#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yes! Mass migration at that level was probably impossible |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Two-Nation Theory in the light of speeches of Allama Iqbal and Quaid e Azam
In my humble opinion, what I have observed is that, this hot topic and the other one, whether Pakistan would be a secular state or Islamic, always ends in an emotionally charged participants from both sides rather than analyzing the situation with rationality and historical references.
To cut it short and brief, in the early years of Pakistan, no debates or discussions were conducted on sensitive topics like these. As 6th September is approaching near, what we observed in Indo-Pak War of 1965 was, a sense of honor, unity and dignity which erected Pakistani people and the ideology together, although many other security imperatives and political dynamics shaped the internal politics of the country. This internal situation lead us to the debacle of Bangladesh and the secession of East Pakistan. So a million dollar question is where we went wrong??? If we observe and read the speeches and lectures of Quaid and Allama Iqbal with a critical eye and rationality, we will reach to a conclusion that after the demise of Quaid, Pakistan was left short of leadership, with all the pygmies to rule the sad state of affairs making it worse with the passage of time. In retrospect, we can say that we lost our way with the demise of genuine leadership soon after the genesis of Pakistan where we went astray. Read and analyze all the speeches of Quaid and Iqbal's vision to understand the deeper concept of TNT.
__________________
Ideals are peaceful. History is violent |
The Following User Says Thank You to Syed Ali Hadi For This Useful Post: | ||
MIR A GHAFFAR (Sunday, August 30, 2015) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
by keen analysis one can easily reach to the conclusion that TNT is entirely failed. Because
1. Pakistan, although a muslim state as demanded by TNT, has no sharia law as it is the base of a muslim country law. 2. If formation of Pakistan is on muslim ideology then bifurcation of west and east pakistan confute it. 3. Inter religion conflects are less than the intra religion conflects. 4. Seperationist movements directly imply that there exists other intrests than religion for demanding a seperate state. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Two-Nation Theory...A Failure ?
Quote:
Pakistan was never meant to be a theological state. Demand was for a country for Muslims not a Muslim country Quote:
That argument has been refuted several time in this thread Quote:
Intra religion conflicts were non existent in Pakistan till the Islamisation of society by Zia. Inculcation of Wahibism by State alienated Shia Muslims thus crisis began so it has nothing to do with TNT Has been refuted earlier on logical grounds |
The Following User Says Thank You to Monk For This Useful Post: | ||
MIR A GHAFFAR (Sunday, August 30, 2015) |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
While I agree with the rest of your arguments in this thread, I disagree with this one. I don't think anyone knew before partition exactly what kind of a state they were demanding. They were just demanding a separate state, nobody was particularly sure what that state would be like. Not even Mr. Jinnah.
__________________
"Everything the light touches, is our kingdom." |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
"In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims-Hindus, Christians and Parsis -- but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan." Quaid-i-Azam, Feb. 1948 “Neither the Muslim League Working Committee nor I ever passed a resolution [called] 'Pakistan ka matlab kya' — you may have used it to catch a few votes,” said Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah when a Muslim Leaguer chanted this slogan at the last session of the All India Muslim League. Unfortunately, the slogan-monger prevailed over Jinnah. Those who believe in this slogan now dominate Pakistan. Those who remember what Jinnah said on this or other occasions can be counted on fingers. The poem, “Pakistan ka matlab kya,” was written by a schoolteacher from Sialkot, Asghar Sodai. He lived a long life (Sept. 26,1926 – May 17, 2008) but never had any direct political influence. His poem, however, proved to be the most influential piece of poetry ever written in Pakistan. It was more influential than the poetry of Iqbal and Faiz put together, seeing as this single poem shaped the country’s official ideology. Last edited by Man Jaanbazam; Monday, August 31, 2015 at 08:39 AM. Reason: merge chain posts |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
"I cannot understand the logic of those who have been deliberately and mischievously propagating that the Constitution of Pakistan will not be based on Islamic Shariat...
No doubt there are many people who do not quite appreciate when we talk of Islam. Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines, Islam is also a code for every Muslim which regulates his life and his conduct even in politics and economics and the like." ~Address to Karachi Bar Association in January 25, 1948 Jinnah was a politician, NOT an ideologue. He was a pragmatist, not an idealist or a visionary. I don't say this with any intention to imply that I consider him overrated--I just think we praise him for all the wrong reasons. As a practitioner of realpolitik, Jinnah said what his audience wanted. His words were adapted to the appease the particular section of the population listening to him. There are his speeches delivered in KPK (erstwhile NWFP), where the highlight is the "Islamic" facet of Muslim League's struggle. Then there are his speeches delivered in modernized urban areas, where he glorified modern democratic ideals. Also notice the fact that though many Ulema were against him (Maududi etc), many (like the Usmanis) joined him. They didn't do so because they were convinced that Jinnah's Pakistan and "Shariah" were going to be mutuall exclusive. In fact, quite the opposite. I just quoted one of his speeches where he talks about Sharia. When you say at one place that all (Muslims and non-Muslims) will be equal and then talk about Sharia at another place; I don't think it should take a rocket-scientist to appreciate the contradiction. Sharia does not give equality to Muslims and non-Muslims (in case you are unaware, I am stating one contradiction). Bottom-line: Jinnah himself didn't know what kind of a state Pakistan would become once it came on the map of the world. In fact, nobody knew. That is why you see many diverse groups with a variety of different ideologies participating in the struggle for Pakistan: all of them thought that the ideological framework of the state that would come into being as a consequence of their struggle would be similar to their own ideologies. On one hand, this helped the cause of Pakistan. On the other, it proved to be a recipe of utter confusion that prevails to this day about the "Pakistan ideology/Jinnah Ka Pakistan".
__________________
"Everything the light touches, is our kingdom." |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Two-Nation Theory...A Failure ?
Quote:
If he had uttered the word "Sharia" ( which according to your source he had) then it can safely by assumed that the author of above article has rightly declared that Jinnah Wasn't sure about the ideology of Pakistan. This one word "sharia" changes the whole dynamics. I was oblivious of this quote. It's mind boggling, thanks for bringing that up but i am bit doubtful that author might have translated " Islamic Principles" or something like that into Sharia |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
"Everything the light touches, is our kingdom." |
The Following User Says Thank You to Cogito Ergo Sum For This Useful Post: | ||
Monk (Monday, August 31, 2015) |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Still i would like to dig deeper into contextual interpretation of that speech because its hard to digest . How come a person with modern liberal outlook strives for a country and when he achieves his goal then handover it to Unscrupulous Mullahs in platter ? For the sake of argument if we admit that he really meant what he Said in that Shariah speech even then his numerous speeches in favour of islamic welfare state (which obviously is devoid of Shariah) outweigh a single speech. Last edited by Man Jaanbazam; Monday, August 31, 2015 at 08:38 AM. Reason: merge chain posts |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Asma Jilani ---- Vs---- Govt. of the Punjab | sajidnuml | Constitutional Law | 5 | Saturday, November 11, 2017 06:00 PM |
some theories of international relations | sayed khan | International Relations | 0 | Sunday, December 02, 2007 09:53 PM |
Economics an overview | Naseer Ahmed Chandio | Economics | 0 | Wednesday, December 13, 2006 09:40 AM |