Posted on 05/01/2002 2:45:17 PM PDT by swarthyguy
Quaiud i Azam = Honorific for Jinnah!
It is a fashion with the secular intellectuals to ridicule and abuse everything that happens to be related to religion, clergy, Islamic values and norms and things that speak of control of spirituality over the individual or collective life.
This trend has gained more vigour after the West, under the leadership of the US, has come down heavy on Islam and Islamic values.
With the new words coined, the clergy and theologians have become fundamentalist, mosques have become centres of training for terrorism, and Jihad has become terrorism, and those advocating or believing in Jihad have become terrorists.
The unfortunate thing about this sort of affairs is that those who are dancing to the Western tune are Muslims and claim to know Islam.
Let me make a reference to one such article under the caption, “Islamic polity: a contentious debate” by one Shahid Anwar, which appeared in The Frontier Post of April 18, 2002.
The views expressed in this article are those which reflect the views of the whole class of secular-minded intellectuals who do not believe that this country was created in the name of Islam and for the implementation of Islam as a socio-politico-economic system.
The false argument against the genesis of Pakistan has acquired greater momentum after Pervez Musharraf has distanced himself from the notion of Islam as a governing force of the country, which I believe, has no raison d’etre except Islam.
Mr. Anwar in his arguments tries to say that Pakistan was created as a secular country, having no ideology and no reference to Islam as a code of life giving all guiding principles.
Mr. Shahid, like other secular writers, tries to ridicule “Mullah” (the word used in the article critically) indirectly lumping together all those who think that Pakistan is the only country to have been created in the name of Islam.
The sum substance of the article is that Iqbal and Jinnah never meant Pakistan to be what is argued by the ‘Mullah’.
We cannot falsify history because of our whims and ignorance or deliberately closing our eyes to the historical facts.
The fact is that Pakistan is a unique state that has been created on the ideology of Islam.
It will be very difficult, rather impossible, that it can sustain itself if you snatch away that ideology.
There is no other basis on which its existence can be guaranteed.
There remains no justification of ‘a Pakistan minus Islam’.
The views of Allama Iqbal about the very basis of Pakistan are not a secret and are known to almost everybody, as reflected in his poetic message.
Allama is the first individual who systematically applied his intellectual genius to the idea of having a separate state based on the principles of Islam.
He not only explained and elaborated the concept of an Islamic state in his poetry but also presented his observations and opinion about its practical aspects in his ‘Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam’.
Iqbal has emphasized in his poetry that sovereignty belongs to Almighty Allah alone, who is the Supreme Ruler, and to none else.
He has also referred to the concept of vicegerency of man in the sixth lecture of ‘Reconstruction’, titled ‘The principle of movement in the structure of Islam’.
The first question posed by the learned writer is whether the views of the ‘Mullah’ are in consonance with those of Iqbal.
Allama, in his famous Khutba-e-Allahbad has said, “I see in the north west of India a Muslim state is destined to come.” In 1930 in the annual conference of the Muslim League, Allama gave the historic lecture in which he specifically explained this point saying, “The Muslims are a separate nation in all aspects from the Hindus and the only basis for their being a separate nation is Islam and Islam only.” The Allama pleaded for a separate state there and then very clearly for the first time and used an Islamic Hind within Hindustan.
The Allama continued, “Is it possible that we should maintain Islam as a code for our morals, but for the system of polity we adopt the system of the alien nations in which religion has no say at all?” He further elaborated, “The religious goal of Islam cannot be separated from its social goal.
If you give up the one you will have to leave the other too at some moment.
I understand that no Muslim can ever think of a political system which negates the principle of unity of Islam.” Allama gave in detail the reasons why the Muslims of India should have a separate state of their own.
Allama says in the same Khutba, “Hindustan is the biggest Islamic country in the world.
If we desire that Islam should flourish here as a force of civilization, we must strive for getting a specific geographical area where we can establish our base.” Allama said,”I make the demand of an Islamic state for the well-being and welfare of Hindustan and Islam.
