Historically, crisis cults emerge in societies whose ideological, structural, social and cultural mores are increasingly unable to meet the needs of their people. The uncertainty borne out of these pervasive failures are indeed what crisis cults cater to. If the Lal Masjid debacle can be considered a festering sore on the already ailing body of the Pakistani nation, the anthropological lens of "crisis cults" provides a useful framework for diagnosing the core issues that have led to the evolution of such a bewildering phenomenon. According to anthropologists, a "crisis cult" is "a group reaction to a crisis, chronic or acute, that is cultic... where the crisis is a deeply felt frustration or basic problem with which routine methods secular or sacred cannot cope" and the "cultic" is the inability to accept any feedback that disrupts the myth of the cult or the appetite of individuals to believe.

The rhetoric used by two Maulanas, the now deceased Ghazi Abdul Rashid and the arrested Abdul Aziz, provides important clues in this regard. Both brothers as well as Umme Hassan, the female principal of Jamia Hafsa, pepper nearly every speech and media interview with a reminder of how the Pakistani state is failing the poor man. Their demand is a simple one: an Islamic system for Pakistan, a country created in the name of Islam. This is a great tactic. In the simplicity of their rhetoric, the leadership of Lal Masjid has captured succinctly the burgeoning crisis that is at the root of the "deeply held frustration" that anthropologists associate with crisis cults.

Indeed, the identity crisis that feeds this "deeply held frustration" is one that was created by revisionist history and nationalistic myths that the Pakistani population has been constantly fed for the last sixty years. Whether it is historically incorrect textbooks that propagate myths about the inherently religious nature of the struggle for independence or ludicrous beliefs regarding the character of Pakistani territory as originally Muslim since the time of the Holy Prophet (pbuh), the beastly confusion and manipulation manifests itself again and again in myriad ways.

The current military administration has contributed to promoting and manipulating the current identity crisis. The Women's Protection Bill was celebrated as a victory against religious conservatives. In reality, with appeasements such as making fornication and adultery a crime under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Bill did nothing to assuage the central question that plagues Pakistani nation identity: what exactly is the relationship between Islam and Pakistan and between the state and the citizen? Is Pakistan a secular or a sacred state?

This question has been answered with sly simplicity by the leaders of the Lal Masjid campaign. For them, things are quite simple: Pakistan was created in the name of Islam and so all else must be abandoned and an Islamic system reinstated. In coupling the practice of their simplistic formula with the highly dramatized theatrics of vigilante justice and insuring themselves media attention by employing the seductive morality of cracking down on sexual licentiousness, the two Maulanas assisted by the formidable Umme Hassan, have tapped into the" deeply held frustration" increasingly ignored by both the military and the secular democratic forces in the country.

The chronological significance of the emergence of the Lal Masjid campaign is also worth drawing attention to. The military, once dutifully revered and feared by most Pakistani citizens, has muddied its uniform by its unglamorous foray into the always-messy realm of politics. Forced to play power games that involve popularity rather than security, the past few months have seen President Pervez Musharraf and the military administration increasingly preoccupied with manoeuvres designed not to defend territorial boundaries but rather to co-opt political enemies. The need and pressure of co-option has become so intense with the suspension of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and consequent constitutional crisis that the Army's reputation as an arbiter of stability has become increasingly questionable.

Similarly, the promise of "real" democracy also bears little hope for the ordinary Pakistani. The supposedly national political parties, recently so incensed over the suspension of the Chief Justice and so ardently committed to his reinstatement, promise little better in terms of resolving either the incipient identity crisis or providing any meaningful expectation of structural change. At best they retain conveniently "democratic" facades for oligarchic landowners, clan leaders and urban industrialists who use established relationships of patronage to pledge support to a national leader. The same faces and figures are recycled before a wearied nation left hapless after ruined experiments with both authoritarian and democratic governments.

Enter the Lal Mosque, a new voice markedly different from that of the usual suspects and promising a utopic society where moral order prevails and justice is accessible. Their emergence and perseverance on the national scene signifies both the presence of a gaping political chasm and the inability of old power figures to respond to the frustrations of an increasingly poor, disillusioned and young Pakistani public. If the opportunistic chronology and festering identity issues are combined, the case is compelling and typifies exactly the "deeply felt frustration and basic problem with routine methods" invoked by the definition of crisis cults at the beginning of our discussion.

