Pakistan: As Envisaged by Iqbal and Jinnah
Ahmad
Subhani
It is
a strange phenomenon that more than six decades have passed, a controversy is
still raging as to which type of system was intended to be implemented in
Pakistan. Secular, Theocratic or any other. A group of so-called intellectuals
opine that the architect of Pakistan, Quaid-i- Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, wanted
it to emerge as a Secular" State. They base their arguments exclusively on
Quaid’s address to the Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947 .On the other
hand, there is the religious orthodoxy, that had initially opposed the very
creation of Pakistan under the pretext that since they had been promised. by
the Indian National Congress, that the Muslims would be free to discharge their
religious obligations freely in India after independence, there was no need to create
a separate state for the Indian Muslims. However, no sooner did Pakistan come
into existence, these so-called “Ulema” flocked to the new born state and had
the temerity to claim that since Pakistan was created in the name of Islam,
they only were the competent authority to determine the Islamic system to be
implemented here .Now, who does not know, that there is essentially a retrogressive
and purely ritualistic brand of “Islam”, which they intend to impose, here
forcibly. Best way to resolve this riddle is to learn the truth from the
proverbial “horse’s mouth” Who can be the better judge to resolve the dilemma
than the founders of Pakistan, namely, Allama Iqbal, who conceived the idea of
a separate state for the Indian Muslims and Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah, who realized
lqbal’s dream by securing a country for them — the Islamic Republic of
Pakistan. Given here under, are excerpts from the speeches and addresses of
these giants, to make the issue crystal clear.
Iqbal,
the spiritual father of Pakistan, who conceived the idea of a separate state for
the Muslims of the Indian sub-continent, said during his presidential address
at the annual session of the All India Muslim League at Allahabad in 1930,
that” India was the biggest Islamic country and in it Islam could be sustained as
a living cultural entity only if it was centralized in a specific territory. (for
that, he demanded ) formation of a consolidated Muslim State in the best interest
of India and Islam. For India, it means security and peace resulting from an
internal balance of power; for Islam an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp
that Arabic Imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilize its laws, its
education, its customs, its culture, and to bring them in close contact with
its own original spirit and with the spirit of modern times”. He elucidated the
point further in his monumental work known as,” The Reconstruction of Religious
Thought in Islam” by saying, “....during the course of history, the moral and
social ideals of Islam have been gradually de-Islamized through the influence
of local character, and pre-Islamic superstitions of Muslim nations .... The
only alternative open to us, then, is to tear off from Islam the hard crust
which has immobilized an essentially dynamic outlook on life, and to rediscover
the original verities of freedom, equality and solidarity with a view to
rebuilt our moral, social and political ideals out of their original simplicity
and universality.”
Highlighting
the paramount importance of “permanence” and “change” factor in Islamic laws he
in his unique masterly style asserts,” The ultimate spiritual basis of all
life, as conceived by Islam is eternal and reveals itself in variety and
change. A. society based on such a conception of Reality must reconcile, in its
life, the categories of permanence and change .It must possess eternal
principles to regulate its collective life, for the eternal gives us a foothold
in the World of perpetual change. But eternal principles when they are
understood to exclude all possibilities of change tend to immobilize what is essentially
mobile in nature. The failure of Europe in political and social science illustrates
the former principle, the immobility of Islam during the last 500 years
illustrates the latter .What then is the principle of movement in the nature of
Islam? This is known as “ljtihad”
In
his concluding remarks ( 6th lecture), Iqbal advises, “ Let the Muslim of today
appreciate his position, reconstruct his social life in the light of ultimate principles(
of Qur’an) and evolve out of the hitherto partially revealed purpose of Islam,
that spiritual democracy which is the ultimate aim of Islam”. If we go through
the speeches / statements made by the Quaid-i-Azam, before the birth of
Pakistan and after, quite a clear picture emerges in this regard. Relevant
excerpts are being reproduced here to illustrate the moot point:—
“Pakistan
not only means freedom and independence, but also the Muslim Ideology that has
to be preserved that has come to us as a precious gift and treasure”.
(Chittagong -- March, 1948). “In Pakistan -lies our deliverance, defence and
honor. If we fail, we perish and there will be no signs and symptoms of Muslims
or Islam left in the sub-continent” (Pakistan Day — March, 1945).
“The
Constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed – I am sure it will be of a democratic
type embodying the essential principles of Islam. To- day, they are as applicable
in modern times, as these were 1300 years ago — in any case, Pakistan is NOT
going to be a Theocratic State -— to be ruled by the priests with a Divine
mission “(broadcast to the U.S.A. February, 1948). “Islam is not merely confined
to the spiritual tenets and doctrine, rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete
code regulating the whole Muslim Society, every department of life collectively
and individually.” (Eid Message – Septen1ber, 1945).
“In
Islam, ultimate obedience belongs to God alone. The only way to follow this guidance
is through the Holy Quran. Islam does not preach obedience to a king,
parliament, person or institution. The Islamic Govt. means rule of the Quran.
And how can you establish the rule of the Quran without an independent state?”
(Address
to-the students of the Usmania University, Deccan, India -- August, 1941). .
From the foregoing discussion, it is absolutely clear, that
the founding fathers envisioned Pakistan to emerge as a Democratic Islamic
State and not a Secular or Theocratic one. There is a misperception that, if it
is not a Theocratic State, then it necessarily has to be a Secular one and vice
a versa. It is not so. An Islamic State, in fact, lies somewhere in between
these two extremes .To be brief, Theocracy means absolute control of religious
clergy over public and private affairs, where as in Secularism, religion is
virtually banished from having any say in public (state) affairs. In Islam,
there is no segregation between the private and public life and also, there is
no priesthood in it. There is no intermediary between Man and his Allah, Quran
being the only link between the two which means, Qur’anic Laws govern the
private as well as public affairs in an Islamic State.
Post a Comment