The Good Sufi - an agent of social justice Print E-mail
Friday, 03 September 2010 10:00
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Earlier this year The Samosa published The Bad Sufi, a controversial article looking at how modern Sufism in Pakistan has become a tool of the corrupt ruling elite and their US backers to maintain their power and privilege. Now Qalandar Bux Memon and Ali Mohsin look at the positive role that Sufis once played as campaigners for social change and against corrupt rulers - and how Sufism might reprise this role today.


Most of Pakistan’s Sufi Pirs and Syeds promote obscurities. They dole out threads where education is needed, speak of the need to give alms when the people need this money to feed themselves and their families, and let children die of hunger while their own kids party in London’s rich Mayfair with beautiful blondes from Sweden.

They rule their localities ruthlessly, subjugating tens of millions across Pakistan to their will and stealing from them their labour, vote, education, and much else. From these fiefdoms they take their seats in parliament and even enter the international arena – Pir Gilani and Pir Qureshi being two recent examples.

The foundation on which this power rests is their hereditary lineage from scholars or rebels of Islam – the Sufis. The British strengthened their descendents to act as a local collobrator elite to safe guard their own power. But the root of their power is theological – that as descendents of the Prophet (pbuh) or a holy Pir, they continue to have a superior connection to ‘god’ than the rest of us. Given that Pirs and Syeds tend to belong to political rather then military ranks of power, Sufism as manipulated by them – contemporary Sufism – has been their ruling ideology. And this ideology, though opposed by some in the military, is certainly the ruling ideology of Pakistan’s political elite, elements of the bureaucratic and military elite, and backed by America.

Some of the characteristics of contemporary Sufism are: quitism (accept your reward in the next world); fatalism (whatever is, is justified and is god’s will); escapism (drugs); belief in divine intervention and non-rationalism (that a Pir’s prayer or threads alter reality); a hollow definition and prescription of ‘love’ on all occasions (which ends up acting as escapism or fatalism); and as already discussed, a belief in the spiritual superiority of Pirs. It is the first four that endear contemporary Sufism to the imperial US, and the last that is important for justifying the power of the local elite.

But nothing in Islam or historical Sufism – what I consider ‘true’ Sufism – supports these Pirs and Syeds. Bulleh Shah, Shah Inayat, Abu Dharr, Sachal Sarmast, Waris Shah, MadhoLal, Dullah Bhatti and Islam itself all stand for something quite different – the eradication of hierarchies and a movement towards equity and equality. Here I want to outline a few of the hierarchies that today’s Sufis espouse but which find no basis in historical Sufism.

The very basis of contemporary Sufism relies on the spiritual distinction of the Pir from the rest. The Syed/Pir is seen as spiritually superior to the commoners with direct access to God. While not denying the qualitative distinction that certainly exists between those who study and learn about a subject and those who do not, the claims of Pirs and Syeds are baseless. While they can enlighten us with the reasons for any normative positions they take, they can not claim that God is likely to respond to their prayers but not others. They have no spiritual superiority – Islam does not claim a distinct class intermediating between God and the people. God radiates equally, not distinguishing between the sons of Ibn Saud, the peasants working the field in Pakistan and the Senegalese musician.

Listen to the words of Bulleh Shah on the matter: “Those who call me and respect me for being a Syed, I pray, for them to receive the punishments of Hell.” In another poem he tells us: “Oh Bulleh, get up Bulleh, get up, go where all are blind, where no-one knows us or venerates us.” Equally, emphatic are these verses from the Sindhi Sufi Sachal Sarmast: “Banding people into orders, to get called a Pir/saint their concern, pouching hands, prayer mats, hats, absolute lies they churn.” Or from another of Sachal’s poems: “I have no ambition to become a leader or makhdoom, neither a Pir nor shaikh, nor I intend to be a fortune teller.”

If these Sufis did not claim spiritual distinction, then certainly their descendants have no right to do so. That they do is painful, for in almost every case the spiritual distinction is used to acquire material wealth. While Sachal and Bulleh Shah learnt to abhor exploitation of humans or of nature, contemporary Sufis glory in such exploitation.

