Daily Times

Given the large number of people who identify themselves as followers of minority religions, there are bound to be people living among those whose beliefs and ways of living they do not share. Some sects and religions are clearly stricter in demanding adherence to their ways than others. Over time, civilization has tended to favour greater tolerance and plurality yet the marginalization of religious minorities is far from over.

In Pakistan, unfortunately, religious intolerance has been on the rise for nearly three decades. Greater numbers of people, it seems, are choosing to follow religious leaders who preach a narrow version or the rituals of Islam, and do not enlighten their followers about its social teachings. The religious knowledge of the masses is thus rudimentary at best. As a result, it is a sad fact that relatively few now recognize love and compassion for all humankind as Islamic values.

Then there are those who buy into the picture of religion portrayed by extremists and reject religious values on account of such attribution. The resulting polarization among the masses is a further point of concern

During the long campaign the state of Pakistan has waged against terrorism it became clear that religious extremists were being trained in mosques and madrassas to bomb public areas including mosques and churches, even commit suicide in trying to kill large numbers of people. Those caught at these camps were found to have very little knowledge of Islam.

These suicide bombers were thoroughly brain washed and a hatred of all other religions and other sects was inculcated in them. However, such hatred is not exclusive to those who went to such madras. Evidence of similar approaches to life and society has been forthcoming at universities and modern workplaces too. An alarmingly large proportion of people in almost every sphere of life tend to judge others on the basis of caste, sect or creed and not their basic humanity. This leaves religious minorities in a very vulnerable situation.

Researchers have been trying to understand and quantify the ideas and practices that lead people to fanaticism. Some religious scholars and students of comparative theology have also studied how perspectives on inclusion differ among followers of various teachers and ideologues, asking why some people show more sympathy and acceptance of differences of opinion regarding the universal truth or the ultimate reality. They have also asked how it is that some deeply religious people can sympathize with atheists.

Then there is the idea of religious pluralism, which means genuine acceptance of adherents of other religions.

On the other hand, another approach to religion is exclusivism – the idea that followers of other religions cannot be expected to see the light and therefore one cannot sympathize with them. This approach is now commonly seen – some of it targeted at Muslims. For their part a large number of Muslims have exclusivist ideas themselves. While Islam is a religion of peace, most Muslims are not great exemplars of this trait.

The whole world was shocked recently by the shooting incident in New Zealand on March 15 where at least 50 people were killed and another 50 were injured. The government and people of New Zealand, led by their prime minister, showed great empathy towards the victims and their surviving families. Most of the victims were immigrants or refugees from Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey, Somalia, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. The immediate response of the government and the community was admirable. They showed great compassion to the affected families. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern quickly denounced the massacre as a terrorist attack, visited the scene while wearing a scarf to show solidarity with the affected families. She also announced a ban on assault weapons in the country and ordered a high security alert.

Azaan was telecasted on national television to show solidarity with the Muslim community. On Saturday, about 3,000 people walked through Christchurch in a “march for love” carrying placards saying “He wanted to divide us, he only made us stronger”, “Muslims welcome, racists not”, and “Kia Kaha” -the Maori words for ‘stay strong’.

Islam recognizes rights of religious minorities. There is a term, “Zimmi”, used to describe religious minorities, and an Islamic state is held responsible for their protection. Even in hadith it is mentioned that “One who kills a man under covenant (i.e., Zimmi) will not even smell the fragrance of Paradise

New Zealanders and Prime Minister Ardern have been lauded worldwide for the sympathy and solidarity shown to the victims of a terrorist attack. They refused to allow religious intolerance to divide the nation and stood as one. The religious tolerance, acceptance and empathy towards people of another faith melted millions of hearts and engendered sympathy for immigrants worldwide. Nowhere was this show of solidarity felt more keenly than by Muslim communities the world over. We must therefore examine our own consciences in this regard. In such circumstances, would we be willing to stand with our minority communities?

We all praised the commendable gestures by New Zealanders in an hour of despair. We should also hold ourselves accountable for not being similarly committed to the protection of the freedom and security of our own religious minorities.

