Imran Khan, Sufis, Imam Ghazali, Hanafi School of Thought and Jinnah

The truth is stranger than fiction. As a born again Muslim in the sufi tradition, Imran Khan is a deeply religious and superstitious type even if his antics as a notorious playboy are sometimes in conflict with that reality. This means he is susceptible to all sorts of manipulation and suggestion. For years now, his spiritual advisors have been telling him what to do and what not to do in order to become the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Bushra Manika, better known as Pinki Pirni, is the latest of these advisors. She was married to a civil servant Khawar Fareed Manika who had a bit of reputation when it came to corruption but he and his wife became devotees to the Sufi Saint Baba Farid Ganj Baksh. A couple of years ago, she is rumored to have tried to hitch up Imran Khan with her sister but that did not work out. Reham Khan, the dignified former wife of Khan who was married for precisely one year, swears by the fact that her marriage was sabotaged by Pinki Pirni. The dogged insistence by Imran Khan that he should both marry and divorce Reham on 31 October seems to lend credence to this. The story then goes, and it remains unchallenged by the Manikas, is that Pinki Pirni is said to have had a dream where the most holy personage in Islam told her that for Imran Khan to be Prime Minister, she must marry him and if she does, both Pakistan and Islam will truly prosper. Pinki Pirni then narrated this to her husband who agreed to give her a divorce for the sake of the cause of Islam in Pakistan. References: Imran Khan’s desire to seek signs to guide his life seems more like a mental illness 20 February, 2018 https://theprint.in/opinion/imran-khans-signs-to-guide-life-seems-like-mental-illness/36783/ Why progressives should support Khan NOVEMBER 6, 2011 https://dailytimes.com.pk/110965/why-progressives-should-support-khan/ Defending Imran Khan NOVEMBER 20, 2011 https://dailytimes.com.pk/110884/defending-imran-khan/ Imam Ghazali and the 2nd Amendment - Freedom of conscience cannot be denied under Islam and ijmah cannot be enforced on an individual FEBRUARY 12, 2018 https://dailytimes.com.pk/199973/imam-ghazali-2nd-amendment/

Imran Khan is Muhammad Ali Jinnah (Roedad Khan) 

Just as he began as a cricketer, dismissed as without talent who would never bowl fast, in politics too Imran Khan was dismissed with nothing but prejudice and contempt. He took each humiliation, insult and used it as a stepping stone to that ultimate triumph that now is only a matter of time. History, dear readers, is replete with such examples of persistence and courage; Jinnah being the last example from our recent history. Reference: OP-ED Why progressives should support Khan NOVEMBER 6, 2011 (Daily Times) Not that Imran Khan needs me to defend him but the intemperate attacks on him by certain quarters leave me no choice but to attempt to set the record straight. I can assure you, dear readers, that the impression created by some writers is nothing but a warped caricature of the only person in politics who is not just incorruptible but a selfless first rate humanist, one that this country is lucky to have at this critical juncture in its fragile democratic evolution. Anyone familiar with my writings in this newspaper and other places knows that I stand for a secular liberal Pakistan as envisaged by Muhammad Ali Jinnah. I, therefore, do not quite agree with Imran Khan’s analysis of why Pakistan was created but I also understand that a debate about history is often lost in semantics. So is the case with politics. I support Imran Khan. Reference: OP-ED Defending Imran Khan NOVEMBER 20, 2011 Daily Times)

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian was a Sufi said Javed Ahmad Ghamidi

In the last years of Iqbal’s life, just before his death in 1938, there was a series of fascinating interactions between him and Jinnah. Iqbal seemed to be drawing Jinnah into his world, and Jinnah seemed to be moving inexorably towards it. There seems to have formed between them a spiritual connection that resulted in the passing of the flame from one to the other. The eight letters Iqbal wrote to Jinnah between 1936 and 1937 and Jinnah’s foreword to them help us to understand the relationship. In his foreword Jinnah calls Iqbal “the sage, philosopher and national poet of Islam,” acknowledging his role as a spiritual mentor. In a letter written on 21 June 1937, shortly before he died, Iqbal identified Jinnah as the leader Muslims had been waiting for: “You are the only Muslim in India today to whom the community has a right to look up for safe guidance through the storm which is coming to North-West India, and perhaps to the whole of India.” References: The man who shaped Jinnah’s Islam - The question of the origins of Jinnah’s Islam is not merely a theoretical one, but one with practical implications for an entire nation by Akbar Ahmed DECEMBER 30, 2017 https://dailytimes.com.pk/170055/man-shaped-jinnahs-islam/ The author has discussed Allama Iqbal's Correspondence with Jinnah in his book "Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity: The Search for Saladin" https://www.amazon.com/Jinnah-Pakistan-Islamic-Identity-Saladin/dp/0415149665

Letters Of Eqbal To Jinnah
https://ia601601.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.71796/2015.71796.Letters-Of-Eqbal-To-Jinnah.pdf  (Foreword by Jinnah himself)  --- EXCERPT: Iqbal’s letter to Jinnah September 11, 2011 https://www.dawn.com/news/658190 Two letters from Iqbal to Jinnah (1937) http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/txt_iqbal_tojinnah_1937.html

Jinnah as a Spiritual Disciple of Spiritual Saint Allama Iqbal (as explained by Akbar Ahmed)

Jinnah was not Iqbal’s first choice to lead the Muslims (Published: November 17, 2016 https://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/43059/jinnah-was-not-iqbals-first-choice-to-lead-the-muslims/ )

Letters Of Eqbal To Jinnah https://ia601601.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.71796/2015.71796.Letters-Of-Eqbal-To-Jinnah.pdf  (Foreword by Jinnah himself) 

Late Justice (R) Javed Iqbal s/o Allama Iqbal on his Father and Jinnah

Jinnah was not Iqbal’s first choice to lead the Muslims (Published: November 17, 2016 https://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/43059/jinnah-was-not-iqbals-first-choice-to-lead-the-muslims/ )

Letters Of Eqbal To Jinnah https://ia601601.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.71796/2015.71796.Letters-Of-Eqbal-To-Jinnah.pdf  (Foreword by Jinnah himself)

Mr Munib Iqbal on his grandfather Allama Iqbal and Jinnah

Jinnah was not Iqbal’s first choice to lead the Muslims (Published: November 17, 2016 https://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/43059/jinnah-was-not-iqbals-first-choice-to-lead-the-muslims/ )

Letters Of Eqbal To Jinnah https://ia601601.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.71796/2015.71796.Letters-Of-Eqbal-To-Jinnah.pdf  (Foreword by Jinnah himself) 

