Jinnah's Religious Dream

[asifp]

In the wake of the latest Lal Masjid bombings I googled Jinnah's Speeches and I found the part I was looking for

August 11, 1947 address of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, to the members of the Pakistan Constituent Assembly, to the status of a national covenant. That it has taken more than 50 years to reach such a conclusion is indeed most intriguing. In that address the Quaid said, among other things, the following:

“You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the State... We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State... I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in due course Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”

[kasoo10]

If I got it right then that is the problem we have. We all believe that we got this state in the name of Islam but Quaid denied this in this address. That is what makes me think what is the ideology of Pakistan? If we look at 2 nation theory we can understand that we were always struggling for a muslim state where we can enjoy religious freedom and Quran will be the rule of law. But, Quaid makes this 180 degree turn just a few days before the birth of our nation. Is this a betrayal?

[Solid Snake]

I don't think that is true. Yes pakistan was for the muslims, they would be the majority and obviously thus the govt. would have their needs as a priority. But it wasn't designed to be an apartheid/racist state. The minorities (which there would inevitably be) were respected members of society, with equal rights.

I think the Quaid was trying to stress that the nation of pakistan would be a tolerant one. Which in truth is what every true Islmaic nation should be.

[KB]

The magnificent vision of Jinnah as expressed in that quotation in the first post has often been used by many as evidence of his “secular” vision.

The reality is somewhat more complex as explored by the eminent scholar, Akbar Ahmed, in his magisterial book, Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity.

Ahmed cites many instances of Jinnah appealing to Islamic ideals and quotes Jinnah as saying in 1948, “it is my belief that our salvation lies in the following the golden rules of conduct set for us by our great law-giver, the Prophet [pbuh] of Islam. Let us lay the foundations of our democracy on the basis of truly Islamic ideals and principles.”

So how do we reconcile the apparently “secular” speech, quoted in the original post, with the above?

Akbar Ahmed argues that one of the biggest influences on Jinnah was Muhammad ‘Allama’ Iqbal. So let us consider Iqbal's thought on state and religion.

Iqbal argued that the separation of church and civil society as happened in Europe “could never happen in Islam” as it was “from the very beginning a civil society.”

Furthermore, for Iqbal an act was temporal if it was executed in a “spirit of detachment from the infinite complexity of life’, whereas it was spiritual if “inspired by that complexity.”

And the state in Islam was “only an effort to realise the spiritual in human organisation.”

For Iqbal, equality, freedom, tolerance and unity where the primary goals of a state, from an Islamic point of view.

Therefore Iqbal's conception of the state had an Islamic basis.

So did Jinnah's. And as Akbar Ahmed showed, Jinnah’s emphasis on the tolerance and the safeguarding of minority rights, which he especially emphasised following the creation of Pakistan, were increasingly anchored to his own comprehension of Islam.

What is important to stress is the conception of an Islamic state by both Iqbal and Jinnah is ill at odds with that which was implemented with disastrous consequences by Zia-ul-Haq. Whereas Zia’s literalist approach emphasised punitive measures, Jinnah stressed Islamic ideals which put an accent on egalitarianism, tolerance and justice.

So no matter how “secular” his famous address of 11 August 1947 seems, in reality his vision was based on Islamic notions not on Western ones.

[shahzad_1]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake I think the Quaid was trying to stress that the nation of pakistan would be a tolerant one. Which in truth is what every true Islmaic nation should be.

Very Well Said.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by shahzad_1 Very Well Said.

Thanks

[KB]

I think the Quaid was trying to stress that the nation of pakistan would be a tolerant one. Which in truth is what every true Islmaic nation should be.

Indeed he was, which is why three days after his 11 August address, when Mountbatten had suggested the Mugahl emperor Akbar as a role mode, Jinnah replied:

"The tolerance and goodwill that great Emperor Akbar showed to all the non-Muslims is not of recent origin. It dates back to thirteen centuries ago when our Prophet [PBUH] not only by words but by deeds treated the Jews and Christians, after he had conquered them with, the utmost tolerance and regard and respect for their faith and beliefs. The whole history of Muslims, wherever they ruled, is replete with those humane and great principles which should be followed and practised."

[Solid Snake]

Wow ggm,

You really know your stuff. Growing up outside pakistan, my knowledge of the history and politics behind the nations creation are limited at best. Would you say the book "Jinnah, Pakistan and the Islamic Identity" would be a worthwhile read for people like me who know little on the subject? Sounds really good from your post.

[KB]

Would you say the book "Jinnah, Pakistan and the Islamic Identity" would be a worthwhile read for people like me who know little on the subject? Sounds really good from your post.