If the existence of a "crisis" is thus taken for granted, then we must move on to whether the Lal Masjid's modus operandi can truly be described as "cultic". Both the iconography and the simplistic rhetoric employed by the Maulana brothers at the helm of the movement suggest a cultic character pivoted on the charisma of the leadership and the isolation of members from the larger society.

Videotapes of Jamia Hafsa show women dressed in their now iconic niqabi burqas, increasingly rapturous in their pleas to the Divine and committed to their isolation in the name of reinstating an Islamic order. Their vigilante behaviour is also typical of cultic groups which often require daring feats of members as a means of proving their commitment to the cause. The raids on video shops, the kidnappings of alleged prostitutes, the forcible occupation of property and now holding students hostage, all suggest a mentality that perceives the members of the group as "good" and the larger society as irreparably errant and misguided. Finally, the unfailing belief among students of Jamia Hafsa that their "sacrifices" would actually result in the establishment of an Islamic system as well as their obstinate allegiance to death for their cause, both demonstrate a distortion of reality that is typical of cults.

If Lal Masjid can indeed be described as a crisis cult, the following questions are raised: What juncture have we as a nation reached when suicide cults inhabit our capital and defiantly claim jurisdiction over Government property? What depths of despair have the destitute women and orphan children been reduced to when entering an extremist movement represents a respite from the harshness of day to day existence? What level of ignorance has our understanding of Islam fallen to such that the most marginal and extremist allusion to faith immediately garners thousands of followers?

As Pakistanis sift through the psychological, social and political debris left by the Lal Masjid crisis they must ponder these questions carefully. Crisis cults emerge in societies whose ideological, structural, social and cultural mores are increasingly unable to meet the needs of their people. True, their solutions are vacuous, misguided and cruel in the exploitation of those who chose to fall for them but the danger lies not simply in the solution that they offer but rather the deep festering crises that they represent.

Six decades have passed since the creation of Pakistan. There have been many experiments both with democracy and with authoritarianism � indeed as a nation, Pakistan has become used to both crisis and uncertainty. Yet if the Lal Masjid debacle and the innocent lives that it has claimed is to mean anything at all, it is time to grapple with questions that have been ignored for nearly sixty years. The most basic among these questions is this: who is Pakistan as a nation and why indeed was it created?

Shit, it took so long for altmuslim to write anything or publish anything on Lalmasjid on this site.Shame to all muslims who do not use their brains and are lead by stupid self centred, arrogant b..d. I am ashamed of the abuse. Musharaff has been brave enough and hat off to him but I am sure still a lot of people would think negative about him. the same man when he took over stated that he was going to teach india a lesson. Over the years, he has matured and absornbed the truth. after all, they are all indians until 1947. shame again when we go to haj. We are treated as converts!!what is the point??We might as well decide who are real muslims and let every 1 decide. What religion teaches cruelty and death to fellow humans. Intepretaion has gone beyond me and many others.
have a nice day and please my fellow converts it is about time we decide who really we are and what respects we get and what we can give,

Pakistan can never be a secular state as it parted company from Mother India!!The rest is Hell Fire!!India is secular and respects every religion despite occasional rifts from uprising fanatics!!

Shit, it took so long for altmuslim to write anything or publish anything on Lalmasjid on this site

This is a volunteer effort, not a full-time job. You get what you pay for :-)

The BJP, RSS, Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dal, Sang Parivar would beg to differ, munna. Pakistan is not secular, neither is India upon closer inspection.
There is no way a believer in democracy would ever support a US backed dictator like Musharraf.

The raison d'etre for Pakistan has always been to prove that muslims cannot live peacefully with Hindus. Every day that India manages to prove to the world that Hindus can live peacefully with Muslims, it is an insult to Pakistan. This is at the heart of the hate Paksitanis feel towards Indians (Hindus first and Indian muslims next).

Indian muslims feel thet have not done enough to further the cause of Muslims in the world and are frequently taunted by paksitani muslims to step up. The doctors from Bangalore took the bait.

Pakistan will disintegrate and may very well give al qaeda their first nuclear weapon. Where it will be used is a matter of speculation, but whether this will happen, is not that much in doubt.