Nor do Islam or Sufism allow for vast inequalities of wealth. While we could look at the Holy Quran to demonstrate this, it can also be illustrated by looking at early Islam. Let us start with the Prophet (pbuh). I quote Ali Shariati, the famed scholar of Islam, on the matter: ‘His palace was no more than a few rooms constructed of clay. He was among the workers who carried the loads and built the rooms. His court was made of wood and palm tree leaves’. And his mode of transport was a donkey.

Equally illustrative is the companion of the prophet, Abu Dharr, a caravan bandit desert-dweller who upon hearing of the Prophet went to find him and upon finding him became the fifth convert to Islam. Under the message of Islam, Abu Dharr shed his past activities and, taught by the Prophet, entwined in his life Islam’s message of equality. Upon seeing this message threatened by the Caliph Uthman, he stood firm and stated: “O Uthman! You have made the poor, poor and the wealthy, wealthy.”

More significant for Islamic history was his rebuke to Muawiyyah for building the monstrous Green Palace. Again unable to tolerate the deviation of the message, he declared: “If you are building this palace with your own money, it is extravagance, and if with the money of the people, it is treason.” The palace, as always, was being built from the people’s money. The Prophet built plain houses of clay and his descendants today build palaces.

Abu Dharr is right to call this treason, and treason allows (if not requires) revolt. Rather then fatalism or quitism, the message of Islam and Sufis has been one of questioning leaders and even revolt. Leaders – be they landlords, Pirs, or politicians – must be overthrown when leading society to injustice, and not be accepted fatalistically. The right to revolt and challenge leaders is inscribed in Islam; let me quote Abu Dharr again: “I am perplexed by a person who finds no bread in his house. How is it that he does not arise against the people with his sword unsheathed?”

In what is now Pakistan, the message of Islam that Abu Dharr upheld in Arabia has in the past been fought for by Sufis. The rebellion of Dullah Bhatti is worth noting. Influenced by the patron saint of Lahore, Madholal, Bhatti and his followers refused to pay tax to the Mughal Emperor Akbar, claiming that land is held in common and entrusted to people by God without any mediation of emperors or Pirs. Akbar had no claim to tax or spiritual superiority, argued Bhatti. Akbar, closer in tradition to the palace-builders, hunted down Dullah Bhatti and had him beheaded.

In Sindh, Shah Inayat is venerated for his opposition to empire and landlords. In the early 18th century he set up a commune on theological lines in defiance of the Mughal Empire. Like Bhatti, he held that the land belonged to God and that only those who worked to grow the crops were entitled to it. The commune’s motto succinctly sums up this ideology: ‘Those who sow should eat’. His thoughts convinced peasants far and wide not to pay crop share as tax to either the empire or local landlords. Oral history suggests that the commune grew to more than 40,000 strong. As the commune acquired more attendants, so too did it attract the wrath of the empire. Emperor Farrukh Sayyar sent in troops; upon their arrival they besieged the commune. The commune’s Sufis resisted for months. Having failed to achieve their goal with force, the empire turned to cunning. Offering peace talks, swearing no less than on the Quran to guarantee Shah Inayat’s safety, they angled him out of the commune, arrested and then beheaded him. It should be noted that in both rebellions, Sufis fought tooth and nail for their ideals in this world. In Sindh, Shah Inayat’s name is well known and he continues to inspire calls for social justice.

Fatalism, quitism and escapism have no part in historical Sufism. While a healthy cultivation of spirituality and developing an expanded conception of the self are part and parcel of Islam, they are not to dominate other considerations. The good Sufis have fought in this world – often paying for it with their life. There is nothing of fatalism in their ways.

Islam is not either Peace (which in the hands of liberals and the Americans means fatalism and love of ‘whatever is’) or Jihad (as articulated by our ISI and their loony mullahs). It’s not either Sufism or Al Qaeda. It’s far more. Inayat and Sachal are examples of this, and though contemporary Sufism suffers from docility, and instead of being a liberating theology has been manufactured into an ideological entrustment for the ruling elite and their backers in Washington, it still contain the flames of resistance – for history cannot be erased and the message of equity will arise again. The message of historical Sufism – its opposition to empire, feudalism and diehard mullahs and its search for justice both in this world and inwardly – stand to be revived.

