Religions and Sustainability

Spiritual traditions—from large, centralized religions to local tribal spiritual authorities—in the future will devote energy to what some see as the defining challenge of our age: the need to build just and environmentally healthy societies. The major faiths will issue declarations, advocating for new national policies, and designing educational activities in support of a sustainable world—sometimes in partnership with secular environmental organizations, sometimes on their own. Responding to the global crisis, smaller traditions will revive ancient rituals and practices in the service of sustainability. A powerful new political alignment will thus emerge that greatly strengthens the effort to build a sustainable world.

A source of power for religions is the sheer number of followers they claim. It seems that some 80–90 percent of people on the planet belong to one of the world’s 10,000 or so religions, with 150 or so of these faith traditions having at least a million followers each. Adherents of the three largest—Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism—account for about two thirds of the global population today. Another 20 percent of the world subscribes to the remaining religions, and about 15 percent of people are nonreligious.

Influence stemming from having a large number of followers is further enhanced by the geographic concentration of many religions, which increases their ability to make mass appeals and to coordinate action. In 120 countries, for example, Christians form the majority of the population. Muslims are the majority in 45 countries, and Buddhists are in 9. When most people in a society have similar worldviews, leaders can make mass appeals using a single, values-laden language.

Religion is an orientation to the cosmos and to our role in it. It offers people a sense of ultimate meaning and the possibility for personal transformation and celebration of life. To this end it uses a range of resources, including worldviews, symbols, rituals, ethical norms, traditions, and (sometimes) institutional structures. Religion also offers a means of experiencing a sustaining creative force, whether as a creator deity, an awe-inspiring presence in nature, or simply the source of all life. Many of these characteristics give religion substantial influence over the environment.

At the same time, the environmental community has often alienated potential allies with what is perceived as scientific aloofness, even self-righteousness. Its “left-brain” approach to its work is partly to blame for its inability to connect with greater numbers of people, to inspire profound commitment on a large scale. Given the central place of culture in national development—and the central place of religion in most cultures—a sustainable world cannot effectively be built without full engagement of the human spirit.

Religious institutions and leaders can bring at least five strong assets to the effort to build a sustainable world: the capacity to shape cosmologies (worldviews), moral authority, a large base of adherents, significant material resources, and community-building capacity.

And most produce strong community ties by generating social resources such as trust and cooperation, which can be a powerful boost to community development. Many political movements would welcome any of these five assets. To be endowed with most or all of them, as many religions are, is to hold considerable political power.

In the three western monotheistic traditions—Islam, Christianity and Judaism—morality has traditionally been human-focused. Thus the natural world can be seen as a set of resources for human use.

Yet scholars in each of these traditions find substantial grounds for building a strong environmental ethics. The Islamic concept teaches that the natural world is not owned by humans but is given to them in trust—a trust that implies certain responsibilities to preserve the balance of creation. The Christian focus on sacrament and incarnation are seen as lenses through which the entire natural world can be viewed as sacred. The Judaic concept of a covenant or legal agreement between God and humanity, for example, can be extended to all of creation. And the
Hinduism and Buddhism contain teachings concerning the natural world those are arguably in conflict. The illusory nature of the material world and the desirability of escaping suffering by turning to a timeless world of spirit, in the case of Hinduism, or by seeking release in nirvana, in the case of some meditative schools of Buddhism. This otherworldly orientation minimizes the importance of environmental degradation. On the other hand, both religions place great emphasis on correct conduct and on fulfillment of duty, which often includes obligations to environmental preservation.

Thus Hindus regard rivers as sacred, and in the concept of lila, the creative play of the gods, Hindu theology engages the world as a creative manifestation of the divine. Meanwhile, Buddhist environmentalists often stress the importance of trees in the life of the Buddha, and “socially engaged” Buddhism active in environmental protection, especially of forests.

The East Asian traditions of Confucianism and Taoism seamlessly link the divine, human, and natural worlds. The divine is not seen as transcendent; instead, Earth’s fecundity is seen as continuously unfolding through nature’s movements across the seasons and through human workings in the cycles of agriculture.

This organic worldview is centered round the concept of ch’i, the dynamic, material force that infuses the natural and human worlds, unifying matter and spirit. Confucianists and Taoists seek to live in harmony with nature and with other human beings, while paying attention to the movements of the Tao, the Way. Despite the affinity of these traditions with an environmental ethic, however, deforestation, pollution, and other forms of environmental degradation have become widespread in contemporary East Asia due to many factors, including rapid industrialization and the decline of traditional values in the last 50 years.