 Jinnah calls Iqbal “the sage, philosopher and national poet of Islam

People often quote Islamic Scholars & Theologian Sufis of Classical Islamic Era to plead the case of Secularism and even if that was not enough they use those scholars e.g. Imam Ghazali and Hanafi School of thought to plead the case of the most marginalized and persecuted Ahmadi community in Pakistan and they are least bothered to at least conduct a proper enquiry into the original work of these Scholars. Imam Ghazali not only supported the Death Sentence for the Apostates but also supported the killing of Mansoor Al Hallaj for Blasphemy and that is not the end he also considered Avicenna, Farabi, Muʿtazila (Rationalists) , Qadariyah as Apostates and Death Deserving, and showered praise for Yazid bin Muawiya (References: Ihya' Ulum al-Din or Ihya'u Ulumiddin (The Revival of Religious Sciences) & Al-Munqidh Min Al-Dalal (Rescuer from Error) . Similarly Hanafi Law Declares that Apostasy is Punishable by Death and also consider Rationalists (Muʿtazila) and Qadariyah as Apostate & death deserving (Reference: Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar, a basic book on Hanafi School of Thought) and it is further mentioned here that those who suggest Abbasid's Rule and their System of Governance for the modern Muslim State , should know that Abbasid's persecuted Imam Abu Hanifa and some report suggest that Imam Abu Hanifa was poisoned by the Abbasid Caliph Al Mansoor (Reference: Biography of Abu Ḥanifa by Muhammad Abu Zahra (1898–1974) - Al-Hidayah by Burhanuddin Marghinani is an Authentic Hanafi Book according to it Apostasy is Punishable by Death (Page 40 Volume 7) - Fatawa-e-Alamgiri is an Authentic Hanafi Book of Jurisprudence & according to it Apostasy is Punishable by Death (Page 434 Volume 3) Radd al-Muhtar ala al-Dur al-Mukhtar (Muhammad Amin Ibn Abidin Ash-Shami) is a Hanafi book and according to the book, Apostasy is punishable by Death (Page 506 to 509 Volume 2) ! This is how our Liberal & Secular people are presenting the case of marginalized Ahmadi Community! What next? Imam Ibn Taymiyyah & the 2nd Amendment?

Imam Ghazali and Yazid bin Muawiya

The author below (in Daily Times Column) is quoting a Quote by labeling it as a Hadith (Tradition) to plead the case of Secularism via Hanafi Fiqh to rationalize Jinnah's Confusion on Islam and Democracy. Whereas the reality of this quote is "Quote" A baseless hadith "Disagreement among my ummah is a mercy" --> " Disagreement among my ummah is a mercy " (BASELESS) The muhadditheen have tried to find an isnaad for it but have not found one, to the extent that Suyooti said in his "al-Jaami' as-Sagheer" : " Perhaps it was collected in one of the books of the huffaadh which did not reach us " ! This suggestion is very far-fetched. since it would mean that some of the sayings of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم) have been lost to the ummah forever, something which is not permissable for a Muslim to believe . Manaawi quoted Subki as saying : "It (i.e. the saying) is not known to the muhadditheen, and I can not find any isnaad for it, whether authentic (saheeh), weak (da'eef) or fabricated (mawdoo) " , and this was endorsed by Sheikh Zakareeyah al-Ansaari in his notes on tafseer al-Baidaawi (92-2) . Further, the meaning of this hadith is also incorrect as shown by the verifying scholars, hence Ibn Hazm says in al-Ihkam fi Usool al-Ahkam (5-64) after indicating that it is not a hadith : " This is one of the most incorrect sayings possible, since if disagreement (ikhtilaf) was a mercy, then agreement would be punishment, something which no Muslim would say, because there can be only agreement or disagreement, and there can only be mercy or punishment " . This saying also contradicts the Quraan, which has condemned ikhtilaf in many places . "Un-Quote"

On the contrary he argues that the only way a religious society — especially one with deepseated divisions such as Muslim society and one with differences of opinion- blessing according to one Hadith albeit a weak one — can remain strong is if there is a secular state presiding over it. This is what makes secularism and Sharia perfectly compatible with each other and makes the pursuit a secular state a religious imperative for all Muslim majority countries. References: A secular state is a religious imperative - Why this nervousness that the future constitution shall be in conflict with Shariat laws — Mr Jinnah FEBRUARY 9, 2018 https://dailytimes.com.pk/198180/secular-state-religious-imperative/  Imam Ghazali and the 2nd Amendment Freedom of conscience cannot be denied under Islam and ijmah cannot be enforced on an individual FEBRUARY 12, 2018  https://dailytimes.com.pk/199973/imam-ghazali-2nd-amendment/

Pathological Liar, Orya Maqbool Jan & Jinnah

To repeat (and it bears repetition ad nauseam), when Jinnah addressed the first constituent assembly of the country on August 11 1947 he embodied in his speech the core of his philosophy, his ideas, and his vision for the state he had founded. It was a fine piece of rhetoric; too fine, too moral, too democratic, too liberal, too full of justice, too idealistic for the Philistines. This speech has been interpreted in many different ways, it has been subject to distortion, it has inspired fear in successive governments, which would have been far happier had it never been delivered. It is to the misfortune of the people of this country that their so-called leaders have refused to live with, or up to, the principles by which Jinnah wished them to be guided. It is a matter of national shame that, from top to bottom, the citizens of this country live in dread of contamination by the truth - such is the measure of self-deception, insecurity, disunity, indiscipline, and faithlessness.

 On August 11, 1947, before the flag of Pakistan had even been unfurled, Jinnah told his people and their future legislators:

 "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. As you know, history shows that in England conditions some time ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some states in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one state. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the nation. Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal.....".