As we search for ways to fight against inequality and injustice, where Bhutto landlords and their offspring drink from rivers of champagne in Paris, London and New York while their subjects watch the rotting bones of their children, and where the murder of a family of peasants sees no redemption but 4 billion rupees of loans to Pirs and Syeds and Bhuttos and Zardaris can be pardoned by the law, we must learn from past rebels and challenge head-on the rule of these latter day Pharaohs. It is upon such a revival that the future of Pakistan and this region rests. Good Sufis fight for the true message of Islam – the message of doing away with hierarchies, be they spiritual, political or economic, and moving society ever closer to equity and equality. Those who fight against the idolatry of hierarchies are the good Sufis.

Last Updated on Saturday, 04 September 2010 13:03
 
Comments (5)
Exactly
5 Wednesday, 08 September 2010 14:08
Usman Haider
People have forgotten the real essence of Sufism in Pakistan but even now when it comes to mysticism these are the Sufi saints who are the first to come into the minds. Sometimes Sufism is beyond our thoughts and sometimes i overcomes our mind and souls. Great effort by Sir Qalandar Bux and my dear fellow Ali Mohsin.
Constructive Criticism
4 Monday, 06 September 2010 09:02
Taimur Rahman
Interesting article I have a few points. These are my thoughts for constructive criticism.

I think it is incorrect to say "Islam... [stands for] the eradication of hierarchies". Clearly the Quran believes in hierachies, divine and human. Please consider gender, slaves, non-Muslims. It was very progressive for its time, but it would be quite incorrect to say that it stands against hierarchies.

Second, it is not correct to make the general statement that sufism suits US imperial objectives. Clearly US imperialism built up Islamic Deobandi and Wahabi Islam during the cold war which is mortally opposed to sufism. It is more correct to say that "at this historical juncture..." And with the current negotiations between Karzai, Nato and the Taliban, this may all change again.

Third, I think there is not enough about "the good sufi" in this article. There is a lot of overlap with your last article. I would have been very interested in learning more about how sufism was historically converted from its its original message into its new form. This is a transformation that few have thought about.

In solidarity
Taimur Rahman
Tssauwuf viz to viz Religion
3 Saturday, 04 September 2010 10:30
Shahzad Irfan
Very interesting and useful. I believe that Tssauwuf Belongs to the People and Religion belongs to the State. From the early History of mankind, any where in the world " Tssauwuf serving, supporting,the people as a defense line and the Religion is owned by the State and Rulers or the elite Families or the persons.


Shahzad Irfan
really good quote
2 Saturday, 04 September 2010 01:58
Sam
I want to share with you a quote from Tahmena Bokhari and ever since I heard it, it has stayed with me and I have been thinking about it ever since...I think she is talking about the spirituality in Islam and NOT religion of Islam here...and I think it is beautiful.

She was asked in an interview how she would describe faith and she said the following,
"How would you describe the concept of faith?
The best way that I can describe it is this. To me, faith is like art, it means different things to different people at different times and in different places......... Art can be used as a mirror to the soul and has in fact been a tool for self reflection, one I have used many times as a social worker. Similarly, the way you interpret Islam may actually say a lot more about you than about Islam itself." Tahmena Bokhari
see her full answer...
http://forum.oyetimes.com/views/columns/4758-whats-faith-got-to-do-with-it
let's move out of the ghetto
1 Saturday, 04 September 2010 01:46
Sam
I actually think Sufism, the spiritual side of Islam is amazing. I am not a practicing Muslim and actually reject many of the teachings of Islam as has been taught my many mullahs or even so called muslim leaders. But I believe in a higher supreme being and divinity. I like the idea of looking within oneself for peace and I do not like these ridiculous rules of Islam.
There was a good article in the Samosa about the religion of peace vs the people of peace by Bokhari, and by the way, Bokhari herself is a Syed and seems to be quite spiritual, anyway, I think Sufism addresses the problem she identifies in that article. She identifies that we have come to know only a ghettoized version of Islam. So I think the teachings of sufism actually help uplift Muslims to rise to be their best and move away from the petty, silly, superficial, external and ghetto ideas that have taken over our religion.

Add your comment

Your name:
Your email:
Subject:
Comment:
<