The entire history of humanity underscores the importance of religion in maintaining societal cohesion. Religion brings about order, unity, and discipline among the various segments of society.

Émile Durkheim, a founding figure of sociology, asserts in The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life that religion provides the framework for shared beliefs, practices, and symbols that unite individuals into a collective consciousness. He argued that “the collective sentiments are the true source of all religion.” Durkheim believed that in pre-modern societies, religion was central to social cohesion, but with the rise of modernity, industrialisation, and secularisation, its role would diminish. However, he did not foresee religion disappearing entirely. Instead, he predicted that in modern societies, religion would be replaced by other forms of collective rituals — such as nationalism or political movements — that would continue to serve the function of social cohesion.

As long as death, the fear of the unknown, hope, hopelessness, love, hate, jealousy, a sense of possession, sacrifice, and other human emotions and passions exist, religion will remain an integral part of human life. Moreover, as long as rulers and the ruled, the rich and the poor, the strong and the weak, the good and the bad exist, religion will also be present. It could be used positively and negatively for manipulation and exploitation.

History also shows that religious leaders and political rulers often exploit religious sentiment for their own gain. Zeev Maoz and Errol Henderson, in their book Scriptures, Shrines, Scapegoats, and World Politics, argue that religion has always been linked to political power, with religious figures frequently taking leadership roles due to their societal influence. They suggest that religion can contribute to conflict, depending on how political leaders manipulate religious ideas to serve their own interests.

By using religion, leaders can galvanise public support, recruit new followers, and suppress dissent. Napoleon Bonaparte understood this dynamic when he remarked, “Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.” Religion, in this sense, becomes a tool for maintaining social order, pacifying the oppressed, and protecting the status quo.

Pakistan’s history highlights the fact that the ruling elite, including political, religious leaders, and governments, has strategically used religion to consolidate its political, economic, and social power. Despite the fact that around 98% of Pakistan’s population is Muslim, the ruling elite has skilfully played the ‘Islam is in danger’ card right from the very creation of Pakistan. This tactic has been used to control the population by creating extremist organisations and fostering divisions between Sunni and Shia groups. The elite has encouraged systems like feudalism and the peeri mureedi system to keep people submissive and under the control of feudal lords and religious leaders. Additionally, over 50,000 madrassas have been established across the country, many of which are producing sectarian fanatic zealots who remain disconnected from modern scientific education. These fanatics are ready to sacrifice everything for their religious leaders.

General Zia-ul-Haq used religion during his military regime to justify his authoritarian control and a jihad war during the Soviet-Afghan War. Zia-ul-Haq introduced the Islamisation of Pakistan’s legal and social systems, including the Hudood Ordinances and the promotion of Shariat law, to gain support from religious groups. Thousands of madrassas were established with the help of America and Saudi Arabia to produce jehadis and extremists for fighting against the former Soviet Union in General Zia’s rule. Many extremist and sectarian organisations were created that killed thousands of innocent Pakistanis. The policy of good Taliban and bad Taliban was adopted which created the TTP. More than 80,000 people have been killed in the war against terror.  The US-Pakistan relationship during the Soviet-Afghan War, the Afghan war against Taliban and war against terror clearly illustrate that religion was manipulated for political and geopolitical purposes by the ruling elite.

Imran Khan, the former prime minister of Pakistan, also used religion to get support from the people. His slogan of Riyasat-i-Madina (the State of Madinah) was a key aspect of his political rhetoric, aimed at appealing to Pakistan’s religiously-minded people.

Currently, the Societies Registration (Amendment) Act, 2024, is at the heart of the latest controversy. The National Assembly and Senate have passed the Madrassah Registration Bill which seeks to regulate madrassah under the supervision of deputy commissioners (DCs) rather than the Ministry of Education, as it was previously proposed under the 2019 reform.

But the president Asif Ali Zardari raised objections to the madrassah registration bill. In a document sent to Prime Minister  Shehbaz Sharif, Zardari pointed out that the inclusion of madrassah education under the Societies Registration Act could create legal and procedural contradictions, particularly with Article 227 of the Constitution. He also cited concerns about the potential for increased sectarianism and divisions within the madrassa system, especially if multiple madrassas operate under a single registration. Additionally, the President warned that the bill could attract international scrutiny, particularly from bodies like the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

These objections from President Asif Ali Zardari infuriated Maulana Fazlur Rehman, a religious leader of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F), who was used to pass the 26th Amendment.  In exchange for Maulan’s support, the government made different promises to him, including the passage of legislation to regulate madrassas. However, once the amendment was passed, the government is looking reluctant to fulfil its promise. The gesture from the government infuriated Maulana, who threatened to launch a protest against the government if the promise was not fulfilled.

The bill is seen as a necessary move to modernise religious education and ensure madrassas meet national and international standards. However, it also threatens the power of Maulana Fazlur Rehman. Madrassas have long been a source of his political influence, and any attempt to regulate them is a threat to his authority.

Maulana Fazlur Rehman has long used religion for personal and political gain. He issued a fatwa declaring a woman’s rule un-Islamic but later supported Benazir Bhutto for personal benefits. His ambition to become Pakistan’s prime minister was revealed by WikiLeaks, where he sought U.S. support in exchange for political influence. Following a meeting with U.S. Ambassador Patterson in 2007, it was reported that his political support was “up for sale,” showing his willingness to work with foreign powers for personal gain.

Madrassa politics in Pakistan is not merely about education, but a tool for political control, sectarian division, and exploitation of religion for personal gain. The state must prioritise solving Pakistan’s economic, social, and political issues through the introduction of scientific and moderate education, rather than using religion to deceive its people.