 [This particular passage has been subject to deliberate distortion and misinterpretation, inspiring the dishonest dogmatists who misappropriated the country after his death with such fear and unease that in the official biography of Jinnah commissioned by the Government of Pakistan, written by Hector Bolitho, published in 1954, it was censored to falsely read: ".....You may belong to any religion or caste or creed - that has nothing to do with the fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State..... Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal....". (Most of the above passages were ommitted).] REFERENCE: The sole statesman BY ARDESHIR COWASJEE (18-06-2000) http://www.dawn.com/news/1072301/the-sole-statesman

 JINNAH - Creator of Pakistan by Hector Bolitho http://www.scribd.com/doc/195835640/JINNAH-Creator-of-Pakistan-by-Hector-Bolitho

JINNAH - Creator of Pakistan by Hector Bolitho by Aamir Mughal

Pathological lying (PL) is a controversial topic. There is, as yet, no consensus in the psychiatric community on its definition, although there is general agreement on its core elements. PL is characterized by a long history (maybe lifelong) of frequent and repeated lying for which no apparent psychological motive or external benefit can be discerned. While ordinary lies are goal-directed and are told to obtain external benefit or to avoid punishment, pathological lies often appear purposeless. In some cases, they might be self-incriminating or damaging, which makes the behavior even more incomprehensible. Despite its relative obscurity, PL has been recognized and written about in the psychiatric literature for more than a century. The German physician, Anton Delbruck,1 is credited with being the first to describe the concept of PL. He observed that some of his patients told lies that were so abnormal and out of proportion that they deserved a special category. He sub-sequently described the lies as "pseu- dologia phantastica." Reference: Pathological Lying: Symptom or Disease? By Charles C Dike, MD, MPH, MRCPsych June 01, 2008 http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/articles/pathological-lying-symptom-or-disease

For sake of clarity a full paragraph from Will Durant's voluminous Story of Civilization is reproduced here from which OMJ picked up a quotation: "Writing continued, even to the nineteenth century, to play a very small part in Indian education. Perhaps it was not to the interest of the priests that the sacred or scholastic texts should become an open secret to all. As far as we can trace Indian history, we find a system of education, always in the hands of the clergy, open at first only to the sons of Brahmans, then spreading its privileges from caste to caste until in our time it excludes only the Untouchables. Every Hindu village had its schoolmaster, supported out of the public funds; in Bengal alone, before the coming of the British, there were some 80,000 native schools — one to every four hundred population. The percentage of literacy under Ashoka was apparently higher than in India today." Will Durant in this section was discussing the education system in ancient India but OMJ picked up a Bengal-related sentence and forcibly linked it with the Mughal period to create a misleading impression. Intellectual honesty demanded that OMJ should have also told his readers what Will Durant wrote in the same book about the Muslim rulers in India. For instance, Durant writes about our hero idol-smasher: "Each winter Mahmud descended into India, filled his treasure chest with spoils, and amused his men with full freedom to pillage and kill; each spring he returned to his capital richer than before." We are told that the idol breaker would sometimes spare the population of the ravaged cities and "took them home to be sold as slaves; but so great was the number of such captives that after some years no one could be found to offer more than a few shillings for a slave." Similarly referring to other rulers of the pre-Mughal era, Durant writes, "There was constantly in front of his royal pavilion and his Civil Court a mound of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while the sweepers and executioners were wearied out by their work of dragging the victims and putting them to death in crowds." OMJ fondly mentions Firoz Shah about whom Durant writes, "Firoz Shah invaded Bengal, offered a reward for every Hindu head, paid for 180,000 of them, raided Hindu villages for slaves." Similarly, Sultan Ahmad Shah is said to have feasted for three days whenever the number of defenceless Hindus slain in his territories in one day reached 20,000. Based on such numerous examples, Durant says, "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilisation is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." Durant in his work appreciates the art and sculpture of India. However, he laments, "We shall never be able to do justice to Indian art, for ignorance and fanaticism have destroyed its greatest achievements, and have half ruined the rest." OMJ in his concluding lines makes a passing reference to Lord Cornwallis, accusing him of establishing a religious seminary in 1781 to destroy educational system of Muslim rulers. Interestingly, in 1781, Major General Cornwallis was in America with a mixed record against rebel colonists culminating in the capitulation of his force at Yorktown and came to India in 1786. Cornwallis, however, is credited with establishing an institution that OMJ never found detestable: the Indian Civil Service. Hope our former deputy commissioner would be more careful with both dates and facts of history. The writer teaches public policy in the UK and is the founding member of the Rationalist Society of Pakistan. REFERENCES: OVER A COFFEE : Postcard for Orya Maqbool Jan — Dr Haider Shah October 27, 2012 http://archives.dailytimes.com.pk/editorial/27-Oct-2012/over-a-coffee-postcard-for-orya-maqbool-jan-dr-haider-shah OVER A COFFEE : History telling the Nasim Hijazi way — Dr Haider Shah December 01, 2012 http://archives.dailytimes.com.pk/editorial/01-Dec-2012/over-a-coffee-history-telling-the-nasim-hijazi-way-dr-haider-shah Orya Maqbool Jan on Jinnah's 11 th August 1947 Speech (Daily Dunya) http://dunya.com.pk/news/authors/detail_image/x5529_16461313.jpg.pagespeed.ic.pvzOK79idJ.jpg

Mr. Jinnah has been the subject of onslaught by both the right and the left- both want to paint a beard on Jinnah. Both have repeatedly failed. But the difference between the left and the right is that the left at least does not deny facts. For example a leftist will not claim that Jinnah’s 11 August speech never existed or that it did not speak of a secular state. Not true of Orya Maqbool Jan, a right wing crook and liar who is also in the civil service. In his most recent column, the Orya claims that Jinnah in fact never made the 11 August Speech because he could not find any reference in the newspapers. Typical. First a civil servant Ch. Muhammad Ali stopped it from being released and now a civil servant claims – see it never existed. Well here is the problem for crooks and liars like Orya Maqbool Jan – the Pakistan Constituent Assembly record DOES exist. I refer to Jinnah Papers Volume IV Appendix IX, Item 4: President’s address. Reference: Lying Orya Maqbool Jan caught with his pants down December 30th, 2013 By Yasser Latif Hamdani The 11 August speech is there in full as is precisely how it is quoted. And since Mr. Jan goes by media coverage here is http://pakteahouse.net/2013/12/30/lying-orya-maqbool-jan-caught-with-his-pants-down/

THE HINDU from 12 August 1947: Jinnah's 11 August, 1947 Speech: Assurance to Minority Communities (Editorial from The Hindu) http://www.scribd.com/doc/110861031/Jinnah-s-11-August-1947-Speech-Assurance-to-Minority-Communities-Editorial-from-The-Hindu

Jinnah's 11 August, 1947 Speech: Assurance to Minority Communities (Editorial from The Hindu) by Aamir Mughal

Professor Hassan Jafar Zaidi on Pakistan: Why & How ? (BBC)

 

Professor Hassan Jafar Zaidi on Pakistan: Why... by SalimJanMazari

Pakistan Kaisay Bana 1 http://www.scribd.com/doc/164495795/Pakistan-Kaisay-Bana-1 Pakistan Kaisay Bana 2 http://www.scribd.com/doc/164514092/Pakistan-Kaisay-Bana-2 Fallacies of History http://afsana3.tripod.com/id34.html

