Was Jinnah a Secularist? |
||
|
|
|
More Articles
by |
|
Perhaps the most contentious issue in Pakistan since its
very inception in 1947 is the nature of the state. Should Pakistan be a
sharia based Islamic state or should she be a Modern democratic secular
state? The very word 'Secular' has been demonized by a majority of religious
class in Pakistan who has loosely translated the word to mean 'irreligiously'
- a concept wholly divorced from secularism. In fact, the term 'secularism'
is misunderstood by many all around the world. Nothing illustrates better the
confusion about secularism than general public's perceptions of Pakistan's
founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah. There is convincing
evidence to suggest that Jinnah was a modern-minded secularist. However, ever
since his death in 1948 - shortly after the birth of the new state - there
has been a tug-of-war over his legacy. Islamists - Muslims who view Islam as
a political ideology - have not been slow in claiming him as one of their
own. Hamid Gul is a retired general and the former head of Pakistan's
powerful intelligence agency, the ISI. He is also a well-known Islamist. What
does he think of the idea that Jinnah was a secularist? "No, this is not
accurate. I think he has been misquoted. There is only one speech on record
[about the subject] - and that is on 11 August 1947 - when Pakistan had
already been announced [as a state]", Hamid Gul said. "Then, in the
Constituent Assembly, he made a speech, saying: 'In the new state of
Pakistan, everyone will be equal before the law, and people will cease to be
Muslims and cease to be Hindus, in the eyes of the law'. "But what law
did he mean? He meant Islamic law. Implicitly - he was clear in his mind - he
implied that it would be Islamic law. So I think Jinnah has been
misquoted...[Jinnah] is quite clear that he did not want a Muslim
nation-state. He wanted an Islamic state". Jinnah did have a vision
as a moderate, although in an overall Islamic context. In his presidential
address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, August 11, 1947, Jinnah
said: "Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and
you will find that in course of time 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". Contemporary Pakistanis are often trying to deny
this secularist call by Jinnah. This tussle is at the heart of Pakistan's
search for a modern identity. Many eminent authors and historians from the
Subcontinent as well as the West have described Jinnah as an avowedly secular
leader, pointing more often than not to his one year in office as the Governor
General of Pakistan. The opponents of this view however point out Jinnah's
fervent advocacy of the Two-Nation Theory as a counter to this claim. Then in
the first camp there are those who point to Jinnah's whisky drinking and
swine eating habits to prove his secularism. The Bhartia Janata
Party's President Mr L K Advani's recent resignation over his remark in
Karachi that Pakistan's founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a secular leader has
revived the old controversy – whether or not Jinnah was a secularist and if
he was, why did he believe in two-nation theory? Mr Advani stated at a
function organised by the Karachi Council on Foreign Relations, Economic
Affairs & Law in Karachi on June 5, 2005: "I believe that Jinnah's
speech to Pakistan's Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947 is the ideal that India,
Pakistan as well as Bangladesh – the three present-day sovereign and separate
constituents of the undivided India of the past, sharing a common
civilisational heritage – should follow". The million dollar question
is, did or didn't Jinnah believe in two-nation theory and whether he was a
secularist. The question was put to various historians, scholars,
intellectuals and writers and following are the answers: Dr Rafiq Ahmed, Director Centre for South Asian Studies,
former Vice Chancellor Punjab University, Lahore The lobby or circles of writers
and intellectuals trying to prove that Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah
wanted Pakistan to be a secular State are quite active especially since the
process of normalization of Pak-India relations started a few years ago. In
the wake of frequent cultural and political exchanges between the two
countries the supporters of secular Pakistan have increased their propaganda,
have geared up their efforts and have created some forums to spread this
notion. All those who subscribe to the secularistic view are bending backward
to prove the Quaid as secular. They base their arguments on 11 August 1947
speech of the Quaid which he delivered in the first Constituent Assembly of
Pakistan. They quote this speech in support of their view but are guilty of
misinterpreting the same. According to their perception and perhaps according
to the agenda given to them, they do not quote any other speech and are thus
again guilty of omission and commission. Unfortunately, since its very
inception, Pakistan is faced with a cultural invasion particularly from its
eastern neighbour and undoubtedly this invasion has influenced some people
and a feeling is growing that the nation's commitment to its Islamic ideals
set by our elders is getting diluted thereby eroding our ideology. The factual position is
that the Quaid on many occasions had clearly and unambiguously stated that
Pakistan would be an Islamic democratic State and Islam would be the ideology
of Pakistan. He meant what he said and he said what he meant and was never
equivocal. First of all we all know that he never said that he was secular.