Our civilization’s challenge is to reintegrate our societal heart and head, to reestablish spirituality as a partner in dialogue with science. While acknowledging its shortcomings, the religious community can rightly claim enormous capacity for self-reform. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

Killing the Innocent

The sagacious thoughts of my mother continue to reverberate even after sixteen years of her death. She would say, “The red storm used to be the cause of alarm and we would know some murder took place in town.” Today, people are being killed like gnats and no one bothers for the human loss. This causes me enormous pain as a human being, and as a father. I still believe in the value of life without discrimination—Muslim, Christian, Hindu or Jew. I daily continue to witness red clouds hovering above my head signaling a sequence of murders.

I saw such clouds on May 31. A mob of hate criminals put a match to a KFC outlet in Karachi and thus incinerated six innocent Muslim workers. I was genuinely troubled for heavy police force and rangers deployed in Karachi, failed to protect life and property of the innocent. When the police will be engaged in knocking the socks off of the political opponents, anarchic situation is bound to dominate. My wretchedness grew larger when I learnt about the paltry details I could gather about the harmless victims.

Three of them got the job only three days ago. Two were students and working part time to bear the high cost of education. All victims were in their bloom of youth—twenties. Even if they were Americans, Britishers or Israelis, they were weaponless and not engaged in war. Killing such harmless human beings should be deplored and must be disapproved forcefully.

How would the fanatics who killed the innocent differentiate themselves from the killings occurring in Gujrat, Ghaza Strip or Kashmir? Indeed there’s a difference. There the non-Muslims are killers. Here Muslims are killing the Muslims.

Such acts of violence signify the deficient knowledge and hence the misinterpretation of Islam. The hate criminals fail to have a nodding acquaintance with the true spirit of Islam.

Anyone who studies Islam from its direct sources will be influenced by the truth that Islam is a religion of peace. When you open the Qur’an, the very first verse reads: Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim meaning “In the name of God, the most Merciful, the most Compassionate.” The crystallization of the concept and precept is that Allah is God of Mercy and Compassion, and the Holy Qur’an is the book of mercy. If you go through the Qur’an, you will find that most verses, directly or indirectly, express the spirit of peace. For instance, there is a verse in the Qur’an: ‘And God calls to the home of peace’ (10:25). This signifies the eventual purpose of Islam is peace. Implicitly and explicitly Islam insists Muslims to be merciful and compassionate to their fellow citizens.

The principal to my dissertation is the idea based on pluralism in Islam. The Holy Qur’an says: "To each among you, have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way. And if God had enforced His Will, He would have made of you all one people" (5:48). This implies that hostile and biased attitude with other citizens is totally against Islamic behavior.

Once a man came to the Prophet (pbuh) and said, ‘O Prophet, give me a masterly piece of advice enabling me to manage all the affairs of my life.’ The Prophet replied: ‘Don’t be angry.’ According to another tradition, the Prophet (pbuh) once observed: ‘Don’t wish for confrontation with your enemy, instead always ask for peace from God.’ This indicates that peace is central to Islam.

In Islam, peaceful coexistence among citizens of the state is simply by dealing with them as citizens with no discrimination in any form. In the early days of the Islamic state, the Jews were recognized for their extreme hate and machinations against Islam. The Prophet (pbuh) nevertheless sustained immense compassion for them. Once a funeral passed by the Prophet (pbuh) and his companions. Muhammad (pbuh) immediately stood up in respect. The companions of the Prophet (pbuh) said, "It is a bier of a Jew." Muhammad (pbuh) replied, "Is it not a soul?" This illustrates that respect even your enemies. This is the fundamental norm in Islam.

Islam does not in anyway allow for the killing of any innocent soul. Verse 45:14 says: "Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not look forward to the days of Allah: It is for Him to recompense (for good or ill) each people according to what they have earned."

Muslims are even encouraged to be kind to animals and are forbidden to hurt them. Once the Muhammad (pbuh) said: A woman was punished because she imprisoned a cat until it died. On account of this, she was doomed to Hell. While she imprisoned it, she did not give the cat food or drink, nor did she free it to eat the insects of the earth (Muslim and Bukhari).