Hassan Jafar Zaidi, a renowned historian, is professionally an engineer, yet his passion is history and political analysis. He graduated from UET, Lahore in Electrical Engineering in 1974, but started contributing political analysis in the weekly Nusrat in 1970, and then on continued to write for many Urdu and English newspapers like Daily Musawat and Dawn. He served as Joint-Secretary of Halqa-i-Arbab-i-Zouq, Lahore, a renowned literary forum of Pakistan from 1974 to 1976. Then he devoted to a multi-volume project of research on history of Pakistan and Muslim history. Twelve volumes on Political History of Pakistan; and four volumes on Political History of Muslims have already been published from this project. Another fifteen volumes on Muslim History and ten volumes on the history of sub-continent are under publication. He has been delivering lectures almost every year in LUMS since 1999, on subjects of current interest on politics in international and regional context, and history of sub-continent with special focus on Pakistan. He appears in discussions on different TV channels of national repute. Hassan Jafar Zaidi http://tehqeeq.org/people/

My interpretation of Islam is quite Literal and I follow the Literal Interpretation of Islam , now lets have a look at the claim of those who quote Jinnah's Vision of Islamic Democracy and love to mix Islam with Democracy and I would rely on a Saudi Fatwa (Religious Edict) on Democracy & Democratic System,

"QUOTE"

Democracy is not an Arabic word. Rather it is derived from the Greek, and it is a composite of two words: demos, meaning the masses or the people, and kratia, meaning rule. So what is meant is the rule of the masses or the rule of the people. Democracy is a system that is contrary to Islam, because it gives the power of legislation to the people or to those who represent them (such as members of Parliament). Based on that, in democracy legislative authority is given to someone other than Allah, may He be exalted; rather it is given to the people and their deputies, and what matters is not their consensus but the majority. Thus what the majority agree upon becomes laws that are binding on the nation, even if it is contrary to common sense, religious teaching or reason. Read More Concept of democracy in Islam https://islamqa.info/en/98134 Democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Allaah, the Most High, the Almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being, no matter who he is. It says in Mawsoo’at al-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib al-Mu’aasirah (2/1066, 1067): Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Read More Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system https://islamqa.info/en/107166

"UN-QUOTE"


Leonard Binder wrote,

 "QUOTE"

 The leaders of the Muslim League hoped for much too, but whether through the operation of Islamic law is questionable. Many persons thought they saw an opposite tendency in Jinnah's words at the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan:

 . . . you will find that 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.

 However Jinnah may have felt in August, 1947, the atmosphere had so changed that by the end of January, 1948, he felt compelled to say:

 I cannot understand why this feeling of nervousness that the future constitution of Pakistan is going to be in conflict with Sharl'at Law? There is one section of the people who keep on impressing everybody that the future constitution of Pakistan should be based on the Shari'ah. The other section deliberately want to create mischief and agitate that the Sharl'at Law must be scrapped.

Reference : C.A.P. Debates, Vol. I, no. 2 (Aug. 11, 1947), Dawn, Jan. 26, 1948 (from an address before the Sindh Bar Association, on the occasion of the Prophet Day). Religion & Politics in Pakistan by Leonard Binder (Published 1963, University of California, Los Angeles USA)

 "UN-QUOTE"

 Ayesha Jalal wrote,

 "QUOTE"

 "So long as Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan remained at the helm, the ideologues of an Islamic State in Pakistan had to rest content with symbolic gestures. As a politician who knew the importance of playing to the gallery, Jinnah made references to Islam that were compatible with his secular & democratic vision of a Pakistan with opportunities for all, regardless of caste, community or creed.

Reference: The Struggle for Pakistan: A Muslim Homeland and Global Politics By Ayesha Jalal

 "UN-QUOTE"

 Renowned Secular thinker and Liberal Pakistani Philosopher Mr Khaled Ahmed wrote in his book, Pakistan: Behind The Ideological Mask (Facts about Great Men we dont want to know) Published by Vanguard Press Lahore) that in 1989 the Punjab Government awarded Ghulam Ahmed Perwez posthumously The Tehreek Pakistan Gold Medal, citing his close relationship with Quaid-e-Azam & his contribution to the scheme of Pakistan. There are letters from Quaid testifying to Perwez's advisory capacity to the Quaid. Ghulam Ahmed Perwez important books were Did Quaid-e-Azam Want to Make Pakistan a Secular State, Finality of Prophethood and Ahmadiyya Movement, Reality of Sufism & countless others attacking Several Schools of Thought's very basic beliefs particularly against Deobandis, Shias, Barelvis and Ahl-e-Hadith but his main target was Jamaat-e-Islami, quite an Irony that the man who was with Jinnah later became and Un-Official adviser of General Ayub Khan who declared Ms. Fatima Jinnah an Indian Agent.

 I fully understand the concern of a whole range of intellectuals representing an assortment of liberals and leftists who steadfastly and heroically keep writing that Jinnah was a secularist, he wanted Pakistan to be a secular state or at least an inclusive Muslim state. As far as an inclusive Muslim state is concerned they are right to a point, but they are dead wrong when they assert that Jinnah was a secularist or that he wanted Pakistan to be a secular state. A secularist being defined in terms of a western life style and unorthodox dietary habits is a loose and poor use of the term and concept of secularism. Secularism is a political term which means a separation of religion and state. Except for the 11 August 1947 speech which can reasonably and legitimately be read as one based on secularism there is no such vision or argument in what he said before that day or afterwards that suggests that Hindus and Muslims can be equal citizens of Pakistan. Therefore, one sunny day does not make a summer or more accurately one swallow does not make a summer. In other words, exceptions are not the rule. Jinnah was not in favour of a Muslim state which would institutionalise discrimination against minorities. He thought that Pakistan could be an inclusive Muslim state. Reference: Jinnah’s prerogatives Jinnah enjoyed unique power and authority and thus unique prerogatives. He could make decisions and appointments which other Pakistani leaders would have hesitated to by Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed DECEMBER 10, 2017 https://dailytimes.com.pk/156051/jinnahs-prerogatives/

Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed's Lecture on Jinnah, Secularism and Pakistan (Part - 1)

