22 August, 2014 / Shawwal 25, 1435

Muslim modernism and Jinnah

Published Dec 25, 2012 11:06am

— File Photo
— File Photo

There’s no controversy about Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s modernist identity. While many commentators in Pakistan and the rest of the world recognise Jinnah as such, this particular aspect of his person, leadership and social vision has escaped our attention.

At a time when we as Pakistanis and our country face a challenge of identity in defining our present and future path as a nation state, we need to explore Muslim modernism in South Asia in length and engage with Jinnah’s thought, life and politics intensively.

The Muslim modernist elite fought two parallel struggles that later in historical developments converged on the idea of Pakistan. The first struggle was for Muslim awakening to the challenges included modern education, joining modern professions like medicine, law and the government services of the colonial power, Britain. These are things that we take for granted in modern day Pakistan and in other societies. But think of Muslims in India in the later part of the 19th century and you will find two retrogressive tendencies among them. At large they were fatalists, pessimistic and sought refuge in the multilayered cocoon of tradition. They were comfortable within their cocoon and unwilling to experience the life and opportunity that the colonial modernity was opening up for many Indians.

The forward-looking individuals, families and social groups among the Indians embraced modernity. The Muslims living in the glory of the past and interpreting history and conflict with the British more in religious tones than applying reason to their plight, hurt their interest in the social and economic power balance with other communities. This became the real concern of the Muslim modernists: how to awaken Muslims to rise and empower themselves.

The Muslim modernist, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and his great colleagues, supporters and followers understood the logic of modern education, science and technology. Every idea they had about empowering Muslim community was rooted essentially in post-renaissance enlightenment. This included faith in reason that challenged old ideas of life and living, keeping what was relevant, explainable, logical and useful and leaving what was superstitious. They were highly impressed by new learning essential in science which marked a new beginning in human frontiers at personal as well as collective level. The Mohammedans Scientific Society in the 1860’s translated scientific books into Urdu and distributed among Muslims, along with articles in magazines and newspapers, about modern sciences and how Muslims and others could benefit.

The new learning couldn’t be possible without bringing Muslims to the British educational system. This was the first step that most of the Muslims were reluctant to take, fearing they would lose their faith and identity. The mullah of the subcontinent and his religious network that sustained his power and orthodoxy, built a counter movement of rejectionism presenting modern education as conflictive with Islamic ideas and ideals. Fighting this mindset we find so challenging today in the 21st century was a far greater daunting task in the latter part of the 19th century. To counter the mullah and liberate Muslims from his deadly embrace, the modernists adopted establishment of modern educational institutions like the Aligarh Muslim University and many other institutions, including the Sindh Madrassatul Islam where Jinnah got his elementary education.

The mobilisation of Muslims and their educational awakening worked, though at a slower pace with resources and a culture of orthodoxy being the major constraint. Even after almost half a century of social movement, the proportionate numbers of Muslims in modern professions and government were lower than others. The best educational institutions including the Government College in Lahore around the time of independence, had much lower enrolment of Muslims than their numbers could justify. Nonetheless, a significant section of Muslims throughout India from Bengal to the Punjab had joined the new stream of modern education and professions.

Mohammad Iqbal and Jinnah, the former a great thinker and dreamer and the other a practical politician that translated the dream of Pakistan into a reality, were the product of a new cultural climate that Muslim modernists had struggled half a century ago. Iqbal ventured into complex and difficult terrain in the re-interpreting the Islamic thought and practices along with a message of hope, change, empowerment and general awakening among Muslims. He wanted them to recapture the glory of their civilization by walking step-in-step with the modern world. The past was relevant to the present, and this could be possible only through creative interpretation, leaving the well-beaten path of tradition.

This needs some explanation. I am impressed by Eqbal Ahmed’s interpretation of Iqbal and Jinnah as constructivist Muslims, a lead that he takes from Iqbal’s four lectures on reinterpretation of religious thought in Islam. What does constructivism mean? It means living in the present and embracing modern institutions, law and practices, both social as well as political without losing sense of what is essential in the religion. It is never a rejection of religion but only its continual reinterpretation through modern institutions, like an elected parliament that may reflect the Muslim consensus.