Islam was in his blood like it is in the blood of all Pakistanis. Yet he was
conscious and aware of true spirit of Islam. It was on the appeal and
persuation of Allama Mohammad Iqbal that he forfeited his career as a highly
successful lawyer of England and came back to lead Muslims and Muslim League. The best way to judge
whether the founder of Pakistan was a secular or not, is to have a careful
look at some of his speeches and statements on various occasions and analyze
them objectively. Speaking on the occasion of the Holy Prophet's birthday at
the Karachi Bar Association on 25th January 1948, the Quaid said, "The
Prophet of Islam (PBUH) was a great teacher. He was a great lawgiver. He was
a great statesman and he was a great sovereign who ruled. The life of the
Prophet (PBUH) was simple according to those times. He was successful in
everything that he put his hand to from as a businessman to as a ruler. The
Prophet (PBUH) was the greatest man that the world had ever seen. Thirteen
hundred years ago he laid the foundations of democracy". On another occasion
addressing the Civil, Naval, Military and Air Force Officers at Khaliqdina
Hall Karachi on 11th October 1947 the Quaid said, "It is my belief that
our salvation lies in following the golden rules of conduct set for us by our
great lawgiver, the Prophet of Islam. Let us lay the foundations of our
democracy on the basis of true Islamic ideals and principles". In his
concluding speech at the session of All-India Muslim League, Karachi on 26th
December 1943 the Quaid said, "What is it that keeps the Muslims united
as one man, and what is the bedrock and sheet-anchor of the community. It is
Islam. It is the Great Book, Quran, that is the sheet-anchor of Muslim India.
I am sure that as we go on there will be more and more of oneness, one God,
one Book, one Prophet and one Nation". In the message of Eid to
the Muslims in September 1945 he said, "Every Mussalman knows that the
injunctions of the Holy Quran are not confined to religious and moral duties.
From the Atlantic to the Ganges, says Gibbon, the Holy Quran is acknowledged
as the fundamental code, not only of theology, but of civil and criminal
jurisprudence, and the laws which regulate the action and the property of
mankind are governed by immutable sanctions of the will of God".
Everyone, except those who are ignorant, knows the Holy Quran is the general
code of the Muslims". Dr Mubarak Ali, historian
and former Chairman of History Department, Karachi University Mohammad Ali Jinnah did
believe in two-nation theory and struggled for the creation of an independent
homeland of Muslims on the very basis of the theory. Jinnah used to be a
perfect secularist as far as his private life was concerned, yet he believed
in using religion for public consumption to achieve his political ends. The
propelling slogan during the struggle for Pakistan was to establish a
distinct identity of Muslims as a nation. And Jinnah used Islam as a
motivating force to rally the Muslims to the cause of Pakistan politically.
But the state they aimed to create was to be secular, not a theocracy. And
the method to achieve the goal was not a religious movement but political
agitation. I. A. Rehman, former
Editor Daily The Pakistan Times, Director Human Rights Commission of Pakistan
(HRCP) Mohammad AIi Jinnah's
two-nation theory lacked clarity. He did not base his theory on the religion
alone but also on the basis of territorial majority. If we examine his
statements that only the Muslims in the Muslim majority provinces of India
constituted a separate nation while the rest of the Muslims in India were not
part of that nation, we can find out the problem in sustaining that theory.
