Summing up his impression about the League Session the Quaid said:
“The first thing that has emerged from this session of the All-India Muslim League is that the entire body of delegates in the open session and the vast public accepted the resolution moved by the chair, also unanimously. This has shown beyond doubt that the Musalmans are capable of standing and going through an order and trial worthy of any great organization."
.
.
.
Source: Paksitan Visions, An International Journal of Pakistan Affair (Quaid-i-Azam Number), Vol. II, No. 1 & 2 January-july 2001, Lahore
Showing posts with label Two Nation theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Two Nation theory. Show all posts
Pakistan Resolution Lahore : March 23, 1940
As soon as the All-India Muslim League, at its Lahore Session in March 1940, adopted the resolution there was a hysterical outburst in Congress and other Hindu circles. Without pausing to consider the merits of the proposal they began to decry and oppose it tooth and nail. The Quaid in a statement appealed to the better mind of the Hindu and other communities to give serious consideration to the Pakistan Resolution as the only way of achieving India’s freedom at an early date. He said:
“I still hope at any rate the better mind of the Hindus will give earnest and serious consideration to our proposals as there lies the achievement of India’s freedom at the earliest possible period. This freedom we shall be able to retain peacefully both internally and externally.”
Source: Paksitan Visions, An International Journal of Pakistan Affair (Quaid-i-Azam Number), Vol. II, No. 1 & 2 January-july 2001, Lahore
“I still hope at any rate the better mind of the Hindus will give earnest and serious consideration to our proposals as there lies the achievement of India’s freedom at the earliest possible period. This freedom we shall be able to retain peacefully both internally and externally.”
Source: Paksitan Visions, An International Journal of Pakistan Affair (Quaid-i-Azam Number), Vol. II, No. 1 & 2 January-july 2001, Lahore
Two-Nation Theory
.
Excerpt from the Presidential Address delivered by the Quaid-i-Azam
"It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religious in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders; and it is only a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality. This misconception of one Indian Nation has troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, literatures. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built for the government of such a state.” (Presidential Address by the Quaid-i-Azam, Lahore March 22-23, 1940)
Source: Paksitan Visions, An International Journal of Pakistan Affair (Quaid-i-Azam Number), Vol. II, No. 1 & 2 January-july 2001, Lahore
Excerpt from the Presidential Address delivered by the Quaid-i-Azam
"It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religious in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders; and it is only a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality. This misconception of one Indian Nation has troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, literatures. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built for the government of such a state.” (Presidential Address by the Quaid-i-Azam, Lahore March 22-23, 1940)
Source: Paksitan Visions, An International Journal of Pakistan Affair (Quaid-i-Azam Number), Vol. II, No. 1 & 2 January-july 2001, Lahore
23rd March 1940: What Our Youth Must Know About?
The Pakistani youth of today seem to be simply ignorant of the historical background of the creation of Pakistan. The reason is mostly to do with detest of theirs for Pakistan Studies while at schools. Based on my interaction with many of them, it is my considered opinion that there is a weakness and void out there amongst our youth vis- -vis history of Pakistan.
On this historic day of 23rd March 'also known as Pakistan Day' I therefore thought to write something for educating my youth on the significance of this day.
The youth of today must know that Pakistan owes her creation to four erstwhile outstanding Muslim leaders, namely: Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1817-98), Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar (1878-1931), Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948), and Allama Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938). These leaders provided intellectual and political leadership to Indian Muslims during about ninety years (1858-1947) of the British imperial rule on the Sub-continent.
It is important for them to also know that in the beginning all of these aforementioned leaders were thorough-bred nationalists at one time or another. By being nationalist means they were the proponents of a united India. Now it should not come as a surprise for our young men and women to learn that over the passage of time our leaders got disillusioned with this concept of one united India. The reasons were many. It could have been either because of Hindu ethnocentrism in the late 19th century or Congress`s championing of unitary Hindu nationalism in the 1920s and 1930s.