Why this feeling of nervousness that the future constitution of Pakistan is going to be in conflict with Shariat Laws?… Islamic principles today are as applicable to life as they were 1,300 years ago…. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. Islam has taught equality, justice and fair play to everyone’(Ibid). In the same speech he said: ‘Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines. Islam is also a code for every Muslim which regulates his life and his conduct in even politics and economic and the like…’ (Ibid). Speaking at the Edwards College, Peshawar on 18 April 1948 he described Pakistan’s distinctiveness as ‘Islamic, Muslim rule, as a sovereign independent state’ (Ibid), On 1 July 1948 at the opening ceremony of the State Bank of Pakistan in Karachi he emphasised the importance of, ‘an economic system based on true Islamic concept of equality of manhood and social justice. We will thereby be fulfilling our mission as Muslims and giving to humanity the message of peace which alone can save it and secure the welfare, happiness and prosperity of mankind’ (Ibid). The religious minorities in Pakistan are not a conquered minority and therefore the jizya does not apply them technically. We need to examine how their rights can be guaranteed by an inclusive Muslim state which was enunciated in the Objectives Resolution. Religious minorities in Pakistan are not a conquered minority and therefore the jizya does not apply to them technically. We need to examine how their rights can be guaranteed by an inclusive Muslim state which was enunciated in the Objectives Resolution. Reference Jinnah, Muslims and minorities On 14 August 1947 a distinct shift in Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan from an ostensibly secular to an Islamic was made explicit in his speech to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly by Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed December 14, 2017 https://dailytimes.com.pk/158815/jinnah-muslims-minorities/

Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed's Lecture on Jinnah, Secularism and Pakistan (Part - 2)

 There is enough evidence that Jinnah made contradictory promises just because he wanted to maximise Muslim support. To keep harping on one speech of August 11th 1947, while ignoring how in 1940-47 Jinnah relentlessly kept saying that Hindus and Muslims can never be one nation is wrong. I have already quoted Jinnah in previous articles where he had termed Sharia as the primary source of law for Pakistan, and this was after his August 11th speech. Unless we speak the truth, we will not be able to make Pakistan an inclusive Muslim state. There is ample literature to show how the British master-minded the partition of India, Bengal and the Punjab — a partition which caused the deaths of at least one million Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. Reference Jinnah’a multifarious pledges To keep harping on one speech of August 11th 1947, while ignoring how in 1940-47 Jinnah relentlessly kept saying that Hindus and Muslims can never be one nation is wrong by Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed DECEMBER 23, 2017 https://dailytimes.com.pk/158815/jinnah-muslims-minorities/

Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed's Lecture on Jinnah, Secularism and Pakistan (Part - 3)

Some Recent Speeches and Writings of Mr Jinnah - Compiled by Jamiluddin Ahmad in 1942 by Aamir Mughal on Scribd

Jinnah has become such a symbol of wisdom in the Pakistani society that people visualize Pakistan with his reference. His vision, his agenda, his dream and his ideals, all.remained unaccomplished because he died soon after the independence. It is commonly believed that had he lived some more years, history of Pakistan would have been different. There are few nations who rely so heavily on one individual. No doubt, Jinnah was a great leader of his people. He was a man of integrity and honesty, but to make him an idol and not allow anybody to emerge out of his shadow is pathetic. Every generation has its own dreams and vision which it wants to accomplish without interference. Not imitation but freedom is required to build a new world. Therefore, attempt should not be made to repeat but to make a new history. People should be liberated from the shadow and allow them to flourish in a free atmosphere. Great leaders should be respected but not worshiped. Reference: Jinnah: Making a myth by Mubarak Ali (2 October 2000)
 http://www.sacw.net/aii/MakingJinnah_a_myth.html

Ansar Abbasi, Jang Group and Punjab Text Books.

"Jack of all trades, master of none" is a figure of speech used in reference to a person that is competent with many skills but is not necessarily outstanding in any particular one. The earliest recorded versions of the phrase do not contain the second part. Indeed they are broadly positive in tone. Such a Jack of all trades may be a master of integration, as such an individual knows enough from many learned trades and skills to be able to bring their disciplines together in a practical manner. This person is a generalist rather than a specialist. REFERENCE: Jack of all trades, master of none http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_of_all_trades,_master_of_none

Dr Salam is not the first talented Ahmadi who gave all for his country. One of the founding fathers of Pakistan and one time president of the Muslim League, Sir Zafrullah Khan, whose ideas formed the basis of the Lahore Resolution, who was tasked by Mohammad Ali Jinnah to plead Pakistan’s case before the boundary commission and who was appointed the first foreign minister of Pakistan was similarly shabbily treated because he happened to be an Ahmadi. Then too an Egyptian president, Gemal Abdel Nasser, had famously said, “Some people say Zafrullah is not a Muslim, well, if he is not a Muslim, I am not one either.” Nasser was very impressed by Sir Zafrullah’s advocacy of the Arab causes in the UN and considered him a great friend and ally. The same Sir Zafrullah was abused by our mullahs on the streets time and again. So while our Egyptian brethren have been fulsome in praise of our two great Pakistani icons, Sir Zafrullah and Dr Salam, we have failed to name even a single road in their honour. Children are not taught of Zafrulla’s contributions to the Pakistan Movement. His picture does not feature in the Aiwan Karkunan-e-Tehreek-e-Pakistan Museum on the Mall, while every ‘jee-huzoori’ (yes man) and nawabzada — including those who openly abused Jinnah — has his picture up as one of the pioneers of Pakistan. Our children are not taught to admire and emulate Dr Salam, who has kept Pakistan’s name alive in the field of Physics even in death. The question of whether one considers Ahmadis Muslims or non-Muslims can be a matter of choice clearly. The problem starts when the state starts deciding who is a Muslim or a non-Muslim. Given that none of us are in possession of divine knowledge, would it not be better to follow a simple test instead, a simple test that the founder of this country, Jinnah, prescribed “anyone who professes to be a Muslim is a Muslim.” What happens when the state decides who is Muslim or non-Muslim? It empowers various sections of the clergy. Inevitably, those sections of clergy then turn on each other, turning one kind of Muslim against another kind of Muslim. This is when Ahle-Hadith tell Barelvis that they are kafir (infidel), and Barelvis tell Deobandis they are kafir and so and so forth. A multitude of movements begin to declare each other a constitutional kafir. The result is that you have endless bloodletting because ultimately not every community is non-violent like the Ahmadis. REFERENCE: COMMENT: Pride of the Muslim ummah —Yasser Latif Hamdani Monday, April 01, 2013 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2013%5C04%5C01%5Cstory_1-4-2013_pg3_4

Jinnah's 11 August, 1947 Speech: Assurance to Minority Communities (Editorial from The Hindu) http://www.scribd.com/doc/110861031/Jinnah-s-11-August-1947-Speech-Assurance-to-Minority-Communities-Editorial-from-The-Hindu

Jinnah's 11 August, 1947 Speech: Assurance to Minority Communities (Editorial from The Hindu) by Aamir Mughal

