Hazrat (Mufti) Saheb (HA),
It is a discussion so no reason to get wound up or rattled about it. Here is my point of view (you have the right to disagree):
The verses of the Qur’aan and Ahadeeth of Nabi (Sallallaho Alaihe Wassallam) are about “obedience of Ameer” and no revolting or rebelling against them, making dua for them advising them with courtesy, humility (when they are engaged in sin) and if they turn to Kuf’r (abandoning of Salah) then consult Ulama before rebelling.
All of that is well understand.
Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) considered democracy to be Kuf’r and the books of our Ulama are replete with Fatwaas as I am sure that you are no doubt familiar with.
The situation in Pakistan is unique. You have Nawaz Shareef who has been elected Prime Minister through “an aspect of western democracy” i.e. elections. You are accepting the results of this “aspect of western democracy” and thereby regarding them as “Wali-Amr” and then transposing all the rules and regulations of Shariah to him.
The following 2 things are happening as a result of your Ijtehaad:
- Western democracy also gives civilians rights to protest, civil disobedience etc. This is preserved in the UN Charter for human rights. You are disregarding this entirely and saying that it’s not permissible.
- You are not giving any solution as to how to address this situation except a spiritual solution (fully acceptable to me) that people should turn to Allah (SWT) and repent but not acceptable to majority.
This splits the population into five groups:
- First group is the one which is basically sick and tired of what’s happening to them and revert to vigilantism (burning buses, riots etc) and basically venting and ranting!
- Second group is the one who say that (Western) democracy gave this system so lets try using the other institutes of the country to counter balance; these institutes are in poor shape and cannot provide the counter balance
- Third group is the one which clearly knows that since Democracy is Ku’fr so is the fruits and they don’t recognise any authority or Government thereby and these are TTP like minded.
- Fourth group is “Tableeghees” minded pacifists etc who have no interest in the apparent conditions of the Ummah and they indeed concur with you.
- Fifth group are also Islamically minded who are looking to Ulama (reading what you are saying) and clearly rejecting it! They are also disillusioned with Islamic parties and Maulana Fazlur-Rahman (HA) and others but may have a soft corner for Imran Khan (because he is the least evil at the moment). Imran Khan is no Messiah for Pakistan (that’s for sure) but he is (according to them) the best hope.
Nobody is contesting your sincerity or your efforts but your conclusions are boxing the people into frustration.
When you discuss our Akabir (of the past) then they led from the front! Whether it was Shaykhul-Islam (RA) or Allamah Shabbir Ahmed Usmani (RA) the problem with present generation of Ulama is that they don’t lead from the front but issues Academic Fatwaas (which are not only far from reality but also strange in conclusions). Yes our Akabir had differences of opinion (Pakistan vs India) but they led from the front and their sincerity, devotion and character was never in doubt. Today, overwhelming majority of Pakistanees have no trust in sincerity, devotion or character of Ulama like Maulana Fazlur-Rahman (HA); whether you deny it or not but it is the reality.
Shaykh (Mufti) Rafi Usmani (HA) and Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) are not in politics.
The most significant (and extentual) involvement of Ulama is with Khatm-e-Nabuwaat (and that’s about it).
In India our Ulama belong to so many parties that laymen can no longer tell what’s what and which way the wind is blowing.
There is no coherent discussion or strategy or plan from Ulama (about Pakistan) at all! Apart from make Taub’a and make dua (this is genuine) but if making Taubah and making dua (ONLY) solved problems then Nabi (Sallallaho Alaihe Wassallam) would have simply employed this tactic.
The conclusion which you draw from this is that I am some sort of a Modernist/Atheist/Secularist who is dismissing the effects of sin and forgiveness from Allah (SWT) through Tauba which I am clearly not.
You may also conclude that I am against Ulama.
Both of these conclusions will be incorrect but you live in a free country and free to do as you please.
The simple point is that you are applying Ijtehaad and equating Nawaz Shareef Government to a legitimate Islamic Government (although admitting faults and shortcomings because they are so obvious that even you can’t overlook them) but you are not admitting this as an Ijtehaad and you are frustrated that a “Mufti” has written a 700 page book so how dare some novice dismiss it! The Saudi Ulama have been doing this since 1926 and producing very similar material to defend their Government.
I am not asking that you or other Ulama are specifically backing Nawaz Shareef or Imran Khan or anyone else (specifically) but your conclusions quash rebellion against any ruler; if Parvaiz Musharraf was a democratically elected leader (now) then your conclusion would be backing him and his Government up.
Before ending, again for the 3rd/4th time I am not questioning your sincerity or that you are deliberately backing any one (group) but questioning your “political Ijtehaad” which is accepting parts of western democracy but dismissing other parts (i.e. protests, sit-ins, demonstrations etc.) as rebellion. If a leader is "elected" through a system then the same system also puts "safeguards" in place to dismiss them. You are accepting a leader through "demoracy" and then placing them with the rights of "Khaleefah" or "Walial-Amr'" thereby dismissing any disagreement (by terming that as rebellion).
It is not possible to make this any clearer in plain English.
Jazakallahu Khayran
