Jinnah and the Islamic State – Setting the Record Straight

#152 Posted by dawa-i-dil,

No. None of those sacrifices will go to waste. Thanks for enumerating all.

atif2 and others:

The writer, manto, rozaiba, HP and others have made the point that Jinnah did not know much about Islam and hence he could not have desired Pakistan to be an Islamic state. Jinnah was simply a nationalist.

The Koran time and again asks the reader to place his/her loyalty only in favour of Allah. This implies the desire to implement Allah's "justice". No other loyality - to the state, its leader etc. This is clear to any reader - Muslim or otherwise. Yet Jinnah asks for loyality to Pakistan - a country (see Manto's quote "Speaking to Quetta Parsis"). I doubt whether Jinnah seriously read the Koran! Forget his desire to implement an Islamic state.

romair
[...he talked about it far more than anyone who, as public policy, is pushing secularism.......no one pushing secularism would mention islam, as a basis of social or political policy, so much...]

Which is what I said... so what the heck are you arguing about?

decades down the drain - you guys still don't agree on what J-man stood for... YLH says he stood for secularism... Atif proves that J-man wanted islamism... ferozk says he stood for neither secularism or islamism... Hoodbhoy says he just used islam for political purpose...

you pakis don't know your head from a hole in the ground... and anybody pointing out this problem becomes your instant enemy, has an "agenda" and twisting and turning to fulfill that agenda... :)

And GT dude says J-man was "simply a nationalist"...now that clarifies everything... :)

Is it a bird or is it a plane?... come on pakis... take your pick... :)

Dear PH,

Many thanks for another great article.

Jinnah in real life by all historical documentation was a person liberal (drink /pig ) and a political secular if you take secular to mean a believer in the EQUALITY of minorities and women. OTOH It is quite clear that Jinnah on chowk is an ink blot test, and stands for whatever the writer hold dear to their own heart.

The only reason we even engage on the topic is because traditionally speaking fundamentalists and liberals should be arch enemies so one group will not allow the other to claim a figure as widely reverred as Jinnah. Even on the flimsiest of grounds.

However when it comes to Jinnah most surprisingly we are falling all over ourselves agreeing with each other.

In the conversation so far the left has yielded that if islamic fundamantalist does not mean taliban but infact kamal atta turk (jinnah loved him) then we are all islamic fundamentalists.

And fundamentalists have conceded that a guy who may have eaten pork, drank alchohol, said a muslim is anyone who said they were muslim, said that we are not a theocracy, that idolators are free to go to their temples and be EQUAL in the eyes of the state....that this man could be an islamic fundamentalist.

for the love of the Prophet & Islam

" Sar-e Khusroe sey taaj-e kaj-kulahee chhin toa jataa hai
Kulah-e Khusravee sey boo-ey sultanee naheeN jaatee"

No matter how much someone hems & haws about their pride in getting westoxicated one thing is certain & has been proven throughout history..every muslim IS a fundamentalist at heart..and when the conditions are right it emergrs if its full glory.

One must concede that for a lot of faint-of-heart roti-kaprRa-aur-makaan (aka Lifestyle & class-consciousness)
makes them do things which are "pragmatic" & hence "taqiyaa" is observed.

"Dil pey liya hai daaGh-e Ishque kho kay bahaar-i zindGi
Ikk gul-e-tar kay vaastay, meiN neiN chaman lutaa diyaa"
_____________________________________________________________

akbar S. Ahmed in the NYtimes.


It has been said that Jinnah chose Lincoln's Inn because he saw the Prophet's name at the entrance. I went to Lincoln's Inn looking for the name on the gate, but there is no such gate nor any names. There is, however, a gigantic mural covering one entire wall in the main dining hall of Lincoln's Inn. Painted on it are some of the most influential lawgivers of history, like Moses and, indeed, the holy Prophet of Islam, who is shown in a green turban and green robes. A key at the bottom of the painting matches the names to the persons in the picture. Jinnah, I suspect, was not deliberately concealing the memory of his youth but recalling an association with the Inn of Court half a century after it had taken place. He had remembered there was a link, a genuine appreciation of Islam. Had those who have written about Jinnah's recollection bothered to visit Lincoln's Inn the mystery would have been solved. However, knowledge of the pictorial depiction of the holy Prophet would certainly spark protests; demands from the active British Muslim community for the removal of the painting would be heard in the UK.

Mohar, That's a funny way of putting it. Lol!

Gandhi too wanted a lot of crappy things for India eg.economy, industries, women issues, religion and what not.

But the Constituent Assembly i.e Team India followed the golden path of team work for India and devised a golden document called Indian Constitution which said 'what we are and what we do'.