ISLAMABAD: The Punjab government has excluded several key subjects from the fresh 10th class Urdu text book edition published in February 2013 which is now being marketed for new students of matric. These subjects include ‘Islamic ideology of Pakistan’ and ‘Hazrat Umar (RA)- a Great Administrator’ besides removing persuasive Islam-related poems of even poets like Allama Iqbal. On the poetry side, all the Islamic poems including ‘Rabbe Kainaat’ of Maulana Altaf Hussain Hali, ‘Mohsin-e-Insaniat (PBUH)’ (the Saviour of Humanity) by Mahirul Qadri, ‘Tulu-e-Islam’ (the rise of Islam) of Allama Iqbal, ‘Siddiq (RA)’ on Hazrat Abu Bakar Siddiq (RA) by Allama Iqbal, ‘Shaan-e-Taqwa’ (which is against drinking) by Allama Iqbal etc have also been removed in the new text book. While the title page of the book contains the picture of Allama Iqbal, it does not contain any poem of the great poet of Islam and Pakistan. The new edition of the ‘Urdu compulsory for 10th class’ does not include the very first chapter of the earlier edition’s prose i.e ‘Hazrat Umar Farooq (RA)- a great administrator’ by Allama Shibli Naumani. The new text book’s first chapter is an essay on writer ‘Mirza Muhammad Saeed’ written by Shahid Ahmad Dehlvi. The second chapter in the old edition was on ‘Ideology of Pakistan’ written by Dr Ghulam Mustafa Khan. This important chapter highlighted the basis for the creation of Pakistan and endorsed that the country was created in the name of Islam, to make it an Islamic state, has been replaced by a new chapter on ‘Princess of Paristan’ (Paristan ki shahzadi) written by Ashraf Saboohi. REFERENCE: Punjab excludes Islamic subjects from Matric book Ansar Abbasi Sunday, March 24, 2013 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-21785-Punjab-excludes-Islamic-subjects-from-Matric-book

Fatawa Alamgeere Par Aik Nazar by Khawaja Muhammad Qasim http://www.scribd.com/doc/100252203/Fatawa-Alamgeere-Par-Aik-Nazar-by-Khawaja-Muhammad-Qasim

Fatawa Alamgeere Par Aik Nazar by Khawaja Muhammad Qasim by Aamir Mughal

The third chapter of the old edition of the 10th class text book was ‘Musaddas-e-Hali’ written by Moulvi Abdul Haq. This chapter narrates how a Muslim poet in the 19th century influenced the hearts and minds of the Muslims. It has now been replaced by a writing of Dr Waheed Qureshi on ‘Eidul Fitr in Urdu Literature’ (Urdu Adab main Eidul Fitr). Similarly the chapters like ‘Sacrifice’ (Eisaar) by Deputy Nazir Ahmad, which has a great lesson for children, has been removed from the new 10th class text book. This chapter gives the lesson of how the affluent should help the poor. The story is about a child, who distributed his Eidi to a poor family. Another important chapter of the old book ‘Fatima binte (daughter of) Abdullah’ written by Mirza Adeeb has also disappeared from the new Urdu compulsory of class 10 for Punjab students. This story was about a 10-year old daughter of an Arab leader Abdullah. The story is about Jihad and the young Muslim girl’s urge to help the Muslim Mujahideen in Jihad against un-Islamic forces. The girl was martyred and did her parents proud. This incident has such an importance that even Allama Muhammad Iqbal had also written a poem on this young girl with the title ‘Fatima binte Abdullah’. Allama presented her as a role model for Muslim youth. A chapter Nam Dev Mali was, instead, included in the book that was about an expert Hindu gardener who was killed when attacked and stung by honey bees. The writer of this short story Maulvi Abdul Haq described the death of the expert Hindu gardener as ‘having embraced Shahadat (martyrdom)’. One of the chapters in the old edition was about ‘The deprived of inheritance’ (Mahroom-e-Virasat) by Allama Rashidul Khairi has also been excluded. This chapter focused on the un-Islamic tradition of depriving women of inheritance. REFERENCE: Punjab excludes Islamic subjects from Matric book Ansar Abbasi Sunday, March 24, 2013 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-21785-Punjab-excludes-Islamic-subjects-from-Matric-book

The Subtle Subversion the State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan http://www.scribd.com/doc/99821197/The-Subtle-Subversion-the-State-of-Curricula-and-Textbooks-in-Pakistan

The Subtle Subversion the State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan by Aamir Mughal

One chapter called ‘Travelling is the key to success’ (Safar Kamiabi ki Kunji hay) written by Moulana Abdul Haleem Sharar, a great Urdu writer, has also been removed. It covered the adventures, jihad, travelling etc of the great Muslim leaders. A chapter on the ‘words of poets’ (Shaeron ki batain) in the old book has also been removed. The chapter presented different aspects particularly self respect of Muslim poets. On the poetry side all the Islamic poems including ‘Rabe Kainaat’ of Maulana Altaf Hussain Hali, Tulu-e-Islam of Allama Iqbal, ‘Mohsin-e-Insaniat’ of Mahirul Qadri, ‘Siddiq (RA) on Hazrat Abu Bakar Siddiq (RA) by Allama Iqbal, ‘Shaan-e-Taqwa’ (which is against drinking) by Allama Iqbal etc have also been removed in the new text book. Two ghazals of Khawaja Mir Dard on Islamic Sufism and two ghazals of Mirza Ghalib have also been removed from the new text. Poetry of a Indian poet Firaq Gorakhpuri has been included in the text book and the poet is presented as a hero awarded by the Indian and Russian governments. While the title page of the book contains the picture of Allama Iqbal, it does not contain any poem of the great poet of Islam and Pakistan. Excluding extremely impressive Islamic poetry, the new text book, however starts with a Hamd (praise of Almighty Allah) and Naat (praise of Hazrat Muhammad — PBUH). REFERENCE: Punjab excludes Islamic subjects from Matric book Ansar Abbasi Sunday, March 24, 2013 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-21785-Punjab-excludes-Islamic-subjects-from-Matric-book

In case people forget "Jinnah, Allama Iqbal, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan etc. were all Zimmis. Barelvi Fatwa Against Jinnah, Allama Iqbal and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan http://www.scribd.com/doc/100199318/Barelvi-Fatwa-Against-Jinnah-Allama-Iqbal-and-Sir-Syed-Ahmed-Khan

Barelvi Fatwa Against Jinnah, Allama Iqbal and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan by Aamir Mughal

Murder of History in Pakistan.