Munna,

What is so great about Musharraf? Can you deny any of the following:

1) He is a military dictator
2) He coddled the extremist nutjobs in Lal Masjid and elsewhere in Pakistan when it suited him
3) He is bending rules left and right trying to hold on to power
4) He is changing his tunes not because he became secularist or more matured, but because he is in a rock and hard place after 9/11. Given half the chance he will coddle with these extremists again if they serve his needs.

You are accusing others for not using their brains. Lets see if you are going to use yours.

BTW, I believe in a secular society, rule of law and democracy. Musharraf is not a proponent of any of those.

Foolkiler,

Don't kid yourself about Hindus living peacefully with Muslims (or Christians for that matter). India certainly has a better record than Pakistan treating its minorities. But, treatment of minorities/lower caste Hindus in India is far from examplary.

Dear Khan,

I have travelled in India and in Pakistan and Bangladesh. My feeling was that there was a greater dislike of other faiths in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In India, as you correctly say, the treatment of the lower castes is abominable, but I suspect that that is more a function of economics than the Hindu religion and caste.

Having seen the same kind of barriers (though less overt) in western societies I have come to the conclusion that caste is something inherent in human nature and is perhaps a hardening of the social strata over the centuries. Surely you are not naive enough to think a Mexican illegal is treated the same as a white guy in America? Or for that matter, I hear Muslims are treated badly after 9/11 in the USA. It is caste in another form. Or like that guy named Munna was complaining about being treated as a 'convert' to Islam! Same story.

But my point about Pakistan being insulted about having been wrong about Hindus is a testament to the larger population of Hindus as well as the Muslims of India. There must be great regret in the larger population of Pakistan and BD, that they chose to break away; and ended up in this horrible mess - both in Pakistan and Bangladesh! For all its ills India is a far more fun place to live if you are reasonably educated and have a job.

Wherever Muslims are in a minority, usually they have learnt to live well with others.

Though turkey is a majority muslim nation it is a minority in the sense of Fortress Europe - or the EU. They have always wanted to belong to the larger community in Europe and perhaps that influences the moderation.

Where as the Arabs...well you probably know better than I!

Foolkiler,

Caste system has nothing to do with economics. If you are born in a caste, your status in the society is sealed for life. Why do you think the lower caste have always converted to other religion (Islam in the past, Christianity in the present) in an attempt to escape their fate?

Muslims in India are not treated as badly in the day to day life. But, they sure face a lot of violence time and time again. Bangladesh is my home country and I know there are more religious bigots there I would like to have. But, may I ask, what kind of experience you had that made you think that Bangladeshis have dislike towards other faiths?

I can't speak for Pakistanis, but I can assure you, most Bangladeshis don't regret having their own country. A lot of us regret being part of Pakistan at one point of our history. But, that's about it. Bangladesh is in a mess for a lot of reason, breaking away from India is not one of them.

The Gujarat riots of 2002 which resulted in the loss of 5000 muslim lives. Atrocites took place on defenseless men, women and children. Independent human rights organisations have concluded that this riot was pre-planned with the support of the State of Gujarat Government, RSS, Shiv Senna and other extremist Hindu nationalists.
The rest is history. India despite its secular mask is a nation deeply immersed in communal politics.

"... despite occasional rifts from uprising fanatics"

And boy do they uprise! As high as the federal government!! Yes, Pakistan has problems with fundies. But show me one Pakistani federal government as openly communalist as the BJP.

(My Indian mum will hate me for this!)

Loss and Separation has a tremendous effect in life. That's the side effects of breaking "Mother India" and what has been going on now is that every one wants a piece of cake. The world cannot revolve without differences and if we all were the same life would be very boring indeed. India is the largest democracy in the world wether we like it or not. At the same time it has poverty, illiteracy and on the other hand a fast developing nation too. All in all this involves all faith/religion irrespective of all the bad press you hear or the stories you read.
I have been to India twice only and have seen how people live in harmony. I doo accept also that fanatics are everywhere and they are also senseless. That is causing problems be it in Bangla DEsh, Pakistan etc etc.
We need to learn and grow from the loss and separation.
Irfy, you have obviously insulted your mum and you need to go and say 'sorry' to her.
To conclude, I can't see how religion can be so dominant feature of aggressive act when prayers are meant to bring about peace and tranquility. People go to the mosque, mandir, churches etc for spiritual wellbeing. I am so sorry about the death of so many people at the Lal Masjid. Moreover, so many young people have been brainwashed in such activities to disturb the nation's peace.