This will pave the way to peace and security by a balance of power.
Islam will have to shed the influences on it due to Arab Malookiyyat.
It will end the lethargy that is prevailing in the Islamic civilization, Shariyat and the educational system for centuries.” Analyzing these and other historical statements of Allama Iqbal, one cannot deny the fact that Allama was not simply longing for a separate state for the Muslims of Hind, but he was deeply desirous of the renaissance of Islam.
He did not wish to see Islam in the would-be new state simply as a religion but wanted to see Islam as a driving force and as a dominant socio-economic and political system.
In the capacity of the president of All India Muslim League and representing the Muslim community of India, Allama Iqbal put forward his strongest advocacy in favor of a separate country.
As a visionary he said, “I feel with certainty that in the northwest of India an independent Muslim State is such a destiny, which seems to be inevitable.” Iqbal considers the absolute sovereignty of the Laws of God as a basic principle underlying the Islamic Political Constitution.
He has stressed the concept of Tauheed in the ‘Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam’ in these words, “The new civilization finds the foundation of world unity in the principles of Tauheed.
Islam as a polity, is only a practical means of making this principle a living factor in the intellectual and emotional life of mankind.
It demands loyalty to God, not to thrones.
And since God is the ultimate spiritual basis of life, loyalty to God virtually amounts to man’s loyalty to his own ideal nature.” Mr. Shahid Anwar has spoken repeatedly of the Mullah and ridiculed him.
The Mullah has no proprietary rights on Islam alone.
Can anybody prove anything else that the Mullah says except to call to the conscience of all that this country was created for, with a pledge to establish here the true system of Islam for which millions of people had sacrificed their lives? Why should the learned writer distance himself from Islam on the pretext of his antipathy for the Mullah? Mr. Anwar argues that the Quaid-e-Azam termed Pakistan as a progressive state.
Progressive doesn’t mean that Pakistan should shed its identity as an Islamic state.
Islam accommodates progress in all ways of life, keeping its principles intact.
An Islamic Pakistan can face any challenge of modern times if it is placed on the right track of its ideology.
Why can’t our liberals and secular intellectuals see so many historical statements of the Quaid who categorically says,”The purpose of creation of this country is to demonstrate to the world the principles of freedom, fraternity and equality.” During the struggle, the Quaid-e-Azam is on record to have said with deep conviction that Pakistan would be an Islamic state.
In an address to women on January 18, 1946, in Habibia Hall, Islamia College Railway Road, Lahore, he said, “If we do not succeed in our struggle for Pakistan, the very trace of Muslims and Islam will be obliterated from the face of India.” When he was on the deathbed he said, “This country would never have come into being but for the spiritual beneficence of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).” History tells us that the difference of opinion of certain Ulema was due to the fear that the people struggling for the creation of Pakistan will not bring ‘real Islam’ and that their cries for Islam may be mere slogans.
(This has now been proved that we have not been able to establish a true Islamic order even after 55 long years as we are ruled by the people dancing to the tune of the Western masters) This was the issue on which Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi had opposed the Pakistan movement.
He doubted that a real Islamic state was going to be established.
He feared that if there was no real Islam in the new circumstances, the Muslims will be divided and the Hindus will remain united.
He could foresee that in such a situation the Muslims were likely to fall into three different pieces.
We can see with our eyes this fact.
140 million Muslims are in Pakistan, 150 million in Bangladesh and 200 million in India.
They cannot help each other as barriers separate them.
The Ulema who are mostly blamed for having opposed Pakistan were Abul Kalam, Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni and Abul Ala Maudoodi.
Once a notable from Kashmir visited India and he met Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru.
Nehru made him an offer of an ambassadorship if he left Pakistan and came to India.
This gentleman later on met Abul Kalam and told him about the offer Nehru had made.