Before I turn to Jinnah and his modernism, we need to mention the second struggle of the Muslims, the political equality and participation. This struggle was shaped by the first empowerment that came from education and entry into modern professions. When the British under the political reform programme in the beginning of the 2oth century opened up some space for representation of Indians, the Muslim leaders rightly raised the issue of their representation as a separate community. There had been a strong sense of Muslim community within the Indian civilisation fold for centuries that Muslim rule under four different dynasties for almost a millennium had further fostered. Its conversion to a modern notion of Muslim nationalism resulted from education and question of representation in all institutions symbolising power and authority in the context of imperial India.

Jinnah was a modernist Muslim more in political, cultural and social sense of the word than in the constructivism of Iqbal. His intellectual development in Britain was rooted in modern law and constitution that had roots in British history and European modernisation. He embraced the ideal of liberation and independent nationalism. The Indian nationalism first and wider philosophy of individual and collective rights had origins in his own development and embracing of modernity as a path to national progress. Besides his profession, the practice of law, all his life was devoted to the independence of India and later how to secure representation of Muslims in the British and post-British institutions through lawful, constitutional and democratic means.

Once that quest lasting until the Cabinet Mission plan failed, he found the ideal of an independent Muslim state the only idea for many Muslims. There are too many interpretations of Jinnah on this, and this is not the right place to get into them. What is relevant for us today in Pakistan, the Pakistan of the 21st century, is the larger discourse on modernity and modernism. While we may learn from Iqbal about creative interaction between civilisation and modern times, we can learn from the life and though of Jinnah about modern politics of individual rights, constitutional argument, freedoms, and democracy.

The last thing, and I believe the most significant point if the idea of the state of Pakistan as a neutral space among religion that Jinnah placed before the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. We have deviated from that vision, a modernist vision of Pakistan according to which religion is safer in the civil society that being a strong arm of the modern state. Sooner we get back to this modernist vision, the better for our social order, peace and stability.

More From This Section

Comments (69) (Closed)


