When, on that rare occasion, we have heading this country a liberal man who preaches tolerance and who tells us that Pakistan was envisioned by its founder as a modern, free-thinking, liberal, secular state, in jump the mulla-maulvi faction, the obscurantists, the thesis writers, the great thinkers, some of whom were not even a gleam in their mother's eye when Jinnah was around, who flail their arms and shriek 'treason' at the word secular, and who with their narrow-minded thinking, intolerance and bigotry claim falsely that they are 'Islamic'. In a recent interview with Newsweek, Musharraf spelt out his vision of what Pakistan's founder had in mind for his country, a vision he intended to bring to material form. Naturally, editorials were written expressing horror, protests poured in from all sides, and then entered his obsequious spokespeople with the inevitable 'clarification'. And so it will continue, for much time to come, for as long as this nation is kept illiterate and uneducated and unable to reason, think, look around at the world it inhabits, and comprehend what it must do to fit into it. But we must never give up; we must continue to press home the points pressed by the man who gave this nation a homeland.
Three months before the partition of the subcontinent, in an interview with Doon Campbell of Reuters, Jinnah firmly stated: "The new state will be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of religion, caste or creed." He repeated this on August 11, 1947, whilst addressing the members of his Constituent Assembly, making it doubly clear to them that religion is not the business of the state. He told them: "You are free, free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State." He could not have been more explicit.
Our learned men have it that the first steps taken in the Republic of Pakistan towards the framing of a constitution was the moving of the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly on March 7, 1949, by the prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan. The view is that this Resolution was intended to be a mish-mash of the general principles of an 'Islamic' state and the accepted concepts of a modern 'democratic' state. What the mish-mash has resulted in is a variety of conflicting interpretations, the orthodox and the obscurantists claiming that the Islamic tenets dominate and the more progressive, forward-looking plumbing for the democratic parliamentary way of governance.
When it was moved, the non-Muslim members of the Assembly expressed their fears that were the Resolution to be passed maulanas would gain the upper hand, and some questioned the phrase stipulating that the "state will exercise authority within the limits provided by Him." What are the limits proscribed by God, they asked, and who will define those limits? Will it be the mullas or the gentlemen of a more liberal bent of mind? Could a non-Muslim become the head of state, for example? Liaquat Ali Khan's response was rather ambivalent--in an Islamic state, he said, it would be "absolutely wrong to say that a non-Muslim cannot be the head of administration under a constitutional government." Maulanas held differently and firmly : "The Islamic state means a state which is run on the exalted and excellent principles of Islam [and it] can be run only by those who believe in those principles....".
Dispute and divergence of view, disagreement and differences from day one. Yet, the honourable gentlemen of the Assembly, most of whom must have been present on August 11, 1947, when Mohammad Ali Jinnah laid down for them the principles which he wished to be embodied in the constitution of his country, took it upon themselves that day to repudiate the man responsible for putting them where they were.
Hasan Zaheer, of the erstwhile all-powerful CSP, in his book 'The Separation of East Pakistan', writing on constitution making, has this to say on the contentious Resolution: "Liaquat Ali Khan, while moving the Objectives Resolution, claimed that since it provided for the exercise of power and authority of the state 'through the chosen representatives of the people', the Resolution naturally eliminates any danger of the establishment of a theocracy.
Little did he realize the opening that the Resolution was giving to the obscurantists and what the Munir Report called 'political brigands and adventurers, even nonentities' to exploit the name of Islam in mundane political affairs and jolt the foundations of the state from time to time. None of the three covenants of the Muslims of the subcontinent, which spelled out the unanimous demand for a separate Muslim homeland, or homelands--the Lahore Resolution of 1940, the Madras Resolution of 1941, and the Pakistan Resolution of the Legislators' Convention of 1946--or the debates leading to these resolutions had mentioned anything about an Islamic state. Over the years, the Resolution proved a perennially divisive point of reference in the polity of Pakistan."
