LAHORE: Speakers in a session on two books, one by academic Pervez Hoodbhoy and the other by trainer and stand-up comedian Shehzad Ghias, sat together with journalist Nadeem F. Paracha to dissect historical narratives of Pakistan.

Hoodbhoy has published his book, Pakistan Origins, Identity and Future, while Shehzad Ghias wrote Pakistan Lost: Ideas on the Idea of Pakistan.

Paracha termed the former a culmination of Hoodbhoy’s writings and thoughts about Pakistani society, politics one of the finest books on Pakistaniat, as it analysed three personalities that defined Pakistani identity, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Abual A’la Maududi and Allama Iqbal.

Hoodbhoy spoke about two aspects of Syed Ahmad’s personality. He said one aspect of his personality was of a great progressive man who led the Muslims of India to stop wailing, remembering their glorious past, adopt the new technology brought by the British by learning the English language. Sir Syed also taught the Muslims how to live with the British, he said and called him a reformer because he tried to bring science and religion together. According to Hoodbhoy, Sir Syed denied the existence of religious miracles and called them figurative, receiving many fatwas of apostasy.

“This was his progressive side and he had another side which was highly regressive. He said the British should never leave India and the Muslims should follow the British and be loyal to them.”

He added that Sir Syed was against education of women and he was a patriarch who did not believe in equality of humans.

Allama Iqbal was an open-minded and liberal person in his earlier life, Hoodbhoy said.

He added that there were two Iqbals in his book, the one before 1905 and the other after his return from Britain. “The one who went out was open-minded, liberal, secular and communist. When he came back and joined the Muslim League and persuaded the landlords to join the party. This Iqbal later on celebrated the murder of Raj Pal.”

Hoodbhoy refused to consider Iqbal a philosopher because he expressed hatred against philosophy in his writings. “A philosopher’s mind should be open to raise bigger questions but Iqbal says, Azadi-i-Afkar hay Iblees ki Eejad.”

Pervez Hoodboy said Iqbal wrote a letter to his sister, saying he had wasted his whole life in studying philosophy and wished that he had followed advice of his father to “serve religion” instead of studying philosophy. He termed the Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam a diatribe against science, venom against modern civilisation and rejection of Muslim glories of 9th to 13th centuries, calling Ibne Sina and Farabi names.

“Our history is a pack of lies. What we teach in Pakistan Studies has nothing to do with reality and to set things right, I, despite having no credentials as a historian, showed the truth to the people.”

Hoodbhoy said Maududi was not significant in the formation of Pakistan. He got prominence in 1953 in the anti-Ahmadi riots in Lahore when he was given a death sentence.

Shehzad Ghias said the idea of Pakistan that was being sold was different from the Pakistan that came to be.

“Jinnah Sahib did not become prime minister but the governor general and on taking charge, he dismissed the government of Bacha Khan, separated Karachi from Sindh and dismissed the government of Sindh after 8/10 months. Bacha Khan and Congress had a majority in NWFP and Babrra ground massacre occurred to end their government.” He made it clear that looking at history critically did not mean undoing the independence.

Lauding the 18th Amendment, he said whatever Pakistan survived was due to the parts of the amendment because it brought provincial autonomy and it should lead to local government.

He added that social media was not a place for real discussion. “Social media runs on bots and fake narratives.” He went on to say that even if it’s really an honest opinion of somebody on social media, it’s also a construct that’s the result of decades of narrative-building in schools. He said he had left engaging with his followers on social media due to fake narratives.

Hoodbhoy said Jinnah was downgraded in history and Iqbal was upgraded during the regime of Gen Zia because though Jinnah was considered the founder of Pakistan, he did not know religious language, he left no writing while Iqbal had written powerful poetry.

He said the gulf between the Muslims and Hindus started in the 1930s when elections were held in Sindh, Punjab and East Bengal and the Muslim League got only 5pc Muslim votes for the Constituent Assembly and in Punjab, Congress and Unionist Party won. In 1937, Jinnah decided to do away with Hindu-Muslim unity, saying that the Hindus and Muslims could not live together peacefully.

Published in Dawn, January 25th, 2026