The contemporary world is one of cultural intersections and according to some sociologists, the world is moving towards a global culture, most likely to be an Americanised model of cultural values and life, a ‘McWorld’ according to the globalisation theorist Benjamin Barber. The present article looks at such processes of cultural convergence from the sociology of religion perspective, especially probing the idea of ‘ideological frontiers’ in a globalising world.
Speaking at the Istehkam-e-Pakistan congregation held in Faisalabad on March 23, 2012, Syed Munawar Hassan, the head of Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), spoke about the importance of the ‘Two Nation Theory’ in defining the ideology of Pakistan. The Hindus are a “polytheist, idol-worshipping nation” having no correlation whatsoever with Muslim monotheism and “our culture and civilisation is different”, he stated. He emphasised that Pakistan was created after hijrat (migration) and jihad by the Muslims who were “driven out from their homes only because they stated Pakistan ka matlab kya, La Ilaha Ill Allah (What is the meaning of Pakistan? There is no God but Allah)”.
At a previous congregation in Lahore, Mr Hassan had stated that the Difa-e-Pakistan Council (Pakistan Defence Council) had come into existence to “defend the ideological frontiers of Pakistan” along with its geographical boundaries. In the council’s congregation in Multan, he stated that Pakistan is “the fort of Islam” and “for us [Pakistan] has the status of a mosque”. The question, however, is what does defending culture and ideological frontiers in today’s world really mean and how is it achieved? And how does Pakistan as “a mosque” relate to the McWorld?
Negotiating with the western cultural juggernaut, especially the media and its ‘global rush of images’ as defined by globalisation theorists, has been particularly a problem for the culturally conservative quarters among Muslims in Pakistan, some of whom have taken extreme positions on this matter. A recent cover of the Rozatul Atfal, a magazine for kids published by the puritanical group Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), shows a large cross placed on central cultural symbols of the contemporary west including Ben 10, Spiderman, Harry Potter and Pokémon, stating that these are “the enemy’s cultural weapons” and asking Muslim children to stay away from these offerings.
Generally speaking, the theoretical framework that has governed, so to speak, the view of Muslim cultural life in conservative circles is a tradition of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) stating mann tashabbaha bi qaomin fa hua minhum, generally meaning that one who imitates a nation is from among them. The conventional interpretation has been that an individual who copies non-Muslims in their appearance and festivals, etc, will be counted as a part of that group and, according to some views, will be resurrected with them on the Day of Judgment. This interpretation has especially been applied to the notion of Muslims keeping themselves away from copying dress and mannerisms of other religious, and by extension, socio-cultural groups.
However, the contemporary Qur’anic scholar Javed Ahmad Ghamidi has provided a different interpretation of this tradition through his characteristic hermeneutical approach. These words are part of a larger narrative. Having been reported out of context, these words have been considered an absolute directive of prohibition. According to Ghamidi, while interpreting this tradition in the light of the Qur’an and keeping in view the entire hadith corpus, this statement of the Prophet (PBUH) refers to the time when the Divine commandment was mentioned in Surah Tawbah. It was ultimately given to Muslims to punish, through their swords, the polytheists of the Quraish in the Arabian Peninsula who had knowingly and willingly rejected the message of Islam despite knowing its authenticity and conspired against the Muslims. Since some Muslims were still living in Quraish settlements at that time, it was stated that they should distinguish themselves from the polytheists in a way that they do not incidentally become victims of the aggressive treatment destined for the polytheists and therefore the emphasis on “not resembling a nation”. Muslims living in such mixed communities were expected to distinguish themselves though their ceremonial salutation (al-salamu ‘alaykum).
However, in saying so, Ghamidi clarifies that the general ethical system of Islam based on the principal of tazkiyah, i.e. the ideal of spiritual, ethical and physical purity that Muslims have to strive for, governs the cultural life of Muslims. Nevertheless, reflecting on the theme of socio-cultural boundaries on a philosophical note, both the conventional and the contemporary interpretations leave us with the difficult question of how to define the ‘existential delimiters’ in the modern world. The relationship of religious values and culture is, perhaps, deeper than we have generally anticipated.
The contemporary world is driven by a market imperative. According to Barber, “the ethos of material civilisation has not yet encountered an obstacle it has been unable to thrust aside”. In addition, while Barber defines cultural homogenisation as formation of ‘McWorld’, the contemporary pop icon Lady Gaga spells it out more interestingly as ‘cultural baptism’ that no one can escape. In such a scenario, the future will clearly bring with it intricate challenges of a religio-cultural nature since the Muslim religion expects central spiritual requirements to be fulfilled in its cultural paradigm.
The current religio-political discourse in Pakistan already bears witness to a sense of urgency brimming on realising the changing socio-cultural conditions that, firstly, the late modern era and, secondly, globalisation bring with them. If Pakistan is “a mosque” then it would be very interesting to see how it copes with MTV airwaves that, being fuelled by global capitalist corporations and driven by cutting edge technology, are able to pierce through any boundaries.
Can the muezzin accommodate the DJ? How does traditional spirituality negotiate with contemporary sensuality? How do we accomplish, so as to speak, the fencing of ideas in the global village? These are deeply interesting yet difficult, existential questions. While the geographical borders of nations are relatively simple to define, the search for ‘ideological frontiers’ may not be that easy in a rapidly changing and globalising world.
The writer teaches Sociology at the University College Lahore (UCL). He can be reached at [email protected]