Adil
Dec 25, 2012 05:46pm
When it comes to Muslim modernism,then there's another name that many people have completely forgotten i.e. Ghulam Ahmed Pervaiz. He was a close aide of Quaid-e-Azam and wrote about Islam and Pakistan Movement like no one else.Pervaiz was always against forming divisions and sects in the name of Islam and considered it(Islam) a way of life,plus he is also considered as one of the exceptional scholars of The Holy Quran.Unforutnately in his own country Pakistan he was labelled as heretic and other labels; and many religious parties,institutions and groups continue to defame him till date. You can still differ with him in a tolerant way but he spoke about certain political and social issues unlike our traditional Maulvis.
hamayun
Dec 30, 2012 09:41am
Dear Riaz, you said "They don’t give a monkey about Islamic values, western values or any values other than their own. They believe in just feudal values that preserves their power and keeps the masses subjugated." It means there is something called "Values" which you also believe in, and my point is that the best values are those practised by these honorable personalities. Feudal or any other social class isn't following it is some other issue.
hamayun
Dec 30, 2012 03:00pm
Agreed.But we should move forward on the path of moderinism with great care. I am not against TV but I am against the contents shown on it e.g the "Ishq e Mamno" type dramas which are totally against our Islamic values. I appreciate Peace TV because they are using 'modern' equipments for the betterment of humanity.
Soul of Manto
Dec 30, 2012 12:24pm
To save their diverse tradition, culture, religion and the skin as well.
sfomann
Dec 25, 2012 05:42pm
Please leave Pakistan.This country was not created for fanatics like you
abbastoronto
Dec 25, 2012 05:39pm
Islamic way of Iqbal vs Islamic way of Jinnah Despite his greatness, Iqbal did confess in the end that he was ghazi of words only, not deeds. He had to convince Jinnah end exile and lead the Ummah because he (Iqbal) could not do it. Jinnah’s knowledge of Islam was deeper than Iqbal who had taken up Sufism, an escapism from real life in reaction to the excesses of the Kaliphate/Monarchies. Man takes refuge in the “self” not society. Jinnah a jurist/politician understood full well that the Medinan Republic founded by our Prophet AS was a secular government with constitution as the Covenant of Medina with rights for all. Mustafa Kemal bin Ali Reza Effendi (aka Ataturk) did away with theocratic Kaliphate and founded the Turkish Republic on the pattern of Medina of our Prophet AS. Jinnah who admired Ataturk did the same 25 years later in setting up secular Republic of Pakistan on the model of Medinan Secular Republic. Allama Maudoodi has valiantly explained the dangers of Kaliphate and Monarchies. Let us not repeat the same mistake again. Let us not have the Kaliphate Theocracy of Pakistan as pushed by the likes of Gen Zia, but the Secular Republic of Pakistan under God on the model of Secular Medinan Republic under God as is the Sunnah of our Prophet AS.
hamayun
Dec 30, 2012 09:51am
Suppose your little kid(say 10 years old) starts smoking what will you do??? Suppose your sister or my sister starts a secret affair, what we are going to do??? Suppose there is a brothel or wine shop in front of your or mine home what you are going to do? These are some situations where you have to impose restrictions???
abbastoronto
Dec 25, 2012 05:46pm
Raika45 ji Greetings Let us not take Malaysia as the model for Islam. I have lived in Malaysia, and noted that its vibrancy is because of the Chinese minority, not Muslims majority who live off the Chinese wealth by taxing it. The Muslims in Malaysia have not distinguished themselves in industry or science or technology, and I doubt if they ever will. Islam of Malaysia is not a tolerant Islam. In Pakistan do not have that luxury to live off others' sweat, and even if we did, it would be immoral to do so. Moreover, the gravy train soon comes to an end as it will in Malaysia soon as the Malaysian Chinese feel stronger with the rise of China and start better protecting their wealth.
syed baqar ahsan
Dec 25, 2012 11:34am
Did you gave us something like this to flourish? unity faith & discipline but you never made anybody out of us to be responsible to ensure that after your depart .Taking responsibility is not in our blood.
hamayun
Dec 25, 2012 02:01pm
"On the point of Muhammed Ali JInnah and Allama Iqbal i personally prefer the more islamic way of thinking of Allama Iqbal." I am also of the same opinion.Incomparable personalities like Prophet Muhammad(PBUH), 'Ashaba e karam' and 'Auliya-e-Karam' have existed and their teachings are a guide to the whole humanity not just Pakistan for ever.Modern and successful is some one who is satisfied at the end and not repentant.
dialogueforpeace
Dec 25, 2012 04:35pm
Today's Pakistan is the direct consequence of Jinnah's ambiguous political pronouncements from 1945 to his demise. This is what you get when you do not take your own people into confidence about your political road-map. Jinnah was confused about the nature of future state of Pakistan and here after 65 years of their independence this nation is still confused about its real enemies living with them in their own streets and mohallahs. I wish, only if Jinnah had been honest and straight forward about the future state of Pakistan, things would have been lot more clearer now.