Irfy,

I can't name any present Pakistani government officials that are that openly communal. But, during the 71, a lot of Pakistani government officials, political leaders were talking about cleansing east pakistan of Hindus and muslim bengalis.

Arshad, I agree with you. The way Pakistani officials behaved toward the Bengali people was a disgrace.

Irfy,

Here are some examples of a 'federal government' being communal. Though you asked about Pakistan, I thought, why stop at poor Pakistan when we have the whole 'Islamic' world!

1. Saudi Aribian Government categorically BANS the practice of any other religion but Islam in Arabia.

2. During the Iran-Iraq war, no Shia security guard was left alone EVER! He was ALWAYS accompanied by a Sunni! I was there, in al Kahfji.

3. Any country that is preceded by the words 'ISLAMIC REPUBLIC' seems a tad communal to me in its application of policy!

4. Refusing a sect of Muslims (ahmediyas) the right to be called Musilms.

5. The Ahmedia policy in Pakistan - enshrined in the federal constitution. And in the case of Zaheeruddin v. State, where 'federal' courts applied Intellectual Property Law to religion (as if Islam is an incorporated business entity) in complete contravention to Article 20 of Constitution of Pakistan. Apparently, Ahmadis are not even allowed to give Azaan because it may outrage the feelings of the majority- forget religious freedom, doing so can land an Ahmadi into jail for three years without recourse.

6. Passports requiring Religion to be named in it.

7. Asking Civil Services officers to swear against India (yes Irfy, my Aussie friend, they do that even today in your beloved Pakistan)

8. Re-writing history as explained above in the article to say that Muslims have been in the region called Pakistan forever.

9. Recently when the Iranian foriegn minister toured India and Pakistan (I was there for this too) he was asked in Pakistan as to why Iran did not haul the government of India over the coals despite its 'anti muslim' stance. His reply to the Pakistani press corps was that he found that the Shias were safer in India than in Pakistan. Communal..? Hmmmm, perhaps....

Want me to go on? I have a few more doozies for you....

Dear Khan,

You are right about the idea of Caste. From what I saw in India, nobody is following those birth rights anymore. Now it is the same as in the west. If you have the money you belong to the privileged caste. If not, you are an untouchable.

I was part of a international consortium to develop the Gas fields in Bangladesh to export - mainly to India. The parliament of Bangladesh voted to stop the exports to India but asked for the international aid. We had to categorically say that without India as a firm market to sell the gas, we had no interest in developng the gas fields. When I spoke to members of parliament off record, I was told that there is a deep seated hatered of hindus in Bangladesh that makes them resent the fact that Islamic Gas is being exported to power Hindu growth! Though this was a minority of members, they were strong enough to torpedo the deal.

At the same time a huge Gas reserve was discovered in the Godavari basin in India, which made the BD gas irrelevant.

That is what made me think Bangladesh is not far behind Pakistan in its hate of Hindus.

Footkiler,

You are absolutely wrong when you say the birth rights not followed anymore. No dalit can move to the privilged caste by having money. A dalit will be always be treated as a dalit. This treatment will vary from state to state. You may have been in place things were better for the lower caste than the others.

Thanks for sharing your experience in Bangladesh. Actually, a lot of people were against the gas project, but not for the reason you mention above. Are you familiar with the way India has treated Bangladesh? How they have practically killed one of our largest rivers by diverting water? People of Bangladesh has a mistrust for India. Some people has it for communal reasons. Most others because the way India treats us. Those experiences have often tainted the way we do business with India. I wish things were different. Unfortunately, I don't see neither Indians nor Bangladeshis changing their ways anytime soon.

If we hated the Hindus that much, our national anthem would not be written by a Hindu. Just as hindu cultural icons, some of are/were don't have any love for muslims, are widely read with reverence, part of the text book. Of course there are some elements in our society, that are intolerant. Unfortunately, in the last government (the one you worked with), they had more power than usual shaping up some key policies.

You mentioned something about rewriting the history. Did you know that BJP government did the same thing when they were in the power? Then we have examples of Babri Masjid demolition, riots every few years and what not. No, calling India an example of minority tolerance is laughable.

