TODAY (November 8), I read an interesting piece in Dawn. Written by Ian Jack, it tells the story of Noor Inayat Khan, a Muslim woman who served England during World War II as a radio operator in enemy territory. The story is really moving. But I could not figure out why the writer had to begin by referring to two other Muslim women (one of whom is a would-be assassin and the other has just embraced Islam) and draw an analogy between the two while saying in the same breath that “it would be foolish to draw lessons from either about the general nature of Islam”.

Besides other things, the writer says: “as if becoming an English Muslim could make a Palestinian village ‘ours’”.

Well, why can Islam be a political identity? Why and how does a Palestinian village become “ours” after it is attacked by non-Muslims or even Muslims? These are the questions to which the west apparently seeks no answers.

In fact I was planning to write something on Allama Iqbal’s concept of nationalism when I stumbled upon this piece. And I felt that despite all those heaps of books that have been published on Iqbal, his ideas on nationalism have yet to gain currency, as is evident from the narrow-minded politico-ethnic strife that is plaguing Pakistan these days.

Much has been written on what nationalism is. It is generally associated with geographical, linguistic or cultural identities. But Iqbal, despite having been educated in western universities and having profoundly studied western philosophy, became a bitter critic of many western concepts, including nationalism. In fact, he denounces the concept of nationalism and says that nationalism draws strength from religion’s demise:

In taza khudaon mein bara sab se watan hai

Jo perahan is ka hai woh mazhab ka kafan hai

He thinks that the western concept of nationality and nationalism takes a very narrow view of the idea and is the very basis of international conflicts and rivalries:

Aqwam-i-jahan mein hai raqabat tau isi se

Taskheer hai maqsood-i-tijarat tau isi se

Iqbal feels certain that European politicians are the epitome of cunning and teach nationalism to the religious-minded:

Lurd-i-maghrib aan sarapa makr-o-fan

Ahl-i-deen ra dad taleem-i-watan

It was after World War II that Europe realised the ruinous effect of nationalism and with the launch of a movement for one, united Europe, Iqbal’s point of view was vindicated.

Iqbal’s idea of a nation and nationalism transcends all racial and geographical boundaries and draws strength from religion.

His concept of nationalism is based, like his other ideals, on the teachings of the Quran and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Quranic teachings say that nations and tribes are meant for mere recognition and this division in no way should raise the question of superiority. Similarly, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said: “An Arab has no superiority to a non-Arab, nor has the non-Arab any superiority to an Arab. Likewise, a white man is in no way superior to a black man nor is the black man superior to the white man except by virtue of God-consciousness.”

What makes a Palestinian village “ours’ for every Muslim, whether living in Africa or Indonesia, is the sense of belonging that Islam creates among its followers — a sense that transcends race, colour, language and borders.

Is this concept of unity not more humanitarian than the narrow vision of nationhood based on political and geographical biases and a sense of superiority, however well concealed? Perhaps it is the narrow concept of nationhood that has prevented the United Kingdom from full assimilation into the European Union, which transcends colour, race and geography.

drraufparekh@yahoo.com