In light of these and other Islamic texts, the act of inciting terror in the hearts of defenseless civilians, the wholesale destruction of buildings and properties, the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women, and children are all forbidden and detestable acts in Islam. Muslims follow a religion of peace, mercy, and forgiveness, and the vast majority has nothing to do with the violent events some have associated with Muslims. If an individual Muslim were to commit an act of terrorism, this person would be guilty of violating the laws of Islam.

Those with malevolent intentions, have internal problem. Instead of chastising others, they should have a gaze into their own self-conscious and kill the enemy of mankind deep in.

And finally a word about franchise. It is defined by three factors: the grant of trademark or rights, a prescribed marketing plan and payment of a franchise fee for the rights. Although franchise outlets signify US brands, they are developed with national investment. The brand owners only get their share for giving the right to use brands. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

The Religions

Researchers project the growth of Islam to roughly 2 billion adherents by 2025. That is out of a projected world population of 8 billion. Among world religions, Islam ranks as the fastest growing faith. Worldwide, the number of Muslims has doubled since 1970 to 1.2 billion adherents. A plausible future is one in which Islam makes unprecedented inroads into the Western world. It is assumed that 1 percent of the Christians in Europe, North America, and Oceania defect to Islam every twenty-five years. As such Christians lose 0.9 percent of the world's population (dropping from 37.9 to 37.0 percent while Muslims gain from 22.6 to 23.5 percent) over the 175-year period 2025-2200.

Islam increases from 17.7 percent in 1990 to 22.6 percent by 2200. Nonreligious persons and atheists, on the other hand, grew rapidly over the period 1900-1990, then decrease from a combined percentage of 20.5 percent in 1990 to 16.1 percent by A.D. 2000.

Fundamentalism is a complicated phenomenon, combining political and religious themes, and may not, of itself, lead to increased piety. Rulers and politicians may continue to pay lip service to Islam, while in fact manipulating faith for purely political purposes. As Martin Marty and Scott Applebee note in their five-volume Fundamentalism Project, religious fundamentalism is on the rise, not just within Islam or Christianity, but is also being felt among Buddhism and Judaism.

The last century has witnessed the shift of Christianity from a white to a majority position of non-white followers. Today more than 60% of all Christians come from non-white races outside Europe and America.

This shift in the center of Christian gravity southward into the Third World has come about from evangelical Protestant church growth in Africa, Asia and Latin America. This produces all kinds of interesting facts, such as the largest Presbyterian church in the world is not found in Scotland, but in Seoul, Korea, or the statistical mean follower of Christ today is under 20 years old, living in Asia, with a per capita income of less than $600 a year.

While much has been said about the decline of the mainline in the US, the resurgence of Pentecostal Christianity has more than made up for it. Estimates put the number of new non-denominational churches in this country at 100,000 since 1980.

The 20th century will no doubt be remembered as a Pentecostal century, given the birth of the modern Pentecostal/Charismatic movement and its dramatic growth. In less than three generations, this movement in the West, Africa and Asia has grown to an amazing 520 million making it the second largest expression of faith within the Christian movement, second only to Roman Catholics.

Till 2000, the tribal religions had shrunk from 6.5% in 1900 to 1.6% of world population. There are still some 5,000 ethno, folk or tribal religions among indigenous people of Africa and Asia number. By mid-century many western religionists thought that these ethno-religionists would disappear by 2000. And despite large numbers converting to Islam or Christianity in Africa, the world's ethno-religions remain stable at about 100 million. But in terms of keeping pace with world population, they have shrunk from 6.5% to 1.6% of world population.

While the growth rate of Islam is increasing, the worldwide growth of persons professing no religion, whether agnostics, freethinkers, atheists or non-religious humanists appears to have plateaued since the collapse of communism. Statistically speaking, the non-religious population of the world is holding its own at 15% of the world's population, and will continue in early 21st century.

Another trend, which religionists encounter is growing pluralism. This is particularly so within the West. Driven by multi-culturalism and internationalization of the West, increasing diversity in society is both an opportunity and a challenge for religions. Increasing cultural diversity and interfaith contact can offer opportunities for mutual understanding, growth and dialogue. On the other hand, the challenge of modernity, with its relativism and individualism continues to undermine traditional beliefs that once informed shaped various common creeds, producing culture wars between traditionalists and progressives.

Although there is still resistance to women in pastoral roles, the basic trend of women in church and pastoral leadership continues to grow and appears irreversible. Some suggest the impact of increasing numbers of women in the pastorate will bring more emphasis on nurture and growth, with more holistic models of communities and congregations.

