The attitude of Jama’t-e-Islami or other such ‘fundamentalists’, proves a hurdle in the way of natural uplift of women, in this industrial age. The overall attitude which is attributed to ‘fundamentalism’ fails to win the hearts of modern educated ladies; it rather creates suspicions about Islam. If Islam is a religion of nature (‘deen-e-fitrat’), then would it not give the women folk adequate and equal rights?

No doubt, Islam is the religion of nature and it not only confers upon women proper rights, but gives equal rights in true sense of the word. Alongwith the leaders of Islamic Movement, Allama Iqbal may also be studied in this respect. More particularly, his work ‘Ramooz-e-Be-khudi’ be gone through seriously, wherein Allama has analysed the Western attitude towards women. If that is kept in mind, then we will get proper answer to the Western inspired media assault and trial of the subject "Women and Islam".

In Islam and in a Muslim society, a woman plays the role of a mother, a sister, a wife and a daughter. In the Muslim social setting, a woman is considered woman and guided to progress in that capacity. In contrast, woman remains no more woman in the Western development and cultural model. We believe, woman has always been deprived and suppressed in the history. In the past she was subjected to suppression as woman, she was degraded, subjected, enslaved and sexually tortured. But today the apparently charming yet deceptive slogans of the West have deprived her of the feminine identity and character. Every effort is made to convert her to "he-woman", and all this is done in the name of feminism and basic rights.

This, in fact, was a trap and intrigue of the capitalists and money-lenders hatched in the name of ‘revolution’. They pulled the woman out of her house for the sake of cheap labour, and as a result fixed dis-proportionate wages not only for women but also for the whole industrial sector. Even after about two hundred years of the so-called progress, woman emancipation and declarations of gender equality, preferential structure persists for the male-female wages. It is not woman emancipation; it is her exploitation. Compared to this, we, in the light of Islamic teachings, consider woman as woman and provide her all opportunities for progress. This is the fundamental nature and unique distinction of Islam.

The Qur’an assigns greatest importance to the fact that as human being, men and women are equal. They have the same conditions to accept the faith. The yardstick for accountability and success or failure in the Hereafter is also the same for both. Look at the beauty of Qur’anic narration, how every where it speaks of the two sexes, bringing them together: "faithful men and faithful women, truthful men and truthful women, pious men and pious women". After this, however, Islam asked for each one according to his or her need, nature and social role, giving opportunity to progress in their respective domain. This is our gender concept, which neither hinders progress nor proves injurious and exploitative for women in anyway. Look, for instance, at the difference of the two civilizations. One is the Western culture, which used woman as a labour in the industrial revolution but destroyed the ‘home’ to reach this target. As against this, Japan, which although is not an Islamic country, also used the woman labour for industrial progress it made, yet without destroying the institution of the ‘home’ and family. This indicates that there is not one but many other ways to achieve industrial growth. We, the Muslims, will follow the approach which conforms our culture, values and our national (milli) goals.

The term ‘equality’ in your question is also worth consideration, which has been very much confused. It is said, "that the Western gender concept, brings the equality to an ideal and desirable level. The differences regarded at various levels in Islam counting on facts and needs, do not amount to equality." I feel this is a meaningless allegation labelled by the ‘western mullahs’ or the ‘west-inspired mullahs’ of the East who only blindly follow the western deceptive tactics. Variety and nature exist as a fact of life. To eliminate this diversity and nature is, in fact, coercion and regimentation, whether employed in the name of equality or any other title. Islam proposes difference at various levels and we accept it. But the Islamic concept is based on justice (adl) and objective realities. This does not at all affect the position of man or woman, concerning basic level, responsibility or accountability. Take for instance the law of witness and testimony. There are areas like delivery and fosterage etc. where only the witness of woman is accepted. In other places it is said that only man will come to witness. As such it is not inequality. It is rather the fairplay dictated by the nature and need. And it is also not related to rights; is rather a social and legal obligation. In the areas of rights, Islam has created real balance and justice. The term ‘equality’ is just a hollow slogan which was neither materialised by Communism nor the mal-cultured capitalist America or Europe could deliver todate.