In Pakistan, the nation is violently divided on the basis of religion and sect. It is no wonder, then, that Pakistan is the country most affected by terrorism. More than 60,000 of its people have been killed in terrorist attacks but no ethnic hatred or political agenda other than religious differences have been involved. In 2009, churches in Gojrain were burnt down and many lives were lost. To our lasting shame, not only government leaders but also the people at large remained aloof. Those showing solidarity with the victimized minorities were accused of being deviant and apostate.

The trouble is that many among us cannot tolerate a difference of opinion and have no patience for a clarification that might be forthcoming. The recent lynching of a university student, Mashaal Khan, was an extreme example of religious intolerance. The charges of blasphemy against him were never proved.

Pakistan is recognized as one of the most intolerant countries in the world. The shrinking population of the religious minorities is an indication of how secure they feel. In the 1951 census, the Hindu population was 1.6 per cent. By 1998 it had shrunk to 1.2 per cent. Reports of Hindu citizens migrating to India from Sindh and Balochistan, a fairly regular occurrence, are a reflection of the state’s failure to protect its citizens from violence and discrimination. Glaring examples of discrimination against Christian citizens in Pakistan have earned the country a bad name. It is unfortunate to see that legislators picked to represent the interests of minorities do little to improve conditions for them. Citizens of minority communities see their religious freedom at stake and many of them are leaving for other countries to protect it. Others are forced to blur their identity by taking Muslim names.

Many factors contribute to religious intolerance. Exclusivism and cultural stagnation are two of its main causes among many. The exclusivism and cultural stagnation evident in Pakistan owe their prevalence to the two wars imposed upon it in the wake of Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the 9/11 aftermath. The Afghan-Soviet war exacerbated fanaticism on both sides of the border and cultural stagnation was worsened by the war after 9/11, when Pakistan was deliberately isolated by the western world.

During the Afghan-Soviet war, religious fanaticism and sectarian intolerance were deliberately promoted. Before the frenzy hit, Pakistani society had been quite pluralist, progressive and tolerant. There was tolerance for other faiths and for differences of opinion. The aftermath of this war was pernicious to the social fabric. As a pedantic approach was adopted to defining religion and Muslim society, those speaking up against extremism were labeled as deviant. The clerics increasingly took the easy way of rejecting other points of view outright. This exacerbated the situation. The angry polemics among religious leaders, divided the nation on the basis of creed and sect.

The situation worsened after 9/11 as sanctions imposed by western nations isolated the country. The strict visa policy for Pakistani citizens, adopted by most western countries, stymied cultural interaction. Besides terrorism, religious extremism and inflation the country is now facing cultural stagnation. The sanctions also hampered inter-cultural assimilation of people, art, music and tourism. Society, transforming in such a manner, became rigid and people also became more intolerant of differences of opinion. Lynching and murders on account of differences of opinion became routine. Citizens from religious minorities started fleeing to other countries just to be able to practice their faith. According to the United Nations Human Rights Report for 2017, there was an increase in blasphemy-related violence. The government continued to enable discriminatory prosecutions and other forms of discrimination against vulnerable groups by failing to repeal discriminatory laws and using religious rhetoric that incited hatred against minority groups.

Islam recognizes rights of religious minorities. There is a term, “Zimmi”, used to describe religious minorities, and an Islamic state is held responsible for their protection. Even in hadith it is mentioned that “One who kills a man under covenant (i.e., Zimmi) will not even smell the fragrance of Paradise. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever harms a Zimmi, I shall be his opponent on the day of Judgment, and I always defeat the one whom I oppose.” Here, the fair and foremost responsibility lies with the religious scholars to avoid perpetuating hatred and exclusivism. The true image of Islam as a religion of peace can only be recognized through acceptance of diversity. Differences of opinion can be sorted out with tolerance and grace without threatening one another. More frequent cultural exchanges with the wider world would promote the acceptance of other cultures, ideas and ways of life.

The writer is a freelance contributor