THE Quranic verses relating to the creation of Prophet Adam, the first human being, do not simply tell us why and how he was created. They also tell us how he was guided and developed in order to conduct himself in line with the object of his creation.

The Quran tells us that Adam was created to place human beings as the vicegerent of Allah on earth. As Allah’s vicegerent he had to discharge certain obligations for which he was to be properly guided. This is evident from the Quranic verses which say: “Who created and then proportioned: Who measured and then guided.” (87:2, 3) The words “created” and “proportioned” imply the creation of human beings in the best possible form with all the requisite faculties and qualities. (95:4), (91:8) and (16:78)

The word “measured” in the verse implies that Allah took account of the faculties and frailties with which human beings are born so as to devise a proper plan for their guidance and development. The word “guided” in the verse implies provision of necessary guidance to enable them to discharge their obligations as Allah’s vicegerents in a proper way.

The implementation of the above plan started simultaneously with the creation of Adam. Allah taught him the names of certain things and then asked the angels “Now if you are right, tell Me the names of these things.” (2:31) The angels first objected to the creation of Adam on the ground that he and his offspring will cause bloodshed and create disorder. Allah told them that He was going to place His vicegerent on earth. Then the angels expressed their inability to answer God’s questions. Allah turned to Adam and asked him to tell the names of the things. When Adam told them, Allah said “Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of heavens and earth. I know all that you reveal and conceal.” (2:33) Then He ordered all those present to fall prostrate before Adam. All the angels fell prostrate except iblees (satan).

The above exercise had a three-fold objective. One was to give knowledge to Adam as a first step in the process of his development. The other was to show to the world the importance of knowledge and how much Allah valued it. The third was to motivate Adam to strive for the acquisition of more and more knowledge.

A question is often asked if merely knowing the names of certain things can be deemed as knowledge. The answer is very simple. Knowledge in the ordinary sense means knowing that which one does not know. So knowing the names of the things concerned was knowledge in so far as Adam and angels were concerned. Second, it was not the level but the importance of knowledge, however small, that mattered in that context. Third, even now the process of acquisition of every knowledge starts with first knowing the names of certain things.

After the above test, another exercise having a multipurpose object started. It is generally being asked that if Adam was created to serve as Allah’s vicegerent on earth what was the sense in keeping him in the “gardens” above and expelling him from there. But the fact remains that the development process does not involve merely telling a person about what he should do and what he should not do. One can learn a lot from certain important mishaps, reversals, failures and setbacks in life. In the “gardens” Adam and Eve were told to eat whatever they liked but not to go near a particular tree. They were, however, misled by satan and made to do what they were forbidden to do.

As a result they were turned out of the “gardens”. The object was to impress upon them through practical demonstration as to what could be the outcome of doing what satan tells one to do. That was, in fact, the lesson of Taqwa which means the fear of Allah manifested, among other things, in abstaining from doing what satan tells one to do.

During the same process Adam and Eve were made aware of the outcomes of some other elements germane to the guidance and development of human beings. One was the outcome of self-centred pride and arrogance on the one hand, and of repentance and submission, on the other. Satan was so proud of his false superiority (he claimed superiority over Adam on the ground that he was made of fire while Adam was made of clay) that he not only refused to fall prostrate before Adam but also did not care to beg pardon for his disobedience. Hence he was condemned for ever. On the other hand Adam and Eve after realising that what they had done was wrong, immediately admitted that they had committed a wrong and prayed for pardon. (7:23) And they were pardoned.

At the same time Adam and Eve were made aware of the outcome of the use of two other faculties, namely, the faculties of conscience and reasoning. It was the use of conscience (91:7, 8) that made them realise that what they had done amounted to disobedience to the command of Allah and was, therefore, a major sin. And it was the use of reasoning (16:78) that made them realise the implications of what they had done as reflected from their prayer for pardon. (7:23) They realised that what they had done fell in the category of major sins and any one who committed such sin had to be in loss in the same way as satan. And finally, it was the fear of Allah that made them repent over what they had done and pray for pardon.

They were also made aware of the outcome of one of the most common frailties or characteristic of human nature, namely, the inability to resist lust. As stated above, Adam and Eve were told not go near a particular tree but satan whispered to them that they were forbidden to go near the said tree because if they tasted it they will either become angels or live for ever.

It was, therefore, the desire to become angels or immortals that impelled them to do what they were forbidden to do. The object was to let them know through a practical demonstration that inability to resist lust was one of those weaknesses of human beings that could be easily exploited by satan and that the fear of Allah coupled with His guidance could be the only way to save themselves from such exploitation. (28:50)

“WHEN politics is defined as the relational work of redistributing power and resources, negotiating differences, strengthening communities, and working together with others to influence or alter societal institutions, then the connections between service and politics can be made more readily.” — The New Student Politics: The Wingspread Statement on Student Civic Engagement (2002)

Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani has announced that the ban on student and trade unions is to be lifted. This decision has been widely lauded with some analysts terming it as a historic step that takes democracy back to the streets, factories and campuses.