What humans will do in the years just immediately ahead is begin to dissect their religions, looking at them closely, exploring them piece by piece, examining them doctrine by doctrine, to see what makes sense and what doesn't make sense, what is functional and what is dysfunctional, what works and what doesn't work in tomorrow's world.

And alongside religion will stand a new form of human expression of the impulse toward the Divine, an expression that will not be rooted in codified texts and teachings, but in the moment-to-moment experience of each person sincerely seeking God.

While there is no way of knowing the details, it is safe to predict that qualitative secularization will still exist in the near future. Religion will remain important both in society and in the media, but most crucial cultural and political decisions will not be determined by it. In Islamic countries there is no qualitative (nor, of course, quantitative) secularization.

Many non-Muslims and quite a few Muslims, based on what their physical senses dictate, ascribe to the idea that religion is on its way out. The ‘moral decay’ is nearing its peak and they think that soon there is to be a religious revival.

The future trends in Islam breathe about most people who will find it easy to absorb novelty in religion (bidat). Thus they will (unjustly) discover shortcuts in winning the blessings of God. This implies that corruption will become the daily norm. The Bible will be transformed further to suit the needs of some. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

Ijtihad: The Road to Spiritual Democracy

Abstract
The ultimate spiritual basis of all life, as conceived by Islam, is eternal and reveals itself in variety and change. Without freedom and democracy ijtihad cannot be performed. Democracy is the key to opening up ijtihad—the key to solving the principal problems confronting the Muslim world today. That is the thesis of this paper. It discusses ijtihad and its role in addressing the contemporary needs of Muslim societies. My paper also explicates the way ijtihad works, and how can it be used to address the needs of Muslim societies in the twenty-first century. It brings into question: Who has the right to perform ijtihad, and how should Islam adapt to changing societal conditions, needs, and priorities in its quest for social justice and equality?

This paper also converges on the needed solutions to the prevailing crisis and development of modern Muslim societies and reconciling their understanding of Islam and the message of the Quran with changing needs, circumstances, and priorities in Muslim societies.

Permanence and Change
Perpetual change, adjustment, and movement-inevitable aspects of human society-have been recognized by every succeeding generation, as it marks its losses and gains.

Yet, at any given time, there is a local sense of continuity. But every culture, of course, experiences both continuity and change: over the longest term, these changes may be so radical that they amount to a new cultural or socio-economic form, but in the shorter term they are more often a change of content, not of form.

Whereas the basic principles that govern economy and society may stay the same, many of the devices, rules, and customs that mediate between these principles, on the one hand, and material production, on the other, are constantly developing.

Any loyalty to a social system makes sense only when we recognize the existence and importance of deep feelings of continuity, which are perhaps the very essence of a sense of culture.

In order to find reconciliation between stability and change, Islamic society finds eternal principles to regulate its collective life; for the eternal gives us a foothold in the world of perpetual change.

Change is inevitable in human life and society. Dr Muhammad Iqbal, recognized as the Poet of the East, also says that it is only revolution, which is permanent and everything else keeps on changing. In the event of constant change, can religion and religious law remain unchanged? Again the important question is what is permanent in religion? Is there any component, which changes? Does divine mean something static? Then what is the meaning of the Quranic verse ...every day He manifests Himself in yet another (wondrous) way (29:55).

Ijtihad
However since eternal principles can also be debilitating if they are understood as excluding all change, the dynamism of ijtihad is necessary. Ijtihad keeps its body and soul together with the principle derived from Quran: Nor should the believers all go forth together: If a contingent from every expedition remained behind. They could devote themselves to studies in religion, and admonish the people when they return to them—that thus they (may learn) to guard themselves (against evil). (9:122)

The science of ijtihad (or reasoning and interpretation) was developed by Muslim scholars in order to understand and apply the message of the Quran to varying societal needs and conditions. This process is based not only on the Quran and religious tradition (sunna), but also on reason, and prioritization.

Ijtihad has the meaning of being an authority in the matters of Islam; but there are two ways of being an authority and deriving opinions in the matters of Islam: one which is in accordance with the shari`a, and one which is forbidden by it.

Now, the kind of ijtihad which, in my opinion, is forbidden is that which means legislating or enacting the law, by which we mean that the mujtahid passes a judgment which is not in the Quran or the Sunna but according to his own thought and his own opinion. The sources of legislation, and the valid proofs for determining the shar`ia, are given as the Book, the Sunna and ijtihad.