Agha Ata
Dec 25, 2012 04:13pm
Just as you said, ". . . this particular aspect of his person, leadership and social vision has escaped our attention. . . “Similarly there is another aspect that escaped from our attention. We ignore the fact that there have been TRULY great leaders in the last one thousand year's Islamic history, yet ... the nations remained backward, uneducated, and not prosperous at all. We seem to learn nothing, absolutely nothing from our leaders. We just sing songs of praise for them, celebrate their birthdays, fight with each other on their names and have immense pride, but nothing else. I don’t see a single leader who could change these people. I wonder, why.
Riaz
Dec 25, 2012 04:12pm
By and large a well balanced and a good article. There is nothing wrong with Islam, the problem lies with Muslims and Islamism; both of them badly scarred and maligned by 12th century theology, theosophy, and theocracy. Quran is divine and true, the Hadith and Sunnah are relevant to the context of time and place; the rest is man made , including sharia and the interpretation of the Quran. Everything man made is subject to re-evaluation and revision so that it conforms to the needs and context of time and place. Laws that applied to horse carts in the twelfth century are irrelevant to today's automobile. Laws that applied to slaves and their masters have no place in modern age. Muslim mindset is firmly struck in the twelfth century; unwilling and incapable of adjusting to the demands of modern age. Read Said Nursi; an enlightened Islamic scholar and a scientist from Atta Turks days. Pakistan needs the Golan movement which has brought modern Islamist in to ascendency in Turkish government and society. If you do not discard your mullah in the dustbin of history, he will keep your mind imprisoned in the dungeons of twelfth century. The Greeks do not want to go back to the days of Alexander, the Italians do talk about going back to the days of the Romans, the British do not aspire to go back to the days of queen Victoria; they fully understand that these were unique and extraordinary moments in their history. The Muslims on the other hand want to bring back the twelfth century.
Ram Krishan Sharma
Dec 25, 2012 04:02pm
Follow the example of modern Turkey. Keep religion out of politics . Mullas should stop preaching hatred from the mosques against non-muslims . Then only ,Pakistan can progress. Muslims all over the world are far behind in scientific knowledge as compared to Jews , Christians , Hindus and Budhists . This is a fact.
ss
Dec 25, 2012 02:35pm
well said,
Abdul B.Jam
Dec 26, 2012 11:39am
Although I am not tempted to say that I do not have any respect for the Quaid, I wish he had directed his efforts more towards finding a solution to live together in harmony as one nation rather than dividing the country in the name of religion and nationalism. The moment one starts believing that something cannot be done, in this case that Hindus and Muslims cannot live together, is the moment that one gives up- false premise lead to false conclusions. People of different religions, fates and colours have lived and still live together all over the world and that is the beauty of life. What have we gained after independence? From one giant county we became three countries, so much bloodshed, regional instability, sectarian violence, to name but a few tragedies. The end result: a Pakistan has been ruled by none other than dictators, landlords and terrorists, that has lost its national identity, is politically and economically unstable, to name but a few tragedies. Alas, the Quaid's vision of Pakistan as a united, prosperous, hard working, and intellectual nation has become more of an ideal than a reality. I feel so sorry of all this. It is only the people, average man like you and me, who can change the nation and not the institutions or the people running the institutions. We all have a DEFINITE part to play in making our country a better place and UNLESS each one of us plays that part, I doubt that our country’s fate will change at all (God forbid).
Riaz
Dec 25, 2012 02:47pm
If you live in the world of reality, you wont be peddling all these paradigms that have no relevance to the situation. Pakistan was created as a state for Muslims solely of Economic reasons. Try to read and understand the reality of your history. The Feudal elite dominated Pakistan at the beginning and dominate it to this day. They don't give a monkey about Islamic values, western values or any values other than their own. They believe in just feudal values that preserves their power and keeps the masses subjugated. To make matters worse, their ranks have been further strengthened by the emergence of the recent industrial elite. Feudal power operates through patronage, nepotism, bribery, manipulation and exploitation. This is precisely what you see in every nook and corner of Pakistan. What you see as democracy is a monkeys tea party, run as a show by feudal / industrial elite. Pakistan has become a graveyard of intellect and a cesspit of ethical and moral decay. Ordinary people are chocking with its stench. Ask your self a question, millions of mosques are full to the brim during Friday's prayers, yet the society and its culture has become a cesspit of ethical and moral decay. This society is rapidly heading towards sure self destruction.