Now let us focus our discussion exclusively on our great leader and founder of Pakistan 'Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah'. It is very important for the youths to understand the elements of the crest and the troughs in the political leanings and ideologies of Quaid-e-Azam over his long career from 1904 thru 1948. It is interesting to note here that for some seventeen years (1904-1920), he was pro-Congress, pleading the Congress cause and envisioning a truly nationalist destiny for India.
And, still for another sixteen years (1921-37), though he was practically out of Congress as he had joined All India Muslim League in 1920, he was still working for a nationalist destiny. During this period, he was still striving for a Hindu-Muslim settlement and he was still collaborating with the Congress and its leadership for the same. It is also very well known that in pursuit of his mission of Hindu-Muslim unity, he had devised several constitutional formulae, but all to no avail. It is also pertinent to mention here that till early 1937, Quaid-e-Azam was still in his "nationalist" self; preaching his credo eloquently and trying miserably to unite Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. For this he was widely known as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity.
On this historic day of 23rd March 'also known as Pakistan Day' I therefore thought to write something for educating my youth on the significance of this day.
The youth of today must know that Pakistan owes her creation to four erstwhile outstanding Muslim leaders, namely: Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1817-98), Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar (1878-1931), Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948), and Allama Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938). These leaders provided intellectual and political leadership to Indian Muslims during about ninety years (1858-1947) of the British imperial rule on the Sub-continent.
It is important for them to also know that in the beginning all of these aforementioned leaders were thorough-bred nationalists at one time or another. By being nationalist means they were the proponents of a united India. Now it should not come as a surprise for our young men and women to learn that over the passage of time our leaders got disillusioned with this concept of one united India. The reasons were many. It could have been either because of Hindu ethnocentrism in the late 19th century or Congress`s championing of unitary Hindu nationalism in the 1920s and 1930s.
Now let us focus our discussion exclusively on our great leader and founder of Pakistan 'Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah'. It is very important for the youths to understand the elements of the crest and the troughs in the political leanings and ideologies of Quaid-e-Azam over his long career from 1904 thru 1948. It is interesting to note here that for some seventeen years (1904-1920), he was pro-Congress, pleading the Congress cause and envisioning a truly nationalist destiny for India.
And, still for another sixteen years (1921-37), though he was practically out of Congress as he had joined All India Muslim League in 1920, he was still working for a nationalist destiny. During this period, he was still striving for a Hindu-Muslim settlement and he was still collaborating with the Congress and its leadership for the same. It is also very well known that in pursuit of his mission of Hindu-Muslim unity, he had devised several constitutional formulae, but all to no avail. It is also pertinent to mention here that till early 1937, Quaid-e-Azam was still in his "nationalist" self; preaching his credo eloquently and trying miserably to unite Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. For this he was widely known as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity.
Jinnah and Kashmir
The Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah thanked the National Conference leadership for the right royal reception given to him but at the same time said that it was not a reception for his person, but to the All India Muslim League, the party of ten crore Muslims of India of which he was President. This annoyed the Hindu leader so much that he left the stage in distress. According to Mr. Justice Yusuf Saraf, author of “Kashmiris Fight for Freedom” the Quaid-e-Azam and his wife seemed to have had visited Kashmir for the first time before 1929. Though this visit was private in nature, yet as a great Muslim leader he felt concerned at the appalling conditions of the Kashmiris at that time too.
The second visit of the Quaid-e-Azam was in 1936 during which he hinted to his first visit, saying that he had visited Kashmir ten years earlier too. In 1936 the Quaid-e-Azam addressed a meeting held in connection with Milad-un-Nabi, the birthday of the Holy Prophet (SAW) at the Mujahid Manzil, Srinagar. The Muslim Conference (at that point of time was led by Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas and Sheikh Abdullah) in welcome address to Jinnah appreciated his role as lover of Hindu-Muslim unity. Mr. Jinnah reciprocated the sentiments and said that the Muslims were in majority in Kashmir but it was their duty to ensure that the minority community that is, the Hindus of Kashmir would get justice and fair play at the hands of the majority community of Kashmir.