The commands which are given in the shari`a from the Book and the Sunna are limited and finite, whereas circumstances and events which occur are not, so another source in addition to the Book and the Sunna must be appointed for the legislation of Divine commands - and that source is the very same as we have defined as ijtihad alra'y.

Ijtihad gradually found a wider meaning, i.e., the employment of careful consideration and reasoning in reaching an understanding of the valid proofs of the shari`a. This, of course needs a series of sciences as a suitable preliminary basis on which to develop the ability to consider and reason correctly and systematically. The `ulama of Islam gradually realized that the deduction and derivation of the precepts from the combined valid proofs of the shari`a necessitated the learning of a series of preparatory sciences and studies such as the sciences of literature, logic, the Quranic sciences and tafsir (Quranic exegesis), the science of hadith and the narrators of hadith (rijal alhadith), the science of the methodology of usul alfiqh, and even a knowledge of the fiqh of the other sects of Islam. A mujtahid was someone who was a master of all these sciences.

Ijtihad as used today means competence and expert technical knowledge. It is obvious that someone who wants to refer to the Quran and hadith must know how to explain the meaning of the Quran, he must know the meaning of the verses, which verses abrogate which verses, which ones have clear meanings and which ones ambiguous meanings - and he must be able to distinguish which hadith is valid and authoritative and which not. In addition, he must understand, on the basis of correct rational principles, incompatibilities between hadiths to the extent that it is possible for him to resolve them. In the verses of the Quran themselves, and similarly in the hadith, a series of general principles for verification and interpretation are laid down, and the use and exercise of these principles need training and practice, just as in the case of all other basic principles in every science. Like the skilled technician who knows which material to choose from all the materials available to him, the mujtahid must have proficiency and ability. In hadith, especially, there is a great deal of fabrication, the true and the false are mixed together; the expert must have the power to distinguish between them. In short, he must have enough preliminary knowledge so that he can exercise competence, authority and technical expertise.

Every day Muslims are faced with new problems in their lives, and they do not know how to confront them as Muslims. Basically, the 'secret' of ijtihad lies in applying general principles to new problems and changed circumstances. The real mujtahid is one who has mastered this secret, who has observed how things change, and subsequently how the rulings on them have changed.

The work of a mujtahid is the deduction and derivation of the precepts of the shari`a; but his knowledge and understanding of all things, in other words, his worldview, has a great influence on the decisions he makes. If we imagine a mujtahid who is always sitting in the corner of his house or his madrasa, and compare him with a mujtahid who is conversant with the currents of life, both of them refer back to the valid proofs of the shari`a, but each one of them will derive his legal rulings in a particular way, using a particular method.

In all the world's sciences - medicine, mathematics, law, literature and philosophy - branches of specialization have been created, and for that very reason progress has been accelerated in each of these branches. Some mujtahids also take as their specialization `ibadat (the rites of Islam), and others mu`amilat (transactions), some siyasat (politics), and other ahkam (criminal law); Thus, each mujtahid can study his own branch more thoroughly.

Many people wonder why it is that the mujtahids differ at times in their decrees, when the basis of their Ijtihad are the same. It should be observed that difference in scientific opinions is not to be taken as a sign of a substantial defect in the quest for knowledge. It is rather, a sign that knowledge moves in progressive steps towards perfection. Differences of opinions are to be found in all sciences, not just in fiqh.

A mujtahid who may sometimes make a mistake while practicing the act of deriving Islamic laws from their original sources - the Quran and the sunnah - but his mistake is not done blindly and at random but due to his insufficiency or inadequacy in his scientific tools or his self capacity which causes him to be unable in deriving legal law as it is formulated in the world of law and a divine Shari'ah.

Contrarily, an example is a case in which Imam Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafi'i, one of the founders of Islamic jurisprudence, gave a certain legal opinion in Baghdad. One year later he moved to Cairo, and in response to the same question he gave a very different opinion. Someone questioned him, "Oh Imam, last year in Baghdad you gave a different answer," and he replied, "That was in Baghdad and this is in Cairo. That was last year and this is now." When employing ijtihad, scholars considered the time, place, norms, and prevailing conditions when they rendered their religious advice and opinions.

Some scholars depend on some of these sources in formulating laws while others refuse to do so pointing out the drawbacks of these sources.

