The ANP Challenge

manato saab, you did not answer my question bout your photo saab?

salam

Peon of the West

PS: I have read Hamid Khan's book... but not completely. I will read his view of Bacha Khan etc and get back to you.
You will obviously appreciate that Hamid Khan's view on what Pakistan was created for is identical to mine.

Salman,

Jamaat-e-Islami is Ghair Muqalad and not Barelvi. They infact hate Barelvis.


Zakkk,

As far as I know Jinnah put up the demand for reforms in NWFP and Balochistan on several occasions in the 1920s, including the 14 points:

Reforms should be introduced in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Baluchistan on the same footing as in the other provinces.

He raised the same demand in the Roundtable conference. But perhaps the greatest service he did was not related to reforms but ending the military occupation of the tribal belt through Operation Curzon.

I hope our leaders follow suit.

Yasser: What exactly was Jinnahs contribution to the development of NWFP? To my knowledge the Khan brothers seeking support against the draconian laws that NWFP, was under originally, were rebuffed by the Muslim League and after that approached the COngress.?

Also you are right that the ANP colloborated with the establishment post 1990 (although they backed nawaz shari rather than GIK ) No ANP members name is on the mehrangate list to my knowledge although several PPP ones are

http://dawn.com.pk/weekly/cowas/20071208.htm

Incidentally have you read Hamid Khans book on constitutional history and Pakistan? What do you think of his opinion of Bacha Khan and Wali Khan?

hamdani you wrote

3. Ofcourse Bhutto hobnobbed with the Islamists...But Bhutto did not claim to be secular or non-violent.

"4. ANP did join up with Nawaz Sharif's Islami Jamhoori Ittehad."

whats the point here? you are comparing ANP with which party in Pakistan? PPP had alliance with Mufti Mehmud's son in 1993 when they created Taliban.

Hamdani's argument proves one thing that ANP is still "the most Secular" party in Pakistani politics. (watch my words) ofcourse you won't accept MQM as real political party. (please don't start arguing about that now lol)

If you know a party which can get 5-6 National assebmly seats and is more secular than ANP. then please let us know.

I see Jamaat-e-Islami the biggest party of Brelvis. They don't believe in democracy and elections they believe in revolution. They infiltrate their people in Media, Army and civil services, in 70s they came in elections. Their idea is: a few righteous people should bring revolution and impose (their brand of) Islam. They are the biggest supporters of Jihad. Their propaganda for "Afghan jehad" and their share in Zia's Majlis-e-shoora and the $$$s which came from US to fight that War is well known. MMA as whole supports Taliban. (perhaps not the Shia faction) so dividing deobandi and brelvi into Jihadi and non jihadi is not working practically. if it said that only Pashtuns are deobandi then what about Kashmiri Militants and their support base in Punjab.
Basically Jihad is a Responsibility of a Muslim against evil. its only the interpretation and the use which can make it good or bad. Bacha Khans non-violent struggle was a Jehad. if someone was writing in newspaper against the British it was also a jehad. it can have any form of struggle against something bad considered by the society. Since occupation and colonization is considered bad or evil by the society of any country, then getting rid of it is the right of the people. To use that right is Jehad in Arabic. Hindu would give it any other name Christians would call it something else for example Crusade.
It is a more political jehad. people get money from Saudia or Kuwait or UAE to convert people to Wahabism. there are more than 10,000 Madrassas in Pakistan. I know a few grand Madrassas which are built by Wahabis in Balochistan near Quetta. the presence of Arab Militants ( or terrorists) proves that it was not our Jehad it was imposed on us by United States and the West.
So Hamdani should have problems with its use by different people but not with its basic concept.

Manato saab, why do you look so different in the photo here and the one on your home page.

you have grown old very quickly saab.

may be i am new here so made a mistake

Regards

Peon of the West

Yasserbhai,

I hate to agree with you but I do now. :)

Re: # 756

Dear VRV,

As far as Deobandis are concerned... in my view the reason why they haven't gotten militant in India is exactly what you say: lack of opportunity (Their role in politics of India otherwise has hardly been exemplary). In Pakistan, CIA + ISI backed Afghan War gave them the opportunity to implement and experiment with their Jehad doctrine.

I mean restart the whole debate all over again on another board :)

Majumdarda,

I always maintained that the leaders are not Gods. They are mortlas and lemme make it public the private msg of my friend Yasser (with due apologies to Yasser for making it public as it's a matter of extreme necessity).

He too believes that the top leadership of Freedom struggle were humans as well and therefore were fallible. It's difficult for him to admit that in public.

Yasserbhai,

///////Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and others also ascribed to the view that English jurisprudence was perfectly Islamic and according to Sharia and Jinnah being a lawyer who believed in British justice system did not believe his religion was in conflict with modern life.///////

This is comparable with a political statement. Amputation, eye4eye justice system is NOT compatible with English jurisprudence. In similar vein, eating pork and drinking whiskey is also not compatible with Islam. I dont know how Ahmed Khan and Jinnah thought that way.

As for Deobandi school of Islam, they are not gun toting fundoos, esp in India. If they did in Pakistan it's bcoz ISI gave them. Deobandis supply the syllabi of the madrasas & that doesn't include political education abt fighting Soviets/US.

They sided with Indian national leadership all thru. If they are eligible to be called as anti-Pakistani from ur pov, so be it.