Abul Kalam said, “No. Never! It was one thing when Pakistan was not existing.
Now the honour of Islam is solely attached with Pakistan.
You remain in Pakistan and help in strengthening it.” Similarly, Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni when asked during his visit to a Madrassa in Dhabel (India) about his attitude towards the Pakistan movement, answered, “My brother! When a proposal for constructing a mosque is put before a group of Musalmans, there is the possibility of difference of opinion whether it should be built or dropped.
But once the mosque is built, it is now the sacred obligation of all the Muslims to protect it by all means.” Maulana Maududi considers the sovereignty of God as the first principle of Islamic political theory.
In his book, ‘The Islamic Law and Constitution’ he writes, “The belief in the oneness and the sovereignty of Allah is the foundation of the social and moral system propounded by the prophets.
It is the very starting point of the Islamic political philosophy.” The ideology minus religious concept considers the relationship with God as essentially an individual and private affair.
In lonely seclusion it seeks through worship God’s forgiveness and bounties, and having done that, proceeds according to his own sweet will, to engage in mundane affairs.
The separation of religion from state and other public affairs amounts to negating parts of the Quranic injunctions.
Islam is not a ‘religion’ in the ordinary sense of the term as is understood by the secularists.
The Holy Quran says it is a ‘Deen’ and wants its followers’ complete submission not only on the individual level but also at the collective and state level.
It wants to completely dominate and control the social, political and economic domains of the state as a whole.
It has been proved beyond all doubt that Pakistan’s ideology is nothing else but Islam.
As such the inviolable principle of Islam must be applied to the affairs of the state.
It is of course a fact that after the 1857 independence struggle, Sir Sayyed Ahmad Khan had done a great service persuading the Muslims to get education and learn the English language to be able to get their share of what the English rulers agreed to give to the Indians.
In his book ‘Asbab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind’, he has made a reconciliatory approach and has asked the Muslims to learn English and to take every good thing, which is not in direct conflict with Islam.
He established Aligarh Madrassa, which later on became a college and then a University.
Allama Iqbal strongly believes that secularism and nationalism are the two big evils of the time.
Similarly he considers man’s sovereignty as the worst form of polytheism and infidelity.
Allama was the most affected person on the abolition of the Khilafat in Turkey.
The elegy he wrote on this most painful event in the life of the Ummah amply speaks of the mourning of Allama.
He terms the tragedy as the result of the conspirators and the folly of Mustafa Kamal.
I do agree that no one has the proprietary right of interpreting Islam according to his own whims.
The correct interpretation of Islam is of course the one given by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and his right guided Khulafa and the agreed Muhaddiseen and learned Mujtahideen of the Ummah.
It is not the domain of the modern secular intellectuals who claim to be the interpreters of Islam with no understanding of the Quran and even lacking a basic knowledge of Arabic, the language of the Book and the sayings of the Holy Prophet (PBUH).
The Quran of course does not give details of the Islamic state, but it does give the guiding principles and prescribes certain limits and forbids its followers as well as the ‘state’ to transgress those limits.
These fundamentals are the guiding principles of the political polity.
You are not a lawgiver.
It is the domain of Almighty God.
Man on this earth is His Khalifa and a Muslim individual or for that matter a Muslim state has to exercise the authority as a vicegerent and not as a ruler or Hakim.
Whether it is the ‘Mullah’, a religious party, any political party or anybody who acknowledges that Pakistan was meant for this polity is right.
People having ideas contrary to this, are bent upon proving that Pakistan is a secular state, negating thereby the ideological basis of the country.
I think he meant to say "dominate .. the world as a whole."
Islam is an evil on the plane of Maoism, Stalinsim, Nazism, and Pol Pot.
One should note that these fanatics would also meake good liberals or communists for that matter, same mindset.
reminds me of a section in Mein Kampf where Hitler commented how communists would also make the best Nazis once they are turned. It's all the same mindset just different agendas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.