It is useful to point out the main principles, which serve as necessary conditions in the process of juristic reasoning (Ijtihad). Among them are the following:
1. Certainly, the Quran and sunnah are two main sources in formulating Islamic laws.
2. No one has the right to give his own Ijtihad in any case whenever there is a legal law in the Book of Allah and the Prophet's sunnah. "...And whatever the Messenger gives you accept it, and whatever he forbids you, abstain (therefrom)" (59:7)
3. Only one judgment for one subject falling under the same circumstances and conditions, and which represents the pure legal opinion.
4. The laws discovered by the faqih are only estimated but not final and should therefore be subjected to scientific discussion and strict legal scrutiny.
5. As a result of the previous point, we should understand that the process of juristic reasoning is a critical one in which discovered opinion undergoes a thorough accurate criticism, and evaluation in order to arrive at the correct law. No juristic reasoning could be considered sound if it is not subjected to criticism and scientific discussion.
6. Juristic reasoning should be pure and free from any fanaticism or internal and external factors such as political and sectarian tendencies and should be capable of withstanding scientific analysis and criticism. Therefore, Ijtihad is a scientific process based on research and inquiry.

It is also important to bear in mind the two aspects of religion, and it applied to all religions of the world, i.e. transcendental and transient. The transcendental is immutable whereas the transient as the word itself indicates is subject to change depending on the contingencies of the situation. What we understand by the Shari'ah is composed of both the elements i.e. transcendent and transient or, in other words, the divine and human. The Quran also incorporates both the elements. For example the institution of slavery is a transient one whereas the concepts of human dignity, equality and fraternity are all transcendental.

In a fast changing world recourse to ijtihad is a must and Islam is among those religions which approves of healthy change and allows its believers to not only grapple with the changes taking place around them but also to strive to reapply Islamic principles of jurisprudence.

Spiritual Democracy
Religious establishments impose restrictions on the contemporary practice of ijtihad. Nonetheless, democracy and freedom of inquiry and expression are essential to the practice of ijtihad and to the successful reconciliation of Islam and modernity.

Today's proponents of ijtihad take a far more expansive view. "There will be no Islamic democracy unless jurists permit the democratization of interpretation. Political elites in the Muslim world have for centuries restricted the development of democracy and political accountability by hiding behind religious principles that they proclaim to be fixed in stone. In effect, for an end run around the entire traditional apparatus of Muslim jurisprudence. Believers should instead look directly to the Quran and to the practices of Muhammad (pbuh) and his companions, and use their own efforts at interpretation to build ethical communities.

The reformist interest in ijtihad is not new. For more than a century, Muslim scholars and activists have cited the concept as they have tried to respond to the trauma of colonialism and its aftermath. In his 1934 book The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, poet Dr Muhammad Iqbal, argued for transferring "the power of ijtihad from individual representatives of (legal) schools to a Muslim legislative assembly," which would build toward "spiritual democracy, which is the ultimate aim of Islam."

The latest proponents celebrate a much more inclusive model of ijtihad. No jurist can single-handedly interpret Islam. Shariah should be by shura," or consultation, he says. "We should all consult among ourselves and conclude what God is telling us. ... Interpretation of God's message is the quintessential quality of humanity. To take away from me my right to interpret Islam, you have to deprive me of my humanity.

Creativity built on the belief that there were always new possibilities available and that God gave us this earth and this life with permission to use them creatively. Legal reasoning—even the best legal reasoning—is not the solution to our problems. Our problems are not going to be solved by having scholars think more deeply. If we limit change and innovation to only those who have qualifications to reason from the text, we are not going to get anywhere.

It is hoped that by the conclusion of this paper, the audience will see Islam in a new light, not as a form of religious dogma, but as a guide to making choices based on intelligence and reason. New awareness almost always creates more questions to answers than answers to questions. It is this mode of thinking that allows for scientific progress. In principle, a democratic process allows and encourages all questions and points of view, even those, which challenge the principles of democracy, although this is the ideal more often than the reality. When the ideal is the reality, the process remains dynamic. In a dogmatic regime, the process becomes static, even in a supposedly democratic regime. The truth has been declared and no other point of view will shake it or change it. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

Flitting away from Freedom

The spirit that culminated the movement for freedom sought a separate homeland for Muslims where its citizens would have freedom to live a way of life according to Islam—i.e., freedom to work, freedom to organize; and freedom of analogous choices. This freedom was eventually accomplished in 1947 though, it was not given but taken and at a considerably high price. The ticket to freedom was purchased with the blood of our brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers. The Hindu and Sikh carnage of our Muslim youth turned out to be a dark part of freedom movement. We witnessed train-loads of dead bodies arriving at Lahore Railway Station as an authorization for the price we paid for freedom. We cannot forget this price.