However:

Pak's journey lost it course and momentum b4 the journey is started. Let them entangle themselves more with the quotes of Jinnah. ;-)

Lets see how/where it proceeds.

clifton

The only reason why are on the topic is bcause J-man pulled statements out of his %%% depending on the audience... his ideas are all over the place and you pakis have no what to grab on... is it a plane, is it a bird, is it a bee... you have no clue...

That's the unfortunate reality...

Add-on:

India was not formed as a secular state in 1947 or after.

It was as recent as 1976 this word "Secular" was added to Indian Constitution along with the word 'Socialist'.

As for criticism that western countries are not secular cut much ice, as they dont treat different citizens differently. There are no 2/3 grades of citizenry in the west.

mohar let me guess....you must be one of those guys who believe that being muslim in itself means being against secular governance right? Which is why its tough to for you understand why a proponent of "secular " system (exact word not used) must either stand up and proudly proclaim atheism or else he is talking out of his a$$?

Echo sahab you are right that islam will always out.... but i think the question is can you believe at both things at the same time? i.e islamic principles and some western inspired ideolgies ? because i humbly suggest that a person could.

It is a sheer delight to read the article as it is from a scientist who highly values objectivity. The article gives benefit of doubt to Mr. Jinnah and his vision but unlike Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Nehru , who have left lots of written record , Mr. Jinnah was not very transparent and hence the interpretaion of his views by liberals, secularist and hard line religionist to explain his views to suit thier ways.
I am , puzzled that unlike Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Nehru who are constantlt evaluated for their failings there are hardly anybody in Pakistan who is openly skeptical of of Mr. Jinnah's views on religion in general and on Islam in particular ( I suppose except the poet faiz ahmad faiz). I find that people from Pakistan always quote Mr. Jinnah's speech in the Assembly where he refers to the religion as personal faith. What kind of a person Mr. Jinnah must have been when he said the following at a pan-Islamic meeting in Cairo in 1946 as quoted in Mr. Wolpert book , Jinnah of Pakistan.

"I told them of the danger that a Hindu empire would repress for the Middle-East and and assured them that Pakistan would tender co-operation to all nations struggling for freedom without consideration of race or colour...If a Hindu empire is achieved, it would mean the end of Islam in India, and even in other Muslim countries. There is no doubt that spiritual and religious ties bind us inexorably with Egypt. If we were drowned all will be drowned."

Could this be from a secular man coming from the subcontinent or was it sensationalism and fear mongering to get Pakistan created. How wrong was he as it is the USA, his beloved ally, and not India, which is creating havoc in the Middle East and is despised by almost all Muslim countries. Does one not see his own leanings towards a pan Islamic World and hence the present OIC which, incidentally refused to let India have an observer status despite India being a country with the third largest population of muslims in the World. Unlike Mr. Gandhi, Mr. Jinnah was not very trusting of others. If he was truly a secular man he did not have to use religion as a proxy to get Pakistan which again is not really a homeland for Mulsims of India as unlike Israel which is homeland for Jews and where any Jew can go, Pakistan still has as a large number of its citizens rotting in Bangladesh camps. Moreover Pakistan, is not open for those muslims who think victamized in India and would like to migrate to Pakistan.
If indeed Mr. Jinnah was a secular man, he gambled and I would say lost as his beloved Pakistan is now a hot bed of Islamic based terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism.
I would like to know why people in Pakistan do not see that Mr. Jinnah , for all his best intentions for muslims, was not a perfect man and prone to mistakes as most politicians do? Would Mr. Jinnah have allowed( accepted) the sharia law where woman as a witness is worth half that of a man. If history is the judge then msulims in India would not have to face sectarian violence ( by this I do not mean between hindus and muslims but between various sects of Islam)and more space for those muslims who are liberal, to adapt to the chnaging World.
Mr. Hoodbhoy is to be congratulated for this excellent article.

clifton

J-man talked from both sides of his mouth - now thumping the koran, the next moment holding forth on secularism...

Speaking of atheism - may be you guys should try that for a change... with the amount of bedouin BS that you have loaded up over the years - atheism may prove to be a healthy anti-dote for you folks - restoring some sanity and balance into your society...

172

J-man really said that? WOW!!!

there you go clifton bi... yet another example of J-man talking out of his 555, pandering to the audience...

yeah i thought so mohar. Just wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. Let me guess you also consider yourself "secular" like the rest of India. Where the goal for prosperity as seen by enlightened folk just like you is the destruction of islam and conversion of muslims in the name of a "balanced" society?
Please remember that stated goal because two days later when you decide to talk out of the other side of your mouth and pretend muslims in India live like kings in a shining tolerant land you will be reminded.