A quick overview of student politics in Pakistan underlines its substantial role in influencing mainstream political discourse in the country. Campus politics served as a nursery for national leadership.

The National Students Federation (NSF), espousing a leftist ideology, was a pioneer in the field. It was in the forefront of student activities in the 1960s and 1970s. Having a visible electoral strength in various colleges and universities of the country, the NSF led the student movement against Ayub Khan’s martial law in 1968.

It is also believed that the NSF injected radical politicisation into the educational environment by launching ideological debates on polity, the economy, culture, art, literature, history and so on. The intellectual landscape of the academia was conducive to critical thinking and idealism that sought structural changes in the country.

In 1972, came the People’s Students Federation (PSF) — the student wing of the PPP. Being closer to the NSF ideology, this student outfit remained in electoral coalition with the NSF and other leftwing student organisations under the United Students Movement and Progressive Students Alliance in the 1970s and the 1980s.

At the same time, the Islami Jamiat-i-Tulaba (IJT) — the student wing of the Jamaat-i-Islami — emerged as a counter-left outfit. The IJT massively manned the anti-Bhutto movement in 1977 and is believed to have introduced rightwing militancy on campus. Some reports suggest that the IJT was behind the firing incident at the NSF rally in Karachi in 1979 and that it established strategic links with the establishment by supporting the official jihad policy of the government oin Kashmir and Afghanistan.

The All Pakistan Mohajir Students Organisation (APMSO) — which later led to the formation of the Mohajir Qaumi Movement — was established in 1978. APMSO and the IJT have had an acutely adversarial relationship as they competed to capture the Karachi University campus. This has been viewed as a conflict between ethnic and religious militancy as each party sought to establish its base in Karachi’s student community.

Under Zia’s martial law, student unions were banned in 1982. But intriguingly, the IJT was allowed to operate with the tacit support of the regime. It also gave secure space to its workers and leaders which allowed them to influence the decisions of the education administration in colleges and universities. Resultantly, the IJT cadre was able to establish its stronghold not only within the student community. The education administration and faculties also opted to side with the rightwing outfit for their own reasons of political expediency.

Thus the culture of democratic and ideological debates that had emerged was turned into a monolithic and unidimensional ideology inspired by the thoughts of Maulana Maudoodi. In Punjab University, for instance, forced segregation between male and female students was enforced by demarcating seating spaces for men and women in the classrooms. Holes were made in the dividing curtains as a mark of mute protest against unsolicited gender separation and the restriction on male-female interaction in the classrooms of Punjab University.

Benazir Bhutto’s first government revived the student unions in 1989 creating space for pluralistic politics in educational institutions but this failed to neutralise the entrenched hold of the IJT significantly. Rival candidates were abducted, threatened and harassed, and a culture of violence re-emerged in educational institutions leading to the ban being re-imposed and political space being left to the well-organised IJT.

It is suggested that this trend led to a massive de-politicisation of the student community which replaced the romance of ideological debates and intellectual enterprise with parochial, conservative and at some point criminal dispositions apparent in student politics. Campuses became the dens of proclaimed offenders, undesirable elements and trigger-happy youth. The spirit of vibrant student activism lost to power-driven interest groups and universities became infertile, and could not produce political cadres with democratic and pluralistic training.

It is assumed that the skills required for healthy student politics include political knowledge, critical thinking and relations-building and negotiation skills. But during the Zia years and after, student politics damaged the very core of students’ organisations that degenerated into entities resorting to group violence and showing community intolerance. These patterns were capitalised on by political parties who now used their student wings merely for personal lobbying and individual security purposes.

It was observed that many politicians employed these student ‘activists’ as their private bodyguards or front men for their political businesses. Some of these student wings are now involved in the real estate sector, placing their weaponry skills at the service of syndicates of land and property dealers.

Against this backdrop and as a follow-up to the prime minister’s announcement on student unions, it is suggested that the incumbent government needs to deliberate upon reforming student politics in the country. Primarily, these reforms can be focussed on:

1. Developing a code of ethics for student bodies by engaging existing organisations at the national, provincial and district levels.

2. Setting up a multi-party/parliamentary commission on student affairs as a facilitating body to inform, educate and orient student organisations towards democratic, pluralistic and tolerant values and practices in politics.

3. Develop a consensual policy of student politics by effectively discouraging violence on campuses and creating a better interface between politics, intellect and service at the student community level.

4. Putting in place mechanisms for redressing grievances and resolving conflicts at educational institutions by engaging faculty members and reputed academics.

5. Linking student unions with regional and international student bodies to enrich the content of politics at home.

6. Developing a leadership curriculum for student organisations in order to enhance their skills of debate, negotiation and interest and to demand articulation.

It is feared that without large-scale reforms, student politics will continue to unleash lethal violence on the campuses and polarise the academic atmosphere in accordance with the priorities of groups with vested interests.

amjad@rdpi.org.pk