Patriot to the bone
Dec 25, 2012 11:46am
please define modernism in your article because NO ONE will disagree that a modern pakistan would be a better pakistan. BUT you are mixing modernisn up with westernization. westernazation will mean that we give up our islamic values. you may want a more tolerant pakistan but dont use the word modern. Pakistan is created on islamic values. BUt what is going on in pakistan is that there is a lot of cultural paranoid with the people. the secular think that they are right the islamist think that they are right. we are muslims (non-moslims are a small minority) so we should tolerate each others(islam teaches us that) but never ever try to become like the western world because you will end up having a generation who has a freaking identity crisis. ISlam defines us We may have a different perspective and a different vision of pakistan but it our core principal is the same tolerate evryone On the point of Muhammed Ali JInnah and Allama Iqbal i personally prefer the more islamic way of thinking of Allama Iqbal. Long live Pakistan may allah lead us to the rightious path
syed baqar ahsan
Dec 25, 2012 11:43am
what is Unity,Faith&Discipline?At least nobody has the answer to this question in Pakistan.
raika45
Dec 25, 2012 12:10pm
The moment you bring religion into running a country in this modern times, you will court nothing but disaster.Centuries old laws and commands have no place in running a country. Unless like the Middle East you have oil under your feet.Look at Malaysia, a Muslim predominant country that had a Muslim Prime Minister that took all other races as partners to jointly run the country.Something that is followed till today.I as a Malaysian Sikh am proud that our country is held up as a model to other Muslim countries with other races as citizens.
Mustafa Razavi
Dec 25, 2012 05:55pm
All times were modern in their own time. Ethos of any nation, religion or otherwise, is centuries old. Malaysia is indeed a model, not only to the Muslim world but to the whole world. The other great model is Turkey.
Faisal
Dec 25, 2012 05:58pm
My friend, our generation already HAS an identity crisis. They don't know whether they are Pakistani or Muslim or Arab. Why are you so scared of the word Modern. Thank the West for your Computer, for Electricity and many other luxuries of the modern age. Why do you need religion to define you? You are an individual. Look around you, religion has seriously messed up Pakistan, stop living in denial.
Bharath
Dec 25, 2012 06:15pm
Here modernism means instead of becoming terrorists, need to study higher education and challenge the world in development
Yawar
Dec 25, 2012 06:57pm
Turkey is a better example for Pakistan to follow
Masood Hussain
Dec 26, 2012 04:34pm
A well written and timely artcle must be read and given extensive wide publicty. I may mention here ,while role of Sir Seyed Ahmed is recognised in struggle which no body dare deny but we tend to forget other muslim institutions like Anjumann Himayat-e-Islam,mother organization of Islamia College Lahore,which iwas founded much earlier.
Jehan Mir
Dec 25, 2012 07:39pm
Happy Birthday,Quadi-Azam !
abbastoronto
Dec 26, 2012 05:49pm
Mustafa Razavi: AOA Malaysia has two resources Pakistanis do not - the natural and the Chinese. Without the 2, especially the second, Malaysia would be a basket case. To whom more is given, from him more is expected, says the Bible. Neighbouring Singapore, with more Chinese and few Muslims, is a First World country, and without any resources. It even gets its drinking water from Malaysia. Success is having nothing and making something out of it. Pakistan on this respect is a resounding success. Once the Civil War of Transition from rural/agrarian to urban/industrial is over (soon) Pakistan will shoot like a rocket. You want to bet!!
abc
Dec 25, 2012 09:12pm
totally agree with you. Following Islamic values are the most logical and mordern way of thinking. Because it is ageless and absolute truth. long live pakistan. Pakistan is destined to become the islamic and modern world leader for everyone to emulate and follow.
sal
Dec 25, 2012 09:24pm
It is looking more and more each day that Islamic rule can only survive with oil or iron hand dictatorship. Pakistan could be a defining point in future when it is realised that Islam and democracy cannot co-exist. That is that the Mullah's and the President will always lock horns..and the mullah's will usually win. Perhaps Pakistan will survive, it may be more of a Somalia type of survival however.
A follower of Jinnah
Dec 25, 2012 09:51pm