Now a personal example of Indians hating muslims. Where I live (a small suburb in Texas), Indians put up a culture week in the library highlighting Indian history. They had pictures of all those glorious architectures in India. But, they left out the most iconic of them all - Taj Mahal. Take a guess why that was done that way.

And, having travelled to India myself I have seen quite a few incidents where Indians were resentful towards Indian Muslims.

Arshad Bhai you stated this "Indians were resentful towards Indian Muslims" This in my opinion is NOT the majority.. There is racists element in almost anyone. Please remember that partition of India was because the muslim wanted an islamic state bhai Arshad. There is resent ment coming from people when you get incident like Dr. Haneef emerging. During partition muslims had an opportunity to go to newwland Pakistan. Those who stayed behind are not really backwards. They are enjoying good life. They call themselves Hindustanis. So you have to accept it is hindustan land and not an islamic state. Christians and hindus who live in Pakistan have to accept that it is an islamic state. However, may I remind all readers that India is the largest democracy in the world. Muslims who are falling behind in India are those who are stuck and do not wish to integrate and move on with modern life.
Taj Mahal, Arshad bhai, contrary to lots of reports it is NOT what people believe it was was. there has been lots of developments to unearth history.
I am proud to see Hindus, muslims, christians in india mingle and go about their business in daily life and show respect. Yes, there is a minority of troube makers from all parties that make headlines from time to time including the politicians.
Hope this week will be better and no more killings!!

Munna,

Regardless of Taj Mahal's history, it is the most iconic monument in India. Yet, the Indian Hindus decided to omit the picture of it altogether only because it is associated with Muslims. And, all those unearthing of history of Taj Mahal is of course is being done by BJP types to erase any contributions Muslims made towards India.

I did not claim that majority of Indians are resentful of Muslims. But, there are enough of those who either have resentment or are totally apathetic towards Muslims/minorities who put BJP in the power.

Bottom line is Pakistan is a terrible mess. Bangladesh is not doing so great, but at least has a strong secular culture, believe it or not. India, though a democracy, still has a long way to totally uproot its religious zealotry. None of these countries are models of religious tolerance, like it or not. In each of these countries, a fanatic mob will go and kill a bunch of innocent minorities whenever there is any indication that some members of the minority community has done something wrong.

Dear Mr. Khan,

I completely agree with you regarding the tolerance in Bangladesh for India and Hinduism being greater than in Pakistan. No doubt about it. I still have dealings with entrepreneurs in India who are ecstatic about working with Bangladesh. They tell me so many times that they are treated like royalty in Bangladesh - and to be honest, I have never heard any Indian complain about Pakistan either.

I personally worked with absolutely great guys from Pakistan when I was in Saudi Arabia. These guys were the best - nobody could ask for a better team of hard working people. I remember like it was yesterday when we were stuck in deep doo-doo because the contractors who were supposed to construct the roof of a building that was ready, reneged on us. These five or six Pathans came literally from nowhere and saved our asses!

I would have paid thrice what they asked for because the penalty clauses would have kicked in and our entire margin on the construction would have been wiped out!

As for the Dalit problem in India, you are wrong. I know of Dalit Engineers who have made it in life as good as any upper caste engineers. In fact - as ashamed as it makes me to say this - the Christians are the most hypocritical when it comes to untouchability in India because they have separate mass for the dalits, and even the cemetery is seperate!

The Hindus have made gigantic strides in social upliftment. I understand how you cannot see this because you are part of the culture - not in any derogatory sense but that you are too close to the picture.

I wonder how many other cultures in this world would have let the oppressors live after they lost power. It is not trivial what the Muslim rulers did in India to eradicate Hinduism. Yes, if one considers ALL the muslim rulers only a handful were tyrants. But tell me Mr. Khan, how many times does genocide have to be attempted for it to be not remembered forever? But the Hindus have managed to forgive, and even harder, FORGET!

Regardless of how closely the Slovenians and Bosnians live in the future will they forget the massacres of the 1990s? Or will the Americans simply not know what 9-11 means in a few hundred years? Forgive me for being callous but in a historical sense 9-11 is nowhere as close in horror and bloodshed to what went on India, again and again at the hands of the Moslems.