PAKISTAN is a part of India and P.V. Narasimha Rao is the prime minister of the country. This is being taught to school students in some Indian states, according to a member of parliament. S. Semmalai, of the Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (ADMK), highlighted these monstrosities in Lok Sabha on Wednesday while referring to the controversy over an Ambedkar cartoon in textbooks during a discussion on an amendment bill concerning educational institutions. Dr B.R. Ambedkar, born into a lower caste family, was a crusader for Dalit rights who headed the body that drafted India’s post-independence constitution. “In the textbooks of Karnataka, it is mentioned even now that Pakistan is a part of India. It went on to state that American constitution is based on capitalism. Class-III students of Urdu medium in Andhra Pradesh are taught that P.V. Narasimha Rao is the prime minister of the country,” Semmalai said, evoking laughter all around the house. Finding further fault with the textbooks, he said: “In some textbooks a forest is defined as a group of trees and heavy industry is defined as one where heavy type of raw materials are used.” The member said that only 15 per cent of graduates were suitable for employment. It reflects the poor quality of education at all levels, from primary to higher levels. He lamented: “If this is the quality and stuff that we provide to our students, one can imagine what will be the standard of our students. “Unless we make concerted efforts to allocate six per cent of the GDP to education, our goal will remain unreachable,” he added. REFERENCE: Karnataka textbook says Pakistan part of India http://dawn.com/2012/05/17/karnataka-textbook-says-pakistan-part-of-india/

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad predicting Pakistan


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q7p3_fZCKw

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad: The Man Who Knew The Future Of Pakistan Before Its Creation by Shorish Kashmiri, Matbooat Chattan, Lahore http://www.newageislam.com/books-and-documents/maulana-abul-kalam-azad--the-man-who-knew-the-future-of-pakistan-before-its-creation/d/2139

Most significantly, Allama Iqbal favoured, in his Sixth Lecture, the concept of real ‘ijtihad’ (reinterpretation) on the ‘nas’ (clear edict) of the Quran. That is the only ‘ijtihad’ useful to the Muslims. Nothing has gone right with Islamisation, starting from ‘zakat’ to ‘diyat’ (blood money) and the ‘hudood’. When the Muslims have done ‘ijtihad’ on the ‘nas’ they have done ‘ijtihad-e-ma’akoos’ (retrogressive reinterpretation) as in the case of the Quranic ‘nas’ on the law of divorce . Few will disagree that Allama Iqbal was a great poet. But there is a reaction against him in some circles after the state of Pakistan adopted him as its founding philosopher and selectively hyped up his message. One has to be careful not to lose objectivity over Allama Iqbal. Self-serving politicians and ulema quote him to advance their dubious causes. Finally the greatness of the poet will rest neither in the hype nor in the angry reaction against him. GEO (November 3, 2004) had Ghazi Salahuddin discussing Allama Iqbal with Dr Mubarak Ali on his Main Nahin Manta programme. Dr Mubarak Ali said that Allama Iqbal had no message for the world of today. He wrote poetry for the middle class Muslims and his objective was Muslim ummah which did not exist. He was not a supporter of democracy and it was an exaggeration to call him a national poet. One scholar present in the programme said that Allama Iqbal had defended democracy in his Lectures. Jinnah was finally to take the cue from Iqbal’s address of 1930. Dr Mubarak Ali said that Iqbal was a great poet but it was not fair to call him a national poet. He said his main aim was to create pride among Muslims whom he thought downtrodden at the time. Dr Mubarak Ali’s rather intemperate opinion (to which he was entitled) was rebutted by the audience effectively. If he wanted to win over the audience he failed because he was so extreme in posture as to be inaccurate. In his famous Lectures, Allama Iqbal favoured democracy. Most significantly, he favoured, in his Sixth Lecture, the concept of real ijtihad (reinterpretation) on the nas (clear edict) of the Quran. Those who hold him up as the thinker of the fundamentalist state should be chastened by this. His 1930 speech in Allahabad has been completely misinterpreted through selective reading by the state. His diatribe against the fundamentalist ulema has also been ignored by the state, while his anti-West verse has been exploited by politicians and the ulema to create xenophobia in Pakistan. Allama Iqbal cannot be rejected out of hand. When the ayatollahs of Iran did it, Dr Ali Shariati arose to his defence and told them they were wrong. GEO (November 3, 2004) programme Chchoti Khabar Bari Baat discussed the situation in Lyari saying the criminal mafias had taken over there and the police had become their informers. Lyari Town in Karachi had become impossible to control because of the fight between two rival mafias: Pappu Dakait and Rehman Dakait. In two and a half months 24 people had lost their lives there. The fight was over bhatta (protection money). The town had no water and no law and order. PPP MNA Gabol said that Lyari had fallen on bad times because it was traditionally a PPP constituency. The governments in the past were not interested in allowing any development there because of this factor. He said in 1996 when the PPP was in power there was no crime in Lyari. He said the police was on the payroll of the dacoits. He also said that ministers in Balochistan were backing the dacoits. When pressured he named chief minister of Balochistan, Jam Yusuf. He said many ministers in Sindh government, too, were taking money from the dacoits of Lyari. Police officer Imran Shaukat admitted police weakness but claimed that he was making headway. He said Lyari had only 100 criminals who could be taken care of. He said the dacoits had started ‘gate politics’ which was cutting off localities with no-go gates. He said every street had its small dacoits. He said he had brought 350 commandos and had deployed 240 policemen in the area. But Gabol said mukhbari (informers) was still going on by police and thana officers were changed on the orders of the mafia. And policemen also ran away. Police officer said Lyari could be normalised in one month. Lyari is the microcosm of a state which has gradually surrendered its writ. The involvement of the feudal and tribal politicians in crime through patronage of dacoits is well known in Sindh and Balochistan. This is the alternative state in existence. Their alternative state is opposed by another class which has been empowered by the state through jihad and the consequent surrender of internal sovereignty: the religious parties and their militias. This is armageddon, the big war in which everyone is a satan. GEO (November 5, 2004) had Aniq Ahmad in his Alif programme discussing dialogue among religions with Prof Manzur Ahmad, and clerics from sects plus a Christian priest. One cleric said that the Quran had said the Jews were firm enemies and so were the pagans (India) but the Christians were soft on Islam and there could be dialogue with them. Christians were not proud and were educated too. Prof Manzur said dialogue was not tabligh (proselytising) and Muslims should not approach a dialogue with other faiths in order to convince them to leave their religion and join Islam. Christian Father said that first one will have to decide what kind of minds had been developed in Pakistan. If the mind was inflexible then it will not dialogue with anyone. The Shia cleric said there was no ban on dialoguing with the Jews in the Quran. He said Quran was negative only about the Jews of Madina. Sunni cleric insisted that Quranic verse was daemi (eternal) therefore Jews were enemies even today. Aniq said the Quran ordained that both Christians and Jews were enemies of Islam; how could the Christians be good then? Christian Father said Muslims could do ijtihad whereupon Aniq asked could there be ijtihad on the verse of the Quran? This was a most absurd discussion with Dr Manzur Ahmed alone talking sense. The clerics were unfit for any human dialogue (even with Muslims) because of their intellectual rigidity. The Sunni was divided with Shia over whether to talk to other faiths. If Islam is to talk to other faiths the ulema will have to be kept out of it. Finally, the discussion made shipwreck on the issue of ijtihad: whether a Muslim could reinterpret a clear verse of the Quran. One fallacy among Muslims is that they allow reinterpretation of faith. The truth is that they live in taqleed (imitation) of the fiqh (jurists) of later times. The only ijtihad useful to Muslims would be ijtihad on the nas of the Quran, as proposed by Allama Iqbal in his Sixth Lecture and rejected by General Zia and the clergy. That is why nothing has gone right with Islamisation, starting from zakat to diyat (blood money) and the hudood. When the Muslims have done ijtihad on the nas they have done ijtihad-e-ma’akoos (retrogressive reinterpretation) as in the case of the Quranic nas on the law of divorce. * REFERENCE: SECOND OPINION: The persistent greatness of Allama Iqbal —Khaled Ahmed’s TV Review uesday, December 14, 2004 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_14-12-2004_pg3_5