I am indebted to the Prof. Rasul for writing this article and highlighting Jinnah's modernist identity. For years i have tried to argue the fact that Pakistan was never created as "Islamic republic of Pakistan" but was created as a Pakistan whose flag had white in it. Most if not all of us have forgotten that Pakistan is not a land only for the Muslims and is a land for the people most of them happen to be Muslims. The modernism I would define is not mixing up the religion with state policies their can be a reflection of values in the policies but religion can not be the basis. Only a fool can ignore Jinnah's point of view regarding alcohol. The person who is the founder of Pakistan unarguably enjoyed alcohol as many politicians still do. The problem about making policies according to the religion arises when the people who are not very religious come into question. It is a fact that many in Pakistan enjoy alcohol if some one does not agree they could refer to the financial statement of Murree Brewery and notice the rise in their sales over the past years. This is just one little part of many policies which unfortunately Pakistan has adopted which hinders the economy of Pakistan to grow at its potential. Other non-modernistic policies that hurt the image of Pakistan is the cruelty imposed on the Mirzai's. Just another minority if you label them non Muslims. But why is that Abdus Salam undoubtedly one of the best minds from Pakistan has to be erased from history. One day hopefully westernized or not Pakistan will live up to Jinnah's modernistic dream.
Amir Saeed
Dec 26, 2012 04:22pm
Well written and ended with the right advice.
Nasir Shah
Dec 26, 2012 01:35am
Muhammad Ali Jinnah was one of the most remarkable person to have lived in the last 100 years. He was neither a secular, nor a theocrat or a religious minded person. He stood for Islamic Democracy. Neither the secular/modernist nor the religious minded will ever understand that. Come forward as servants of Islam, organise the people economically, socially, educationally and politically and I am sure that you will be a power that will be accepted by everybody. Muhammad Ali Jinnah
Kamal Gupta
Dec 26, 2012 01:41am
Quite true, and not only for muslims of Pakistan, a large majority of whom have let the local mullahs guide them. Maybe these mullahs are filling a vacuum. In the less developed partsof India, we see the same thing. I have even seen highly educated muslims in India turn to the mullahs for "final" guidance. Countries, societies where liberal education is accessible, where people are encouraged to form their own thoughts, will not fall into this abyss. Jinnah was a great leader, but many of his successors went for short term power grabs.
Muhammad K
Dec 26, 2012 01:57pm
Dear Yawar, Turkey is the worst Muslim State in the current world as far as political state of Turkey is concern. Turkey is a part of NATO now. 100 years before Turkey was ruling a huge Asia. Turkey was operating train service from Istanbul to Medina. Now the current Turkish government is a puppet government working for NATO. Turkey's best friend is Israel. Turkey is using Israel for drone attacks in Turkey's northern area to suppress opposition tribal people.
Ahmed
Dec 26, 2012 02:40am
I agree about differentiating between modernism and westernization. But identity crisis? Pakistani people have been in an identity crisis since 1947. Pakistan was created on Islamic modernist values, not Islamic traditional values. We have thrown Unity, Faith and Discipline out the window.
anwar kamal
Dec 26, 2012 03:01am
Pakistan society is going in to primitive age.
ration
Dec 26, 2012 05:07am
Firstly what do you mean by modern Islam. You have seem to got idea completely wrong. Islam is word of Allah delivered to the Prophet and it is the strict code of conduct that need to be followed in all ages. Modern Science is in contradiction with Islamic principles since Science believes in things which are proved . Darwin's Theory is a case which contradicts the origin of Man as per Semitic religions. There is high probability of space race and developed nations will fight for land on moon , there is huge reserve of helium-3 and the possibility of moon being destroyed by nuclear weapons and there would not be lunar calendars and so festivals will cease to exist. Moreover there is firm belief "Allah alone is creator ,care taker and destroyer " so why to use modern medicine for treatment. Hence the case of assassinating the Health Workers who were involved with polio immunization. If you really want to follow the footsteps of Quaid-E-Azam Md. Ali Jinnah you must emulate his daily chores , reading , thinking etc and what he use to "Eat".
raw is war
Dec 26, 2012 06:28am
How modern can your country be when Hindu women are kidnapped and converted to Islam in 2012? It reeks of 7th century values- to be honest.
Rizwan
Dec 26, 2012 06:54am
The writter obviously lacks insight to what the Quaid really wished and acted upon.His speech to the Hindu's of Pakistan when they started leaving for India after 1947 in which he told the hindus that " your free to go to your temples and religion is not the bussiness of the state" is still quoted today out of context that it was the Quaids only vision. Sadly every body quotes Jinnah in the way they themselves wish to see this country. You might not agree with the islamic and sunnah vision of the Quaid which is totally up to you and fair enough, but to mix his words and claim he said something otherwise is actually amounting to Treason !