It is this Resolution which forms the preamble to the Constitution of 1973, and it is this Resolution which, as Article 2A, is a substantive part of the Constitution, and which has more than proven that it is indeed not only highly divisive but also destructive. And, to boot, our great makers, breakers and amenders cannot even get it right. In the preamble, in one sentence, the original resolution has been adhered to: "Wherein adequate provision shall be made for the minorities freely to profess and practise their religions and develop their cultures;" whereas in Article 2A which forms the Annex to the Constitution in the very same sentence the word "freely" has been omitted. Whether this was done wittingly or unwittingly is not known, but the question is that after the passage of 16 years since 2A was inserted by PO No.14 of 1985 why has it not been corrected? Is there a motive behind the omission of the highly pertinent and important word? Were our amenders plain sloppy, or were they wicked? Musharraf rode in on horseback, and now is riding high. So far he is on the right track. His reflexes are sound. He has not yet heard messages from on high. But he does need to shun the oleaginous perennial sycophants who equate being with him as being in the presence of greatness, or who praise him fulsomely for his penetrating mind, his iron resolve, his calm demeanour. He does not need to be glorified or exalted. He needs to be supported. REFERENCE: Back to Jinnah By Ardeshir Cowasjee 03 February 2002 Sunday 19 Ziqa'ad 1422 http://archives.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/20020203.htm
Dr Safdar Mehmood & Haroon ur Rasheed have been trying their best so construct a bridge between Secular Jinnah & Deobandi Scholar Ashraf Ali Thanvi to Islamize Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Pakistan, and each time Dr Safdar Mehmood & Haroon ur Rasheed create/concoct a lie to achieve the desired result ends up in more confusion. Pakistani Scholars are strange, they have several version of Ideologies/Islam to concoct Alleged Islamic Ideologies of Pakistan e.g. on Blasphemy Law they follow Traditionalists, while executing/implementing the Blasphemy Law these ideologues target the most marginalized section of the society i.e. Minorities whereas spare Blatant Blasphemers within the Mullah Community (Deobandi, Barelvi, Shia books are riddled with Blasphemy and their Mullahs often resort to worst kind of Blasphemy in the name of respective Fiqh), same Ideologues adopt a criminal silence on the practice of Blatant and Brazen Apostasy/Disbelief e.g. Practice of Sorcery openly in Pakistan & Promoted through Pakistani TV Channels. Above mentioned Alleged Scholars shamelessly quote Apostate Masnoor Hallaj & Blasphemer Ali Hajweri in their Daily Jang Column without any check or any threat of use of Blasphemy Law from any quarter for quoting Blasphemous Sufis. Dr Safdar & Haroon ur Rasheed & their partners in crime e.g. Mujib ur Rehamn Shami (Dunya TV) and Irfan Siddiqui (Daily Jang) take one more giant step they often praise Mawdudi (Founder of Jamat-e-Islami) whose Blasphemous Views on Prophets (Peace be upon them) & Companions of Prophet Mohammad (May Allah be pleased with all of them) are not a secret. Irony is that Dr Safdar/Haroon ur Rasheed are praising Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi & Jinnah's alleged connections, conveniently forget about the Religious Edicts (Fatwas), Books, even Fatwa of Apostasy issued by the very same Deobandi Scholars on Mawdudi and Jamat-e-Islami. It is requested that Dr Safdar Mehmood & Haroon ur Rasheed would also reveal the Fatwa of Apostasy against Jinnah and Fellow Alleged Founders of Pakistan, and Fatwas were issued by Barelvi, Deobandi, Jamat-e-Islami Scholars.
http://jang.com.pk/jang/feb2012-daily/22-02-2012/col2.htm
Tuesday, February 14, 2012, Rabi-ul-Awal 21, 1433 A.H.
http://jang.com.pk/jang/feb2012-daily/14-02-2012/col2.htm
Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Deoband & Sex Education - 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hig1M3JkT3Y
Imdaad as-Sulook
Quote 1: Imdadus Sulook, p.27, story no. 3 - “Once, a person of Kashf went to the mazaar (tomb) of Hazrat Haji Sahib (Dhaamin) to recite al-Fatihah there. After reciting al-Fatihah he said, “Brother! Who is this esteemed man? He seems to be a very jolly person. When I began to recite al-Fatihah, he said to me, “Go and read al-Fatihah for a dead man. You have come here to recite al-Fatihah on the living. What is this matter?” Thereafter, I was informed by people that the person in the grave was a shaheed (martyr). REFERENCE: http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/index.html
Imdaad al-Mushtaq
Quote 1: Imdaad al-Mushtaq p.8 - Moulana Zakariyah says: “Once he (Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) saw in a dream that he could not lift his feet on account of the awe, which pervaded his being. Suddenly, his honorable ancestor, Mulla Bulaqi appeared and taking hold of Haji Sahib’s hand, presented him to Rasoolullah. In turn, Rasoolullah took hold of his (Haji Sahib’s) hand and assigned him into the care of Shaikh Mashaikh Hazrat Mia’nji Nur Muhammad.
Quote 2: Imdaad al-Mushtaq p.9 - Moulana Zakariyah says: “He (Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) withdrew himself from the midst of people and wandered in the wilderness of Punjab, which became his home… He would refrain from eating for up to eight days. Not a grain would go down his throat in these periods of self-imposed starvation.”
Quote 3: Imdad al-Mushtaq, p.62 - Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi said, “He (Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) used to say that the human being is outwardly a slave and inwardly (Batini) the Haqq (Allah).” Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi further elaborates, “The batin is the reality which is manifest in the human, and the batin should not be considered a part of the human…” REFERENCE: http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/index.html
Malfoozat Moulana Ilyaas
Quote 1: Malfoozat Moulana Ilyaas, p.50 - Moulana Ilyas said, “Hazrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi has done a great service (to the religion). It is my heart’s desire that the teachings should be his and the Manhaj (methodology) of Dawah (propagation) be mine, so that this way his teachings become well-known.” REFERENCE: http://www.ahya.org/tjonline/quotes/index.html
No comments:
Post a Comment