I enjoyed Akbar Ahmed’s book, because it was a brave and sophisticated effort at re-interpreting Jinnah from an eminent scholar.

He explores with great clarity the weaknesses of existing works on Jinnah, especially on how writers have relied on Mountbatten for forming views on Jinnah, despite Mountbatten’s blatant bias against Jinnah and Pakistan.

He also attempts to show that Jinnah was not a mere robot. He demonstrates Jinnah’s human side.

Also whereas many authors have concentrated on ‘high politics’ and thereby depicted Jinnah as a detached constitutionalist, Ahmed focuses more on the social and cultural dimension of Jinnah’s leadership, thereby bringing out Jinnah’s charismatic appeal, his relationship with Muslims and why so many followed him.

He is also very convincing when explaining Jinnah's conversion from upholder of Indian nationalism to advocate of Muslim separatism.

Finally, he puts Jinnah in context by considering Muslim identity prior to Jinnah becoming a force and to the development of Pakistani identity post Jinnah’s death

[Solid Snake]

Sounds worth reading! I'll make a point to check if it's in my school library. Or probably will try and buy it when I'm in pakistan. Thanks ggm

[asifp]

The idea here is that the word secular is mis used as being Western or anti - Islamic. Its because it is believed that if religion is mixed with politics it leads to an anti-tolerant state.

However even if Islam is a part of our politics it still teachers us to be tolerant and love others no matter what cast or creed like our own. That was Jinnah's version be tolerant and let everyone practice their own belief as religion is a personal matter.

[Plasma]

This was such a good point, that it was in the movie jinnah. Near the end they showed Sir Muhammad Ali Jinnah addressing that exact point. Maybe some people have realised this and are making an effort to tell other which i feel is very important.

[zaf1986]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake Sounds worth reading! I'll make a point to check if it's in my school library. Or probably will try and buy it when I'm in pakistan. Thanks ggm

Also the Sole Spokesman by Ayesha Jalal is an excellent read on Jinnah.

[the Great Khan]

thanks for that ggm..finally a proper take on what Jinnah and Iqbal really meant!!...ill check out the book, also see political thought in islam by iqbal..

thanks

[Zeenix]

The general perception is that Jinnah himself was a secular person, never believing much in religion, however the platform supporting was purely based on religion (that was the only argument on which Pakistan was sought for), hence he couldn't openly express his views. Once pakistan was created, Jinnah tried to revert back to the secular model he had in mind for the republic. Unfortunately his death didn't allow his vision for the functioning of state to take roots.

[KB]

The general perception is that Jinnah himself was a secular person, never believing much in religion, however the platform supporting was purely based on religion (that was the only argument on which Pakistan was sought for), hence he couldn't openly express his views. Once pakistan was created, Jinnah tried to revert back to the secular model he had in mind for the republic. Unfortunately his death didn't allow his vision for the functioning of state to take roots.

But even after Pakistan was created, Jinnah envisaged a state drawing on Islamic ideals. So on 25 January 1948, he stated "Islamic principles today are applicable to life as they were 1,300 years ago." And a few weeks later, he asserted, "Let us lay the foundations of democracy on the basis of truly Islamic ideals and principles."

[lahori@denmark]

Originally Posted by kasoo10 If I got it right then that is the problem we have. We all believe that we got this state in the name of Islam but Quaid denied this in this address. That is what makes me think what is the ideology of Pakistan? If we look at 2 nation theory we can understand that we were always struggling for a muslim state where we can enjoy religious freedom and Quran will be the rule of law. But, Quaid makes this 180 degree turn just a few days before the birth of our nation. Is this a betrayal?

it was muslim who had problem practicing thier faith under hindus majorties, punjab govn before english was a prime example of it and many indian states had also such propblems, jinnah and co tried to get a place for muslims where they are free to practice. but it was never ment to stop other ppl of religion,faith to practice as they wanted, this what exactly quiad try to say,,

[pakistani_banda]

ggm is the book the graphic novel by akbar ahmad ? i have that and i say it is a worth read.

[Zechariah]

I think we as humans have our own brain as well and can make a near-perfect Islamic system that strikes a balance with everyday life. We dont have to remain hellbent on one viewpoint. That's one of reasons Pakistan is in problems right now, becasue mullahs want it as a extreme conserative country and secualrs want it as a liberal. We need a moderate Paksitan as Islam is a moderattely conservative religion.

[KB]

ggm is the book the graphic novel by akbar ahmad ? i have that and i say it is a worth read.

Akbar Ahmed's ambitious project on Jinnah included the following quartet:

1. A film - Jinnah
2. A television documentary - The Making of Jinnah
3. A graphic novel - The Quaid - Jinnah and the Story of Pakistan
4. An academic book - Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity.

I was referring to that academic book.