M. S. Alvi
Dec 26, 2012 02:38pm
I agree with Riaz one hundred percent. He has spoken the facts as clearly as possible. Immediately after partition, the first thing that Nehru did in India was eliminating feudalism. That set the right course. In Pakistan, Jinnah died before he had a chance to do any thing. Feuadals took over and now it is impossible to get rid of them. Considering what happened, and is happening in Pakistan, it was a bad idea to create Pakistan. If Pakistani Muslims had stayed with India, the feudals and mullahs will not have a chance to do the havoc that they are doing in Pakistan today. I believe that the Pakistani people will be better off if some how India and Pakistan can merge into one country again, just like Germany did. But we all know that the FEUDALS will never let that happen.
Reality Check Please?
Dec 26, 2012 07:40am
Quaid was A Great Leader, who was principled, hardworking and caring AND he should be our Role Model!
Fais
Dec 26, 2012 08:05am
Do you even know what iqbal's concept of Islam was?
abbastoronto
Dec 26, 2012 05:20pm
You mean Turkey of Kemal Pasha Ataturk. Today's Turkey is soon turning into the Theocratic Kaliphate of Turkey that Ataturk buried 6 feet under.
Imran
Dec 26, 2012 10:29am
Pakistan was NOT created on Islamic values. It was simply created to be a state where Muslims were not in a minority. All the so-called values have been imposed after partition by various vested interests pursuing their own nefarious agendas over the decades. And thats why we are in the mess we are today. If Islamic values was the only objective, why create Pakistan in the 1st place ?. Islamic values were in no danger in un-divided India, or even in present day India for that matter.
pathanoo
Dec 26, 2012 06:50pm
Eloquently and Truthfully said.
pathanoo
Dec 26, 2012 07:00pm
Jinnah was a product of liberal India who knew he was a Muslim and believed in his religion but was also intelligent enough to know that he was not beholden to these crazy Mullas who spread nothing but hatred. He knew this illiterate bunch well enough and knew how dangerous they were to the nation. Muslims will ALWAYS be at the bottom of the nations of the world till they recognize that religion is a personal construct between an individual and his maker and no body else's business. And, till the Muslim countries take out religion from the public discourse as a Government policy; they are condemned to live in the cellar of misery. Given the choice of migrating to the infidel West Vs to any Holy Muslim nation; guess how many Muslims would choose to migrate to West. You know the figures. I do not need to tell you the truth. Does that tell you some thing about Islam and Modernism?
Mahavir
Dec 26, 2012 07:15pm
Mr. Kamal Gupta, Stick to the topic instead of pandering. The article is about Jinnah's vision, thoughts and action. Didn't Jinnah created a country for people belonging to a particular relegion? How does that go with the Jinnah's secular views? When one talks about secular Pakistan, doesnot Jinnah's two nation theory go for a toss?
Silajit
Dec 26, 2012 08:24pm
For centuries, the northern portion of the subcontinent was ruled by invaders and their dynasties from South Central Asia. Over the course of a millenium they converted almost half the population (15% of the world population) to Islam. Yet, when faced with the prospect of one man, one vote, this population that had grown with centuries of conversions did not want to give up what they had grown to consider their divine right to rule. Pakistan was the result of ONE party's refusal to compromise and work with the majority. The Muslim League (which itself split within 5 years of the creation of Pakistan and disappeared within 10 years) wanted to be the SOLE representative of Muslims in a United India. Such a thing would be monopolistic and would honestly be a disservice to any community. Would Pakistan be ok to have ONE party be the sole representation for ANY community: Balochs, Sindhis, Pashtuns, Christians? Can you imagine Imran Khan being allowed to only represent the Pashtuns? Yet, this demand led to the creation of a country. The seeds of intolerance (remember Direct Action day?) were sowed by Jinnah. Pakistan is reaping them today and this will continue into the future. I urge my Pakistani friends to learn history well. Those who don't are doomed to repeat it.
Muba Khan
Dec 26, 2012 08:37pm
Check the news sir. You just had a massive rally take place in your country for women rights. We all have our own problems and should deal with them like Qaid did in his time.
Kabir
Dec 26, 2012 08:40pm
Creation of Pakistan was a bait which Jinnah lost and then it went into the hands of feudal lords.. not sure.. whether M A Jinnah really wanted to have Pakistan or if this was his vision.. or whether he really said in despair - what did I do?
Pakistani
Dec 26, 2012 09:54pm
Ghandi died at the hands of an Assasin, while Jinnah died of his devotion to Pakistan. I did not make this up. This is actual history
vig80new
Dec 27, 2012 04:52am