Yaar, 750+ is a good record. Lets restart this on another board.

Re: # 753

Well said. If all concerned realized this, we would save each other a lot of unnecessary hurt.

Dear Salman,

Reading your last kind email to me, I have realized that our extreme public positions against Jinnah and Bacha Khan respectively is caused by the fact that we have been talking at each other instead of with each other. In deference and respect to your kind words, I will refrain from responding to any perceived provocation and I suggest you do the same. The "teeli baz sajna" below is no friend of yours I can assure you. I suppose this is what Adam Khan, ZAKKK, Ijaz-Gul, HP, Majumdar and even Harish bhai to a certain extent were trying to tell us.


Dear VRV,

In addition to my last post, I think there are only two or three points I will respond to- I hope you will read it in detail and not respond with knee jerks.:


1. The issue of promising Sharia: It is true that Jinnah assured Pir of Manki Sharif- a barelvi- that Pakistan's laws shall not be in conflict with Sharia. Let me also say that even the laws of secular India today are not in conflict with Sharia. Jinnah's argument was that the principles of Sharia are not in conflict with modern jurisprudence. Here Jinnah was using the dialectics of a great lawyer.

And this is a commonly held Muslim modernist point of view. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and others also ascribed to the view that English jurisprudence was perfectly Islamic and according to Sharia and Jinnah being a lawyer who believed in British justice system did not believe his religion was in conflict with modern life. (Ofcourse this might be because Jinnah was a Khoja Ismaili and Khoja Ismailis actually follow Hindu inheritance law). It may be so that the Muslim modernists are wrong and Jinnah was wrong and Islam is incompatible with modern statehood and secularism. Personally I do not consider myself a believer atleast anymore, so jury is out on that.


2. I have already quoted the difference between Barelvi and Deobandi Islam many times.

Barelvi Islam
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-barelvi.htm

The Barelvis follow many Sufi practices, including use of music (Qawwali) and intercession by their teacher. A key difference between Barelvi and Deobandi that Barelvi's believe in intercession between humans and Divine Grace. This consists of the intervention of an ascending, linked and unbroken chain of holy personages, pirs, reaching ultimately to Prophet Mohammad, who intercede on their behalf with Allah. It is a more superstitious - but also a more tolerant - tradition of Indian Islam. Their critics claim that Barelvis are guilty of committing innovation (Bid’at) and therefore, they are deviated from the true path - the path of Sunnah.

The Pakistan Movement got support from the Barelvis (Low Church). It had faced opposition from the National Indian Congress which was supported by the Deobandi seminaries (High Church). However, after the establishment of Pakistan as an Islamic state in 1949, Barelvi Low Church was too mixed up with mysticism to be a source of Islamic law. Ironically, Pakistan moved away from the 'spiritual pluralism' of the Barelvis, who had supported Pakistan, and relied on the more puritanical Deobandis who had opposed it.

Unlike the Deobandis, the Barelvis see the Prophet Mohammad as more than a man, a part of the divine light of Allah. This doctrine gives rise to a form of Islam that provides a space for holy men and esoteric practices and graves appear to be often more ornate than those found within Deobandi communities. The Wahhabi (Arabia), Deobandi (Pakistan and India) and Jamaat-I-Islami all are anti-sufi, and against the over devotion to Muhammad, whereas the Barelvis emphasize Muhammad's uniqueness. Indeed, nearly 85% of South Asia’s Sunni Muslims are said to follow the Barelvi school, closer to Sufism. The remaining 15% of Sunnis follow the Deobandi school, more closely related to the conservative practice of Islam. Most Shiites in the subcontinent also tend to be influenced by the Sufis. Pakistan’s Muslims, like other Muslims in the region, tend to follow a school of Islam which is less conservative, and hence the support for strongly and overtly religious parties has been minimal.

One should note that Deobandi fundamentalists have been the mainstay of Islamization in Pakistan.

3. Ofcourse Bhutto hobnobbed with the Islamists. Have you missed my debates with Masadi on Bhutto? But Bhutto did not claim to be secular or non-violent.

4. ANP did join up with Nawaz Sharif's Islami Jamhoori Ittehad. Even Salman bhai will tell you because it led to disenchantment even amongst ANP wallahs.

5. As for Jinnah recommending Bacha Khan's name from the frontier in 1929, I have already quoted the letter from Jinnah to Irwin in which Jinnah pressed the viceroy for Bacha Khan's release and Jinnah nominated him for the roundtable conference (though I don't know if he actually went). Ofcourse Bacha Khan was a famous leader in NWFP but he shot to national fame in the 1930s. Interestingly Bacha Khan resigned from the Congress workin committee after disagreeing with Gandhi and Nehru in 1942 (ironically for the same reason Jinnah had resigned from the Congress in 1920).

-YLH

Guys,

What is the point?

Are we saying that MAJ, JLN, MKG, KAGK are saints who never compromised with what was not right? Or are we saying that while people who achieved a level of greatness, they too like lesser mortals may have made compromises to achieve some personal or political goals?

If we are arguing the first I think our heroes will be shown to have feet on clay by their detractors. If we stick with the second, I think we will be on rather more solid footing.

Regards

Dear VRV,

That is August 12, 1948. 1947 was a typo and I corrected this. Atleast have the decency to investigate.

You may produce the accusation against Jinnah from Nehru, Patel or others specifically, the kind that you produced .