Mr.Jinnah, who was once proclaimed as ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity, had been disillusioned by that time and in his speech regretted that some of the leaders of the majority community in British India had not been able to give such an assurance to the Muslim minority. That showed that the Quaid-e-Azam was not satisfied with the concept of Hindu-Muslim unity in British India.
The Muslim Conference, which represented the Muslims of the State 1936, was converted into National Conference in 1939 as its leaders had come under the influence of Nehru. Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas, who had joined hand with Sheikh Abdullah in 1939 to found National Conference, realized his mistake within three years. He returned to the Muslim Conference, which had been revived by 14 other leaders from Jammu and Kashmir. Soon many others joined the revived Muslim Conference and once again it became a force to reckon with.
The main and the last visit of the Quaid-e-Azam to the State of Jammu and Kashmir took place in 1944. During this visit he attended a reception by the National Conference headed by Sheikh Abdullah. Sheikh Abdullah had thought that with the help of Dogra administration and the active and crafty Hindus he would suppress the pro-Muslim League elements in the State and assure Mr. Jinnah that the Kashmiris, Hindus as well as Muslims, were believers in One Nation Theory of the Congress. A Hindu nationalist Jialal Kilam presented the address of welcome to the Quaid-e-Azam. The Quaid-e-Azam thanked the National Conference leadership for the right royal reception given to him but at the same time said that it was not a reception for his person, but to the All India Muslim League, the party of ten crore Muslims of India of which he was President. This annoyed the Hindu leader so much that he left the stage in distress.
The second visit of the Quaid-e-Azam was in 1936 during which he hinted to his first visit, saying that he had visited Kashmir ten years earlier too. In 1936 the Quaid-e-Azam addressed a meeting held in connection with Milad-un-Nabi, the birthday of the Holy Prophet (SAW) at the Mujahid Manzil, Srinagar. The Muslim Conference (at that point of time was led by Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas and Sheikh Abdullah) in welcome address to Jinnah appreciated his role as lover of Hindu-Muslim unity. Mr. Jinnah reciprocated the sentiments and said that the Muslims were in majority in Kashmir but it was their duty to ensure that the minority community that is, the Hindus of Kashmir would get justice and fair play at the hands of the majority community of Kashmir.
Mr.Jinnah, who was once proclaimed as ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity, had been disillusioned by that time and in his speech regretted that some of the leaders of the majority community in British India had not been able to give such an assurance to the Muslim minority. That showed that the Quaid-e-Azam was not satisfied with the concept of Hindu-Muslim unity in British India.
The Muslim Conference, which represented the Muslims of the State 1936, was converted into National Conference in 1939 as its leaders had come under the influence of Nehru. Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas, who had joined hand with Sheikh Abdullah in 1939 to found National Conference, realized his mistake within three years. He returned to the Muslim Conference, which had been revived by 14 other leaders from Jammu and Kashmir. Soon many others joined the revived Muslim Conference and once again it became a force to reckon with.
