Friday, March 29, 2024
05:54 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > General > Discussion

Discussion Discuss current affairs and issues helpful in CSS only.

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #11  
Old Saturday, August 29, 2015
Monk's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 691
Thanks: 293
Thanked 643 Times in 317 Posts
Monk will become famous soon enoughMonk will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MIR A GHAFFAR View Post
>>>means it is applicable in only in subcontinent case,then agreed. but many raise the question about the muslims living in India and Hindus living in PAKISTAN.

Yes! Mass migration at that level was probably impossible
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Saturday, August 29, 2015
Syed Ali Hadi's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Rawalpindi
Posts: 82
Thanks: 19
Thanked 39 Times in 24 Posts
Syed Ali Hadi is on a distinguished road
Default 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ends in an emotionally charged participants from both sides rather than analyzing the situation with rationality and historical references.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
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Syed Ali Hadi For This Useful Post:
MIR A GHAFFAR (Sunday, August 30, 2015)
  #13  
Old Sunday, August 30, 2015
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Islamabad
Posts: 31
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
khaistahkhan is on a distinguished road
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Sunday, August 30, 2015
Monk's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 691
Thanks: 293
Thanked 643 Times in 317 Posts
Monk will become famous soon enoughMonk will become famous soon enough
Default Two-Nation Theory...A Failure ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by khaistahkhan View Post
Pakistan, although a muslim state as demanded by TNT, has no sharia law as it is the base of a muslim country law..

Pakistan was never meant to be a theological state. Demand was for a country for Muslims not a Muslim country

Quote:
Originally Posted by khaistahkhan View Post
If formation of Pakistan is on muslim ideology then bifurcation of west and east pakistan confute it..

That argument has been refuted several time in this thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by khaistahkhan View Post
Inter religion conflects are less than the intra religion conflects..

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by khaistahkhan View Post
Seperationist movements directly imply that there exists other intrests than religion for demanding a seperate state.
Has been refuted earlier on logical grounds
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Monk For This Useful Post:
MIR A GHAFFAR (Sunday, August 30, 2015)
  #15  
Old Monday, August 31, 2015
Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Still Running
Posts: 168
Thanks: 159
Thanked 372 Times in 143 Posts
Cogito Ergo Sum will become famous soon enoughCogito Ergo Sum will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk View Post
Pakistan was never meant to be a theological state. Demand was for a country for Muslims not a Muslim country
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."
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old Monday, August 31, 2015
Monk's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 691
Thanks: 293
Thanked 643 Times in 317 Posts
Monk will become famous soon enoughMonk will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
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.
“Pakistan’s Constitution should incorporate the essential principles of Islam, which are as good and relevant in our day, as were 1300 years ago. But Pakistan should not be a theocratic state ruled by priests.” Quaid

"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
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old Monday, August 31, 2015
Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Still Running
Posts: 168
Thanks: 159
Thanked 372 Times in 143 Posts
Cogito Ergo Sum will become famous soon enoughCogito Ergo Sum will become famous soon enough
Default

"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."
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old Monday, August 31, 2015
Monk's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 691
Thanks: 293
Thanked 643 Times in 317 Posts
Monk will become famous soon enoughMonk will become famous soon enough
Default Two-Nation Theory...A Failure ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
"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".

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
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old Monday, August 31, 2015
Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Still Running
Posts: 168
Thanks: 159
Thanked 372 Times in 143 Posts
Cogito Ergo Sum will become famous soon enoughCogito Ergo Sum will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk View Post
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
This particular speech is quite famous and its text is widely available. To be precise, the word he used was "Shariat" (and hence it is quoted verbatim). In those good old times, Jannah was Jannat and Sharia was Shariat.
__________________
"Everything the light touches, is our kingdom."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Cogito Ergo Sum For This Useful Post:
Monk (Monday, August 31, 2015)
  #20  
Old Monday, August 31, 2015
Monk's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 691
Thanks: 293
Thanked 643 Times in 317 Posts
Monk will become famous soon enoughMonk will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
This particular speech is quite famous and its text is widely available. To be precise, the word he used was "Shariat" (and hence it is quoted verbatim). In those good old times, Jannah was Jannat and Sharia was Shariat.

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
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


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


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.