Farrukh Khan Pitafi I have come across people who think that the Taliban have a better idea of our faith and should be proclaimed our saviours even when they kill us. And then there are those who think that the American predator attacks are a pretty neat idea and hence should be welcomed

“The truth will set you free,” says Jesus in John 8:32. That is true. But truth is often presented as a thing ridiculously simple; something that is indivisible or that which is easily attainable. Yet such a perspective precludes the possibility of half-truths. Then where does the proverbial blind men’s elephant go? Please do not jump the gun and take me for a deconstructionist or postmodernist. I am not. It is just that the way people treat the fascinating compounded dimensions of truth in an obnoxiously simplistic fashion is nothing short of blasphemy to me.

In terms of science too there are umpteen paradoxes involved. One deliciously radical idea of quantum physics is called the Many-worlds hypothesis. In 1954, Hugh Everett III, a doctoral student at Princeton University, introduced the idea of parallel universes where every time we are faced with a fork on the road and we take one turn, the other branches off into an alternative reality. He was trying to explain the erratic behaviour of quantum matter. Of course in our finite view of the universe this sounds like a queer joke but if we were to consider our reality as a three-dimensional software, there is no dearth of space for such an expansion. In this matrix of multiverse, how would you then fit our own limited perception of truth, for everything untrue in your own universe could be true in one alternative universe or another. Undoubtedly this brings the near consensual monotheistic masonry of endism crashing down. But that is merely a side effect. The real effect of this hypothesis is the amount of humour it has generated in the science fiction and fantasy genre.

I am not sure how this quantum interpretation can be proved through hardcore evidence on a macro scale but if it could be, it would drive a dagger into the hearts of many a religious myth. But it is not as if there is no religion that endorses such a view. Certain dialects of ancient faiths do that and so do many esoteric cultures, including a few secret societies. For instance, there is the concept of planes of existence in esoteric cosmology. Even in Islam and other monotheistic faiths there is the concept of an afterlife, which for sure is considered a parallel reality. The day humanity proves this hypothesis, which at least in terms of physics and mathematics is accorded nodding approval and perhaps creates a means of dimension jumps, we will perhaps reach the solid fact of God’s existence or the lack of it. Already many scientists including Gleason, Hartle, De Witt, Graham and finally Deutsch have brought it to the new century and the new millennium.

In our mundane reality too somehow it seems there are multiple universes. If you were to compare the social realities of modern day Tokyo and New York to the technological infrastructure present in the distant nooks of Pakistani tribal areas and Afghanistan, you would instantly understand what I mean. And so can you understand the naked truth of poverty vis-à-vis the advanced nations of the world. And of course you can understand why none of the Pakistani universities is likely to produce even one Everett in the near future. So the illustrations go on and on.

Coming back to the multi-dimensional nature of truth we have several examples of commonplace paradoxes. For example, when Pervez Musharraf accorded full pardon to AQ Khan after his televised confession, he called him a hero and a disgrace at the same time. The questioners kept marvelling at the irony. How could a country’s national hero be a criminal? Perhaps the name of Mordechai Vanunu is forgotten. But then what will you make of the recent controversy in which Shahid Afridi, our hero of the T20 World Cup, is seen offering his teeth to every bowler for the sake of ball tampering? Perhaps that good old sportsman spirit in professionals is being replaced with the mad desire to win. The onus has shifted from good old sporting fun to matters like national pride and the glory and rewards of a win. Means of course then are not important. Ends would justify the means.

These paradoxes and the different shades of truth are not that much visible in two-dimensional Pakistan. Two-dimensional as in a map where no depth — cultural or intellectual — is found. Two dimensional also in terms of our rigid belief in black and white, good and evil: what we do is good, what others do is evil. Our mental and imaginary geography has created two parallel though clashing universes within our very country where those who share our worldview are angels of virtue, and those who do not are the devil’s apprentices.

Consequently, I have come across people who think that the Taliban have a better idea of our faith and should be proclaimed our saviours even when they kill us. And then there are those who think that the American predator attacks are a pretty neat idea and hence should be welcomed. Those who do not embrace either of the two perspectives are neither in the kingdom of heaven nor in the world of darkness but consigned to the dustbin of an abyss. I know I am neither here nor there, that I cannot subscribe to the worldview of extremists even if I tried to and my life depended on it. Similarly, while being a thorough liberal I love my country and like Ataturk I am averse to any foreign meddling in matters of my nation.

This terrible polarisation was brought home once again by Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s controversy. While most of the people I came across expressed their concern for the dear doctor’s well being, there still are people who think that punishing her was a good idea. When we cannot manage to produce evidence, we start dissembling. And that is exactly what has been done by the US authorities while building the case against her. If the American government and agencies had no idea about her whereabouts before 2008, why was her name included in the published FBI list of wanted terrorists just before her disappearance? And if she was a wanted terrorist, why were these charges not pressed against her in court? I know that immediately after the jury found her guilty she threw a tantrum and dragged Israel into the matter without any context. Many will try to prove her a member of a terror outfit through this, but to me it shows her unstable mental state caused by prolonged torture. I wish there was more information available from the government of Pakistan and the Musharraf regime. I also think such instances are caused by the failure of world nations to establish a code to try non-state actors on the pattern of the Geneva Convention. The London Conference too was a woeful waste of resources. Truth then is no longer needed.

The writer is an independent columnist and a talk show host. He can be reached at farrukh.khan@pitafi.com