Quaid-e-Azam's speech before the Constituent Assembly in the context of Two Nation Theory
The Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah during his first address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on 11th August, 1947 said:
“We are all citizens and equal citizens of one state….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.”1
Those who do not have full grasp of the Two-Nation Theory are often misled by the phrase used by the Quaid when he said, “Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims.” They wrongly infer from these words that the Quaid’s vision of Pakistan was that of a secular state in which religion would have no role to play. In this way they mistakenly by wish to hoodwink the people that with the creation of Pakistan the Quaid had given up his affiliation with the Ideology of Islam which he so vehemently asserted before the creation of Pakistan. This mistaken view has already witnessed dangerous interpretations. Therefore, it is not surprising when people of much high caliber as Mr. Justice Mohammad Munir, the former Chief Justice of Pakistan, in his book from Jinnah to Zia while referring to the said speech of the Quaid has observed:
“The pattern of Government which the Quaid-i-Azam had in mind was a secular democratic government.”2
The pre-political phase of the Two-Nation Theory should not be confused with its post-political era. Evidentially, before the creation of an Islamic State, the Muslims and the non-Muslims are two different and distinct nations. The Muslims, in every respect, are a nation, irrespective and independent of geographical boundaries and racial or linguistic bonds. Their religion governs them in every walk of life. In their socio-economic solidarity they have not to be dependent on the state legislation. State legislation is just transcendence of the comprehensive and complete code of life laid down by the Holy Quran and the Holy Sunnah of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam).
Islam provides intellectual foundation for the institutional organization of mankind; whereas territorial nationalism based on geographic, linguistic and racial affinities lead to spiritual paralysis and material superiorities of colour, language, territory, tribe and heritage. Territorial nationalism makes impossible the universal brotherhood of mankind. The motto of Muslim Nationhood in the expression of the Unity of God (Taied-e-Ilahi) in thought and action in accordance with the Will of God. Despite everything else the word country (watan) as a term of Geography is not contrary to Islam. Love of Motherland is a natural sentiment. But when the word country is used as a concept of Political Science, it comes into conflict with Islam, for Islam is itself a comprehensive principle of institutional organization.
“We are all citizens and equal citizens of one state….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.”1
Those who do not have full grasp of the Two-Nation Theory are often misled by the phrase used by the Quaid when he said, “Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims.” They wrongly infer from these words that the Quaid’s vision of Pakistan was that of a secular state in which religion would have no role to play. In this way they mistakenly by wish to hoodwink the people that with the creation of Pakistan the Quaid had given up his affiliation with the Ideology of Islam which he so vehemently asserted before the creation of Pakistan. This mistaken view has already witnessed dangerous interpretations. Therefore, it is not surprising when people of much high caliber as Mr. Justice Mohammad Munir, the former Chief Justice of Pakistan, in his book from Jinnah to Zia while referring to the said speech of the Quaid has observed:
“The pattern of Government which the Quaid-i-Azam had in mind was a secular democratic government.”2
The pre-political phase of the Two-Nation Theory should not be confused with its post-political era. Evidentially, before the creation of an Islamic State, the Muslims and the non-Muslims are two different and distinct nations. The Muslims, in every respect, are a nation, irrespective and independent of geographical boundaries and racial or linguistic bonds. Their religion governs them in every walk of life. In their socio-economic solidarity they have not to be dependent on the state legislation. State legislation is just transcendence of the comprehensive and complete code of life laid down by the Holy Quran and the Holy Sunnah of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam).
Islam provides intellectual foundation for the institutional organization of mankind; whereas territorial nationalism based on geographic, linguistic and racial affinities lead to spiritual paralysis and material superiorities of colour, language, territory, tribe and heritage. Territorial nationalism makes impossible the universal brotherhood of mankind. The motto of Muslim Nationhood in the expression of the Unity of God (Taied-e-Ilahi) in thought and action in accordance with the Will of God. Despite everything else the word country (watan) as a term of Geography is not contrary to Islam. Love of Motherland is a natural sentiment. But when the word country is used as a concept of Political Science, it comes into conflict with Islam, for Islam is itself a comprehensive principle of institutional organization.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Gandhi and Jinnah - a study in contrasts
An extract from the book that riled India's Bharatiya Janata Party and led to the expulsion of its author Jaswant Singh, one of the foun...
-
Reply to the Civic Address presented by the Quetta Municipality on I5th June, 1948. I thank you for your address of welcome and for the ki...
-
Speech on the Inauguration of the Pakistan Constituent Assembly on 14th August, 1947 Your Excellency, I thank His Majesty the King on behalf...