That's why, Jinnah said goodbye to the two-nation theory at the first
opportunity that is on August 11, 1947. Secondly, Jinnah was a
secularist given the fact that he always adopted a secular approach while
dealing with constitutional and legal issues. People today should realize
that the Indian-Muslim community had a number of prominent people who were
deeply religious and also secular in politics. These included Maulana Abdul
Kalam Azad, Maulana Hasrat Mohani, Hakeem Ajmal Khan etc. The apparent
contradiction in Jinnah's creed was the result of communalization of politics
in India which certainly did not match with his philosophy. Dr. Hassan Askari Rizvi,
Political Analys, former Chairman Political Science Department,
Punjab University, Lahore Mohammad Ali Jinnah did
believe in a two-nation theory as stated by him quite often especially in the
only article he wrote for a British weekly Time and Tide, published in March
1940 and his speech on the occasion of the passing of the Lahore resolution
in March 1940. On both these occasions, Jinnah clearly stated that the
Muslims of the sub-continent were a nation entitled to a homeland. Secondly, Jinnah
definitely was a secularist who viewed Islam as an instrument of identity formation
and political mobilization for the Muslims of South Asia. Whenever he talked
of Islam, he also talked about the modern notion of the state,
constitutionalism, civil and political rights and equal citizenship
irrespective of religion or any other consideration. This means that he was
neither for a religious or orthodox Islamic state nor for a secular system in
the classical Marxist terms. His view was that Pakistan would be a modern,
democratic state which derives its ethical formation from Islam. Imtiaz Alam, Secretary General South
Asia Free Media Association (SAFMA) Mohammad Ali Jinnah
envisioned Pakistan as a modern democratic state to be run strictly on the
basis of merit and where all citizens will be equal before the law. Jinnah's
ideas about what the new state should be like were very clear as can be seen
from his speeches and statements. He meant Pakistan to be a progressive state
in which there would be scope neither for intolerance nor for obscurantism
and whose highest aims would be expressed in the social, cultural and
economic uplift of the masses. Only three days before
Pakistan formally appeared on the world map, Jinnah, in his August 11, 1947
memorable speech to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan stated the principle
on which the new state was to be founded: "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 citizens of one state....... in the course of time 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". Rashid Rehman, writer, columnist, former Editor Daily The
Frontier Post In my view, there are two
Jinnahs not one. The younger one was a nationalist who was dubbed as an
ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity because of his efforts in keeping the
independence movement united. But at the same time, he was also a
constitutionalist and a democrat of the old British school. He, therefore,
incrementally had grave reservation about Gandhi's use of religion and mass
mobilization as the means to independence. Jinnah subsequently changed his
stance and took on the view that the Muslims constituted a separate nation in
terms of language, culture and way of life. He soon emerged as the champion
of the rights of an increasingly insecure Muslim minority in India. But
despite his change of views, Jinnah tried to the last to obtain warranty for
socio-political and economic rights of the Muslims of India through
constitutional guarantees and arrangements in a united independent India. Secondly, Mohammad Ali
Jinnah was a true secularist and an ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity. He had
to change his stance after he returned from London and discovered the new
trend of promoting Hindu culture. He made it clear in his first speech to the
Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on August 11, 1947 that he wanted a state which
would allow maximum freedom of religious beliefs and practice while the state
would treat each citizen equally. This is the classical definition of a
classical state. It is another matter that Pakistan has not followed Jinnah's
philosophy. That Pakistan's founder
Mohammad Ali Jinnah advocated many different types of Nationalism at
different times in his career is an undeniable fact. Broadly speaking, he was
a staunch secular Indian Nationalist right until his reiteration of Sir
Syed's two-nation theory. From that point till the creation of Pakistan in
August 1948, he was the supporter of Muslim Nationalism, after 3rd June 1947
he seemed to favour Secular Pakistani Nationalism. This however is of no
consequence to his credentials as a secularist. Neither is his dietary
observation (whisky drinking and swine eating) which can only prove his
'religiosity'. To cut the long story short, Jinnah was a secularist simply
because he endorsed the principle of the separation of Church and State,
which is the active definition of Secularism in our times.
(Cobrapost News Features)
|
|
Pakistani Fatwa Against Suicide Bombing The Pakistanis Training in Al Qaeda Camps Abu Faraj Al-Libbi's Arrest a Decisive Blow to Al Qeda
Mughal-e-Azam and Pakistan’s stance towards Bollywood Pakistani religious seminaries
|