Hussain H Zaidi

The MQM recently organised a Sufi moot in Lahore to juxtapose the teachings of great mystics of the region with militant ideology, which is eating into the very core of our society. What significance does mysticism hold in contemporary Pakistan?

Although mysticism is susceptible to multiple interpretations and even within Muslims, where it is commonly referred to as Sufism, it consists of various schools and cults, its fundamental – almost universal – teaching is purification of the self to turn it exclusively towards God. Concerned essentially with personal salvation, mysticism is not without social implications. Two such principal implications are political quietism and a culture of complete tolerance.

Since mysticism puts premium on the development of the inner self or character, it tends to discount the importance of external social and political environment. What happens within the soul is of vital importance, whereas outside events are regarded, at best, to be of secondary importance. The road to salvation and perfection is to be travelled through spiritual struggle alone; political liberties do not count much in this journey.

Thus mystics underline the importance of perfecting the individual rather than improving the sociopolitical system. More often than not, such an attitude tends to breed political quietism, which itself leads to authoritarianism or uncritical acceptance of the political authority.

At the same time, mysticism teaches tolerance not only of other schools and cults but other creeds and religions as well. It is this aspect of mysticism that sets it apart from priesthood. The latter is as authoritarian as mysticism but lacks its tolerant worldview. The priest or mullah is remarkably intolerant of rival creeds, which he looks down upon as heretical. That is why a priest, however high his stature may be, by and large draws the respect of only those followers who profess his creed or sect.

This makes priesthood – in essence – sectarian. A Deobandi, for instance, will be reluctant to offer prayers led by a Barelvi. A Shia will hesitate to go to a mosque that is run by Sunnis. Nor will he be welcomed there. Not only that, the clergy would want their creed to be enforced as the official religion of the state. This makes them far more interested in political affairs than the sufis.

Hence, we have priesthood’s political activism, in contrast with mysticism’s political quietism. It’s another thing that such political activism is generally reactionary or retrogressive.

On the contrary, mystics command reverence from people belonging to all religions and creeds. For instance, the shrines of great Muslim saints in India and Pakistan hold appeal for Shias and Sunnis and Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Christians alike, who go there for prayers and penance.

A true mystic would never want the state to propagate a particular ideology. He will not judge people as true or false believers. Instead, he will grant audience to anyone who goes to him for help and advice. His teachings will weld people together rather than segregate them in the name of sect or creed. And so, whereas priesthood is divisive, mysticism is syncretic.

Since the mystics are motivated by the love of God, which includes love of humanity, the saints and sufis preach universal love and compassion. They abhor violence and seek only a change in the heart, since spiritual freedom and moral perfection cannot be achieved by force. The teacher can only initiate and guide the disciple on the road to emancipation.

Mysticism thus stands in marked contrast with the fanaticism, intolerance and militarism of the Taliban, who on their part look upon it as heretical. Since according to the Taliban ideology, ‘heretics’ deserve only one type of treatment – death – the militants regard bombing the shrines and killing the pilgrims who visit these places as a religious duty.

Unfortunately, in Pakistan, the implication of mysticism consisting in political quietism has been more pronounced than its teachings of love, compassion and tolerance. To understand this, we need to go back a little in history.

The Indian Subcontinent has been remarkable for its mystics, particularly the sufis. These sufis, who mere men of high character, profound knowledge and plain living, played a powerful role in the moral reconstruction of society. However, gradually a class of hereditary ‘pirs’ emerged, whose only claim to sainthood rested on their being descendents of a saint or custodians of his shrine thus signalling the decay of the institution.

Among the pirs, the most powerful were the custodians of shrines. These pirs were courted by kings and princes when Muslims ruled India and received large tracts of land. This gave birth to the pir-landlord combination, which persists to date. The British – after they had conquered India – allowed the pirs, who had a large number of devotees, to retain their estates in return for the valuable political support that they offered to the British Raj.

The pirs remained staunch supporters of the British regime. It was only when the end of the English rule became imminent that they shifted their loyalties. By joining the All India Muslim League, the pirs ensured the continuation of their privileged position in the new Muslim state, which they have largely retained till now.

Pakistan is a multiethnic society where people professing various creeds and sects live. The edifice of such a society must rest on the pillars of full religious tolerance and freedom and inter-faith harmony. Regrettably, the militaristic view of Islam has made such a great impression on society that we have taken to fanaticism and bigotry and have turned against dissent and disagreement – all in the name of religion.

In such a scenario, the sufi message of universal tolerance has special relevance. The people must be made aware that the followers of divergent creeds can live together peacefully, and that faith is essentially what one believes in the depth of one’s own heart. It is a matter between man and God. One should not coerce change of faith – such change will at best be cosmetic.

It’s high time the message of religious tolerance emanating from the teachings of saints and sufis was spread as an antidote to the toxic militant narrative we see today.

The writer is a freelance contributor.Email: hussainhzaidi@gmail.com

From : The News March 19, 2014