Related Resources

Recent events in Pakistan are representative of the troublesome state of Islam in Pakistan today. A number of religiously-motivated violence acts such as Sunni Muslims killing 60 Shiite in a mosque, the assassination of a parliament member in Islamabad, and the massacre of reporter Daniel Pearl portray Islam in Pakistan today. To understand this violence, fundamental questions about the role of Islam in Pakistan must be addressed. The answers to the question who is defining Islam mirrors a historical cause-and-effect relationship that explains the reasons behind the radical Islamic views throughout Pakistan’s domestic scene.

Pakistan's prominence in the Muslim world stems from its large population, its nuclear capacity, its association with the United States in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, but most importantly from the perception held by most of its people since Pakistan's creation that it is an Islamic state. Pakistan's creation was the result of a movement based on a clear Islamic vision, the Pakistani people continue to feel responsible for defining, guiding, and shaping Islam. The fundamental question, however, for Pakistanis has been: which Islam? Each group has its own definition of Islam with no consensus on which is the final version.

Islam first reached South Asia in the 8th Century by Arabs who employed the doctrine of ijtihad, a mechanism by which Islamic scholars and thinkers can reapply the fundamental principles of Islam to adapt to cultures unexplored by Islam and ever changing social evolutions. The inherent values of empathy and compassion in ijtihad allowed for these two civilizations to coexist, each respecting the others cultures and traditions within the confines of Islam.

Ahmed explained that the Taj Mahal, built in the 17th Century, was a monument whose glory reflected the confidence and imagination of a civilization at its peak. During this period, the story of Aurangzeb and his brother Dara Shikoh illustrate the two different interpretations of Islam that emerged at this time. Aurangzeb espoused an exclusivist interpretation of Islam based on strict boundaries. He adopted and expanded for the Empire a strict orthodox version of Islam implementing Sharia and tax on non-Muslims. By contrast, his brother, Dara Shikoh believed in a mystic and spiritual for of Islam in which he saw a synthesis between Hinduism and Islam – he symbolizes ijtihad in Islam. This story represents a much larger clash within Islam.

After several centuries of decline, Muslims reacted to 19th century instability through two different movements, which reflect the two different strains. The Deoband, another form of exclusivist, strict Islam that rejected most ijtihad. In contrast, the more open, inclusive Aligarh movement sought to incorporate modernity into Muslim society. Ahmed maintains that the former, exclusivist approach emerges when Pakistani society faces a threat and is put on the defensive.

This same tension is also reflected by the 1947 Pakistani movement, whose driving force was colored by a strong sense of resistance to the ‘threat of modernity’. Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the father of modern Pakistan, was supportive of the Aligarh approach, but adopted a more exclusivist approach as Pakistan struggled. The exclusivist model that has prevailed throughout Pakstani history and we are seeing it again today. The prevailing view in Pakistan –that Islam is under siege- is crystallized by its tense relationship with its non-Muslim Indian neighbor and their frequent collisions.

Today, the Dara Shikoh inclusive model of Islam has almost entirely faded, certainly in terms of state and official interpretation in Pakistan. Recent meetings that took place in Lahore last week –including that of the Jama-at-i Islami party- illustrate the dominance of an exclusionist interpretation of Islam in Pakistan today; an interpretation characterized by intolerance as well as a strong anti-Western sentiment. Ahmed warned that Pakistani society will become increasingly radicalized as the population perceives Islam under siege. Recent statements by known moderates, such as Dr. Javed Iqbal that “Bush is the only terrorist” are one example of this troubling trend.