We should be a proud nation that paid a high price for freedom. Just the same, I feel guilty for failing to remember what was sacrificed and what was conceded. We forgot the sky-scraping price paid for freedom; we forgot for we didn’t bother to recognize the role and responsibilities this freedom brought along. We unremembered that the freedom had to be refreshed by the manure of our blood to keep its flame alive. We successfully but wrongly exercised our right to freedom for freedom from responsibility. We started pillaging our own country. Instead of giving our blood to sustain freedom, we came out to eat the vitals of nationhood. The educated elite left the country to benefit Europe and America and thus the selfish leadership was let out for robbing its own land.

Freedom cannot exist without the concept of order. We lost the order, stability, and harmony and thus transformed into a crowd of individuals engaged in a race for loot and plunder. Serving our personal interests turned out to be our prime mission.

Freedom is not choosing. It is merely the move that we make when all is already lost. Freedom is knowing and understanding and respecting things quite other than us. By attempting to avoid the responsibility for our own behavior, we gave away our power to selfishness, narcissism, and smugness. In this way, we escaped from freedom. And most tyrannically we started believing that the vision enshrined by the Pakistan Movement was accomplished and our mission completed.

We were supposed to integrate the vision of Pakistan into our life, making it hard to put off or drop our highest priorities. Such focusing could provide us a framework for all parts of our life. Unfortunately, it could not happen and thus today we fall short of spirits analogous to an independent nation.

The most important role of vision in our national life was that it could give focus to human energy. To enable everyone concerned with Pakistan to see more clearly what’s ahead of him. For this purpose, our leadership could convey a vision. This was lucklessly not done.

Imagine watching a slide show when the projector is out of focus. How would you feel if you have to watch blurred, vague, and indistinct images for an entire presentation? Today we face a similar situation in Pakistan. We are unaware of our future. People are expressing frustration, impatience, confusion, anger, and even nausea. Undoubtedly, the leaders with the fingers on focus button had the responsibility to focus the projector. They have utterly failed in their responsibilities. Thus without any direction and without a roadmap, Pakistan continues to lurch around, getting off course and ending up in places it never wanted to go. Had Pakistan maintained a vision, its distractions would have been minimal and our national life would have been spent in a meaningful way. Thus it would have regained control over our life and no longer felt like wasting time.

Take a peep into ancient history. Explore why old civilizations went extinct. We will also follow their destiny if we failed to recognize the principles for survival. If we failed to learn from history and recognize the future trends, we will eventually go back into darkness from whence we came, and we the people who got freedom 58 years before will perish from the earth.

After the Independence, we lost our vision and subsequently transformed into one of the corrupt nations worldwide, all the nasty crimes once akin to the West now dominate our national life. Each individual of Pakistan seems to be on the looting binge. Instead of contributing our role in nation building, we pillage our own land. When we nurture the same traits that caused extinction of other civilizations, why then our destiny would be any different?

The societies that sustain physically, mentally, and otherwise are those which undergo a series of divergences in development, much like the branching of a tree. The dynamic people are those who are responsive to issues, essentially open, fast paced, balanced, and tend to survive and prosper on a fairly reliable basis. Problems come to them, but they usually manage to work them out.

Outwardly, we are a developing society. But like a muscular athlete with a terminal cancer, a disease is eating away at us from the inside. A great nation cannot be destroyed from the outside until it falls first from the inside.

A flood of immorality, corruption and violence has entered into our national life, and we have unfortunately been recognized as a culture of death from the womb to the streets. Many of our young people have no concept of the true spirit of Islam; and many are tragically engaged in dying or killing innocents. A sense of hopelessness prevails, a feeling of fear surrounds.

When matter is worshiped as supreme and privileges are sought after, ethical decline is not a surprise. The remedy lies in adding spiritual dimension to existing culture and in course evolving a new moral and ethical code for coming generations. Time is still not gone. We can learn lessons from history or else face extinction. Choice is only ours. Asif J. Mir Organizational Transformation