Q. Although you do not deny women the right to vote, but you refuse to accept them on higher positions of the state. During the Presidential election of 1964 Maulana Mawdudi, in a way properly exercising ‘ijtihad’, supported Fatima Jinnah. After some time, however, Mohtarema Benazir Bhutto faced opposition from Jama’t-e-Islami Pakistan. Keeping the present day situation in view, why not uphold the 1964 ‘ijtihad’ of Maulana Mawdudi?

No doubt, Islam has given women the right to vote, at a time when Europe did not even know what it really meant. Even today there are one or two states in Switzerland, where woman can neither vote nor be elected. In the United Kingdom and America, women got the right to vote in the third decade of the 20th century, after the first world war. However, these are not examples worth following for us.

Islam has devised its own system and has provided in it a division of responsibilities, according to which individuals and different sections of the society are given the chance to play their role. In this respect Islam has declared the home and family as the cradle of civilization. Mixing of men and women and having joint gatherings are discouraged. In the family system, Islam gives woman the right of property, trade and income-generation and the right to keep her profit to herself. Meeting fiscal needs of the family and the household is the sole responsibility of the husband and not the wife. In case a husband is poor, even then he has no right to take possession of what belongs to wife, in the name of household expenditure. This is Islamic character which it established in every sphere of life. And this is the overall context in which the woman is given the right to vote in the social and political affairs.

In Islam, woman has the right to be consulted and give her independent view in the social matters. In specific gender problems, she is given the right to take decision. In areas not of her direct concern, she is to participate in consultation. However, the system suggested by Islam for the implementation of these matters is such that the responsibility to head an army or the state, rests with the man and not the woman. This is the principle position in Islam. But if the situation is extraordinary, then strictly limited to that specific condition, relaxation is there to differ and make provision for woman.

To illustrate, if there is need to save life then things strictly prohibited under normal conditions, are permitted to be used to the extent of need, and only need. This was the framework within which, not only Maulana Mawdudi, but also Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi and other religious scholars in the country suggested in 1964, that the dictatorship of Field Marshal Ayub Khan can be opposed and brought to knees under the leadership of a lady who was highly honoured and respected by the whole nation. Remember, that under his Martial Law, Ayub Khan forcibly brought changes in the Islamic Family Law, created discontent in (the then) East Pakistan and instead of the parliamentary democracy, introduced the indirect elections and Presidential system, which shook to foundation the whole social structure and body politic in the country.

In these extraordinary conditions, Maulana Mawdudi and Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi considered it appropriate to support Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah as the Presidential candidate. I myself am one of those who wrote in favour of this decision. In the extra-ordinary conditions Shariah permits to take such decisions for the social needs and collective betterment. To generalize such decisions of particular conditions, is altogether different thing.

Please also do not forget that Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah, owing to her supreme magnanimity, promised the nation that she would restore the parliamentary system after winning the election. As such, she on the one hand accepted the Presidential responsibility, and on the other hand considered it an ad-hoc arrangement to be replaced by the parliamentary system which, as you know, rests on the concept of division of authority.

In respect of supporting Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah, the arguments given by Maulana Mawdudi in support of his view, were based on time-bound temporary needs and involuntary conditions. In one of her speech Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah also confessed that she was thankful to people in the Jama’at-e-Islami for supporting her, that they accepted it under the demand of collective need and as an ‘acceptable evil’. In this respect there was no dichotomy in our stand, and we did not transgress from Shariah, rather clarified the religious position and only then supported her.

By following this example, if some one desires it be generalised to let people get lackeys to ladies of the Bhuto family, then it is extremely regrettable. Peoples Party or its leadership cannot be considered compatible to the limited time-bound offer of Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah or the situation of extreme constraint faced by the Bangladesh of Khalida Zia. Peoples Party’s female leadership follows the policies and is allied to Western imperialist order not only at the cultural and ideological levels, but also in practice. We are sorry to note, that such taunting remarks are made even by serious press circles. We wish they could personally observe the situation in Bangladesh and their columnists could avoid silly arguments and quibbling.