; (i) that all the Muslims throughout the world do not follow their own (i.e. that small group’s) particular interpretation of Islamic teachings and; (ii) all the other nations of the world are doing nothing but just conspiring their some ill agenda towards Muslims.

So this small group of half educated Muslims hates all those Muslims who happen to follow some different interpretation of Islam and they also hate all the other nations of the world particularly three i.e. (i) Jews, (ii) Hindus and; (iii) Christians.

We cannot have any doubt in the sincerity of this small extremist group for the betterment of Islam. They are really very sincere to Islam by their heart. An extremist Sunni, for example, would do a real great service, in his mind, for the ‘cause’ of Islam when he kills some shias and vice versa. In the same way, these extremist people, in their own feelings, are really very sincere for the cause of Islam when they hate or try to promote hatred towards other nations.

The problem is not with the sincerity of this extremist group. They are good sincere Muslims by their heart. The only problem is the boundless volume of grave ignorance, which they possess. Their ignorance is evident in the fact that they do not know any cause of the decline of Muslim societies other than above-mentioned two reasons. They do not know that Muslims are behind in science and technology just because they themselves have just marginal contribution towards the knowledge of science and technology. Instead of knowing this, what they know is that all what westerns know today, was actually told to them by the ancient Muslim scientists. In their minds, they already know all the hidden secrets of Universe so there is no need to try to find any new secret of Universe. Since they already know all the possible secrets of Universe, so the only thing needed is that all other nations also should believe in those absolute secrets. What are those secrets? These are something like that a man must have this much certain length of beard. That people belonging to a particular sect of Islam are kaffirs, in fact. In order that people regularly offer prayers, there is a need of special state police force. That a particular sect is ‘Murttad’ so it is all right to kill the members of that sect. Another universal fact, which they know is something like that, all other nations are all time busy in making more and more conspiracies against Muslims.

Despite their all ignorance, they possess certain positive qualities. They ‘know’ the ‘problems’ and they also ‘know’ the ‘solution’. The ‘problems’ have been discussed above. Solution is of course ‘Jihad’. Meaning of ‘Jihad’ is ‘fighting’. Their real positive quality is that they really fight. They fight for what they consider true and right. So they do not possess negative or destructive intentions. Their intentions are positive because they struggle for the cause of righteousness. They are wrong however because their concept of righteousness is not right.

Their negative quality is that they hate others on quite wrong basis. Their positive quality is that what they consider right, they do struggle for its achievement, and in a way, which they consider right.

Their conscience can be doubted but their intentions cannot be. They think it necessary that in order that people regularly offer their prayers, there should be a special police force. When they really form their government somewhere, they then really establish one such special police force. Their criminal laws include such punishments as for not offering the prayers, and for not keeping beard of a certain length. By doing this sort of things, they just follow their own ignorant minds. They claim to follow the Shariah of Islam. But they never bother to see that according to the essence of Quranic punishments, human authorities are authorized to punish the people only in those matters, which relate to “Haqooq-ul-Ibad”. Thus Quranic Punishments include the punishment for murder, for theft and for other matters relating to ‘Haqooq-ul-Ibad’. But Quranic Punishments do not include punishment for not offering the prayers, punishment for not keeping beard of any certain length and so on. Human authorities have not been authorized by Quran to give punishment in any matter, which relates to ‘Haqooq-Allah’. Because according to the essence of Quranic teachings, punishment in the matters of ‘Haqooq-Allah’ shall be given to the wrong doers in their after life, and by God Almighty himself.

So extremists are actually those people who want to take authority of God also in their own hands. And they do it not due to their any negative intention. They do it just because of their ignorance. Their role for the nation is that of a ‘fool well-wisher’.

Now come to see who are these so-called ‘moderate’ Muslims. These are ‘silent majority’ Muslims. They just like their routine lives and do not want any disturbance in their daily routines. They are quite peaceful. They do not care much about what is going on internationally because most of the international affairs have little to do with their daily routines. At the same time, they do get themselves well informed on various international matters. They often talk about cruelties and double standards of westerns but they know that they can do nothing against those westerns. Having this characteristic, they can be considered to be much passive than those ‘extremists’ because ‘extremists’, after all do take some practical steps. ‘Moderate’ Muslims know that they, as a nation, are just following the dictations of west but they do not feel much ashamed of this fact. They just prefer their daily routines and do not undertake to perform their any role towards the correction of the situation. They put all the responsibility either on government or on ‘others’ and again get themselves busy in their routines. So in this way the ‘extremists’ do wrong efforts whereas these so-called ‘Moderate’ Muslims do nothing at all. This ‘silent majority’ has no positive program to be acted upon. The only thing, which it has, is just its ‘silence’.

What is needed?

Obviously this ‘moderate’ Islam is not the need of the day. Slogan of ‘Moderate Islam’ has been created just to show before westerns that all the Muslims are not extremists and therefore ‘terrorists’. Intention was just to show that majority Muslims are quite peaceful. ‘Extremists’ hate others and want to promote hate for others just due to their ignorance. ‘Moderate Muslims’ on the other hand are ‘peaceful’ not because they have found any corrective solution in their peace. They are ‘peaceful’ just because they do not want to disturb their routine lives and they also find themselves quite helpless before the mighty power of the west. So this ‘peace’ is actually a sign of their crowdedness. Rather than these ‘moderate’ Muslims, there is actually a need of ‘progressive’ Muslims. These should be the people who should not hate others on just baseless things. There is no need to hate any Jew just because he/she is a Jew. Similarly there is no need to hate any Hindu or Christian just because he/she is Hindu or Christian. But there is definite need to hate cruel whether they are Hindus, Jews, Christians or even Muslims. There is definite need to hate those who hate others just because of religious or sectarian differences. There is no need to adopt any absolute ‘peace’. There is definite need to try to become masters of our own destiny, rather than just following the dictations of the west. There is need to feel ashamed of our mistakes and weaknesses. There is need to investigate and find out the real causes of our present day’s backwardness as compared to Westerns. We, as a nation, have been quite addict to the finding of easy solutions to all the problems. Present competitive world is more complex and we must accept that our present policy of finding easy solutions shall not be useful. There is a need of a class of ‘progressive’ Muslims who should devote their lives in the analysis of national crises with the view to find out workable solution to the problem. There is definite need of social reforms and there is need to well educate the entire society. We should be peaceful but not because of our any weakness. We should be peaceful and at the same time we should not compromise our national dignity and honor. We should be peaceful in the sense that we should not force others to follow our dictations. We should not be peaceful in this sense that we have no other option but to follow the dictations.

Posted in -Home-, Pakistan | 5 Comments »