Daily Times

On June 5, the Punjab Assembly decided to ban certain books and also to stop their distribution for being ‘blasphemous’. The books include two books by British-American author Lesley Hazleton, and one book by Mazharul Haq. Moreover, a minority community newspaper was also banned. Provincial Assembly Speaker Chaudhry Peraviaz Elahi has written to the provincial government to immediately issue a notification and confiscate their copies forthwith. However for general information of the public, it is not clear which portions of these books were blasphemous or sacrilegious which have been deemed to be objectionable. Perhaps It has become a tradition “to call a dog a bad name and hang him”. Sometime in the past Stanley Wolpert’s classic book on Quaid-e-Azam (full of praise for the Quaid) was merely banned because of a reference to hamburgers in context of the Quaid.

I guess that none of the honorable members of the Provincial Assembly had even read either of the banned books, otherwise at least some one member had opposed the resolution banning the books.

Before I set out to say anything on this banning order, I want to make it clear that I have nothing to say regarding banning of the spokesman of a minority community, because that newspaper had a specific agenda to promote. Presently I am concerned with other three books, which are highly researched and deeply studied and scrutinized and fully supported by old and authentic historiographers of Islam drawing and comparing analogies of various injunctions of Holy Quran and authentic precepts and sayings of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). Two of these books are written by British-American writer Leslie Hazleton, namely “After the Prophet – the epic story of the Shia-Sunni Split” and “The First Muslim-Mohammad” and the other “A short History of Islam” by the famous historian Mazharul Haq.

Leslie Hazleton’s first book which covers a very sensitive topic was written nearly 10 years ago, and there is not an iota of dispute or controversy about the book. On the other hand it has been acclaimed throughout the world, including Islamic countries, the deep research with which she has narrated her epic story of the split between Sias and Sunnies, and which has been generally accepted by both sects. Prior to that, the account of this split was fraught with a lot of contradictions and confusions and nobody exactly knew what had really caused this schism which continues up to this day. If the author had taken side with any sect, or had distorted the history in any manner, there would have been huge uproar, but no protest has ever been lodged against the book by any side for so many years, is a clear proof that the recorded account is very well fortified by strong evidence. For her sources, she has mainly drawn from most authentic historians like Ibn Ishaq, Abu Jaffer al-Tabari (in 39 volumes), Al-Baladhuri etc who were the most ancient historians, not much removed from the time of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The accounts of Al-Tabari pertain to only 120 years after the demise of the Prophet and their sources were mostly taken from those companions who were themselves the eyewitness to the occurrences of the time so narrated. Hazleton has superlatively admired the Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH), and all his family members, including all the Ahle Bait. Hence her book was regarded as the most non-controversial of all the books written on Islam in recent times. Similarly, Mazharul Haq’s Short History used to be taught at our school and university levels for a long time and was largely used by the candidates sitting in the competitive examinations and nobody had ever raised any objection against it. There was neither anything sacrilegious against Islam nor its founders.

Islam, we all must understand, is not an immutable ideology, but is the most dynamic and pervasive religion, which has to be applicable to all time and places

Islam, we all must understand, is not an immutable ideology, but is the most dynamic and pervasive religion, which has to be applicable to all time and places. It was not meant for a particular time and place, but for all times and places. Ijtih?d, (Arabic: “effort”) in Islamic law is the most fundamental pillar of Islam which explain the independent or original interpretation of problems not precisely covered by the Qur??n, or the Hadith (traditions concerning the Prophet Muhammad’s life and utterances), and ijm?? (scholarly consensus). In the early Muslim community every adequately qualified jurist had the right to exercise such original thinking, mainly in the form of his (personal judgment) and qiy?s (analogical reasoning), and those who did so were termed mujtahids. By the 16th century, Sunni jurists had widely come to the conclusion that ijtih?d was no longer an option in any but truly novel legal cases. But since the 19th century, reformers have used the call for renewed ijtih?d as a rallying cry to campaign for legal reforms and to critique the schools of law

Towards the 8th century AD, the Asha’rite school of thought (the traditional thinkers) after their victory over the Mut’alites (innovators and rationalists) austerely adhered to literal word of Quran and Hadith and spurned ijtihad in any form of its interpretations. The result was that Muslims shunned the new learning while the Western nations embraced new knowledge and realities. While Europe became progressive with the Renaissance, the Muslim world graduately drifted into the dark ages.

There is always provision for “Daleel” or rational argument in Islam, without which we cannot reach at the truth. There is a precept of the Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH), saying that all controversial matters should be decided in the light of “Daleel”. But if our government does not encourage or allow “Daleel” or rational argument in matters of our theology, our ideology will become stunted and hence dead one day. Hence there is a need to accept logic, reason and rationalism in our creed so that it should strengthen our faith and appeal to our younger generation who do not accept anything without questioning its rationale. If the logic of the reformist writers is false or weak, it will automatically be rejected by public scrutiny. Let such writers be thrown away by the public instead of by the arbitrary action of the government. Thus the government needs to be liberal and show accommodation to allow free discussion and enquiry to all new interpretations of religion and to leave them to the scrutiny of the public to accept or reject them. Once the Government arbitrarily with-holds or bans books which they think are not good for the public then the Government itself becomes guilty of curbing the freedom of speech and access to knowledge which is the fundamental right of the public, and without which no society can progress.

During the medieval period, however, Islamic societies witnessed a spectacular flowering of scientific and philosophical edge over the people in the West. Between the 8th to 13th century, it was a Golden age of the Islamic world when theology, science and Greek philosophy went hand in hand which is sufficient proof that Islam and science are not inherently incompatible. There was free exchange of views and no curb on the acquisition of knowledge.

The vast empire was theologically and ethnically diverse; The spread of empire brought urbanization, commerce, and wealth that helped spur intellectual collaboration. The Asha’rite school of thought (the traditional thinkers) after their victory over the Mut’alites (innovators and rationalists) austerely adhered to the literal word of Quran and Hadith and spurned ijtihad in any form of its interpretations. The result was that Muslims shunned the new learning while the Western nations embraced new knowledge and realities. While Europe became progressive with the Renaissance, the Muslim world gradually drifted into the dark ages. Thus the main cause of decadence of the Muslims was their discouragement of rational thinking and their lack of acquisition of new knowledge. Banning of books is a similar exercise to impose restriction on the acquisition of knowledge.

The writer is a former member of the Provincial Civil Service, and an author of Moments in Silence