Most of the policies adopted by Pakistan are to keep the Arabs happy. For instance Youtube is banned in Pakistan but here in UAE also a muslim country we have no such issue. The Arabs want to implement all such stone age rules in our Pakistan which they cannot apply in their land. The day we stop looking at Arabs for directions, is the day we start progressing. Remember Arabs are not your friends, you are treated a low form of species in their land.
Bharat
Dec 27, 2012 05:49am
Pakistan was created on Islamic values? But the core, and initial law of Pakistan was based on Britrish law and regulations. And the original name designated to the country was never The Islamic republic of Pakistan - It was just Pakistan.
Sheikh chilli
Dec 27, 2012 07:00am
I worked in Malaysia for a couple of years. It is the most racist country on earth. The Malays are openly racist. Corruption in Malaysia is even worst then in Pakistan. The Tamils and blacks in Malaysia are treated like outcasts. So maybe you are talking about Malaysia before British independence. The Malaysia today is just a dengue infested corrupt country riding on the sweat of Chinese immigrants.
Sheikh chilli
Dec 27, 2012 07:04am
Ram Betay wake up and smell the turkish coffee. Turkey is not as secular as you think it is. Ask the Armenians, Greeks and the Kurds.
Sheikh chilli
Dec 27, 2012 07:06am
well said beta
Sheikh chilli
Dec 27, 2012 07:07am
Wah wah beautiful reasoning.
Sri Ram
Dec 27, 2012 07:09am
Respectfully, "Islamic democracy" is an oxymoron - Democracy and Islam are independent systems with the ultimate goal of social justice but mutually exclusive in every other aspect. Else you would see some mention of "equal representation in leader selection" in the Shariah or innumerable Hadiths. As an illustration, through the ages of Muslim empires from the start till now, has there been any true democracy? Of course, when I talk of democracy it is one that enshrines true freedom of religion, of expression, of unions, of gathering/protesting/criticizing any holy cows, whether religious or otherwise. And I agree, even western nations have lacked true democracy till the last century. Even Turkey that is rapidly developing and going toward a better form of democracy has arrived at its path, solely by rejecting religion for the state and governance. The Europeans have undergone religious reformation after suffering through the crusades, inquisitions and religious extremes. Likewise Turkey's Ataturk also established a state with as less interference of religion and religious leaders in governance as possible. It will take a long time for many Islamic states to undergo true reformation, but till then the Huntington clash of civilizations between all others and the Islamic world looks imminent.
KKRoberts
Dec 27, 2012 07:22am
Islam can become modern, but muslims will not allow it.Muslims will oppose modernity with tooth and nail.Only non muslims wish islam becomes modern and progressive.
patriot to the bone
Dec 27, 2012 01:20pm
there is a big difference between using using your religion as core values AND being a theocracy like IRAN. our prophet (pbuh) also used the islamic way of governing (no corruption, interest, discrimination) it doesnt mean that other ways of thinking are outcasted. BUT you have exmanples like Iran where is has gone too far. theocracy ore as i would call a theocrazy The point i want to make is that using religous values for your politics isnt wrong. ITs wrong when you think that your religous values should be evryones personal values i hope you get the point salaam & respect
Rao
Dec 27, 2012 08:00am
Hi Abbas......What you said is very true....I live in adjoining Singapore....Bumiputra policy is making Malays more complacent. Malaysian economy is dominated by Chinese businessmen
Rao
Dec 27, 2012 08:07am
Turkey is a better example, not Malaysia.....Indonesia is growing up fast and in a decade it may overtake Malaysia, unless they change their bhumiputra policy
Cynical
Dec 27, 2012 01:17pm
And there is a reason why they do what they do to the Muslims of the sub-continent. Guess why.
Rao
Dec 27, 2012 08:16am
What you said is true...It was never secular, but during Ataturk reign mullahs were kept in place, so Turkey grew economically. With religious parties in power the future looks uncertain. Turkish people are much more open than most Muslims in the world.
masood
Dec 27, 2012 12:18pm
you have taken the words from my mouth absoloutly spot on we are not arabs nor should we want to be
Ijaz
Dec 27, 2012 10:30am
Totally agree!v
abbastoronto
Dec 27, 2012 10:56am
Jinnah died well before the feudalization and Islamization of Pakistan began. Feudalization began under Liaquat who was a Feudal in India (though not in Pakistan). Islamization began with 1956 constitution.
patriot to the bone
Dec 27, 2012 06:19pm
I respect your opinion but i think you are mistaken when you say that jinnah was the intolerant one. Muhammad ali Jinnah wanted a counrty where muslims (and other believes) could be practised without other pressuring the minority. Pakistan government may faile to secure this, but is is the core principal which the counrty is based on TOLERATance
patriot to the bone
Dec 27, 2012 06:21pm
no