Sethi - Murder of History in Pakistan - 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUKr3bCaNJY

Text of Prof. Karrar Memorial Lecture on 2 November 2002 in Karachi delivered by Prof. Hamza Alavi On Religion and Secularism in the making of Pakistan by Prof. Hamza Alavi http://www.sacw.net/2002/HamzaAlaviNov02.html

On Religion and Secularism in the Making of Pakistan SACW 2002 Hamza Alavi Nov 2002

Sethi - Murder of History in Pakistan - 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0Wu9vrqOD8

Rewriting the History of Pakistan by Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy and Abdul Hameed Nayyar [Source: Islam, Politics and the State: The Pakistan Experience, Asghar Khan (ed.) Zed Books, London, 1985, pp. 164-177.] www.sacw.net | February 6, 2005 http://www.sacw.net/HateEducation/1985HoodbhoyNayyar06022005.html

Rewriting the History of Pakistan by Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy and Abdul Hameed Nayyar

Sethi - Murder of History in Pakistan - 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wj92twKzps

Pakistan: Curriculum of hatred in schools Saturday 5 May 2012 Policy Brief - The Continuing Biases in Our Textbooks By Zubeida Mustafa Policy Brief - Jinnah Institute http://www.sacw.net/article2666.html

Pakistan Curriculum of Hatred in Schools by Zubeida Mustafa

Sethi - Murder of History in Pakistan - 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3AhD8KO1L0

History and interpretation: Communalism and problems of historiography in India by Irfan Habib http://www.sacw.net/India_History/IHabibCommunalHistory.html

Communal Ism and Problems of Historiography in India SACW Irfan Habib

Sethi - Murder of History in Pakistan - 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyZNawOgi1M

Radicalization of State and Society in Pakistan by Rubina Saigol http://www.boell-pakistan.org/downloads/Chapter_Rubina_Final.pdf

Radicalization of State and Society in Pakistan by Rubina Saigol

Sethi - Murder of History in Pakistan - 6


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMTtBq-t2ew

ISLAM is a great and good religion, as are the other major faiths of the world, when interpreted and put into practice by true men of God learned, balanced, fair-minded, sensible, compassionate and benevolent. I am a Zarathushti, a follower of the prophet Zarathushtra. I am not a Parsi by religion, but by race. The origin of the word ‘Parsi’ goes back 1,368 years when a group of Zarathushtis from the province of Pars in Iran arrived to settle on the west coast of Hindustan, then ruled by the benign king, Jadav Rana. It was the Hindustanis who bestowed upon the community the name ‘Parsis’ the men from Pars. Zarathushtra taught his followers that life was a gift of God to be lived to the full, and that they should do unto others as others and they would be done by. He taught them that religion is a matter that rests entirely between man and his God, that intolerance, bigotry and dogmatism are the bitterest enemies of religion as they render it a tyranny and a form of persecution. Bigotry stifles reason, is blind and savage, sectarian bigotry and inter-religious bigotry being equally evil. Man has no right to demand that his neighbour shall address his God as does he, nor that he shall pray, worship, and sacrifice to God in the manner that he does. No thinking man’s idea of God and religion can ever be the same at all times and in all places on earth. True men of religion know that they have no right to impose their way of thinking upon others, that they must remain free from the spirit of sectarianism and fanatic zeal. Zarathushtra’s teachings, as do the teachings of all the great prophets, define cleanly and clearly the difference between religion and religiosity.

The Parsis living in the four provinces of Pakistan inherited this country. They chose to remain in Jinnah’s Pakistan, and with relief and happiness accepted his creed as proclaimed on August 11, 1947, in the Constituent Assembly. He was clear and concise when he told the members that all men are equal, that religion is not the business of the state. Jinnah’s Pakistan died with him. Zarathushti blood was not shed in the making of Pakistan, though Zarathushti support was given unstintingly. Now to Nawaz Sharif. To gain the two-thirds majority necessary for the smooth passage of the Fifteenth Amendment through the National Assembly and (particularly) the Senate, he will have to buy men. He has done it before, and will do it again. The process has already started. This week, Chaudhry Shujaat was sent off to Balochistan. Closely followed by trusted briefcase carrier, Saifur Rahman, to meet my friend Nawab Mohammad Akbar Shahbaz Khan, Tumandar of all the Bugtis, who owns and controls five vital Senate votes. The Nawab has his own perception of Islam, as is his right, which may not necessarily tally with the concept as followed in Raiwind. Towards the end of last year, inspired by the incompetence of Nawaz Sharif’s government, I had a bet with him that Nawaz Sharif would not survive as PM beyond July 31. I lost. When I asked Akbar where I should send my cheque, he told me he did not want it. Being a good Muslim, he cannot accept a Kafir’s money. One must wonder if, had he lost the bet, would he have held, as a good Muslim, that he cannot pay a Kafir?

The day before yesterday, I read in Dawn that the Nawab had acknowledged that he has received a cheque from a Kafir, but since Islam prohibits a Muslim to use money won on a bet he must pass it on. He has done so, to the Quetta Press Club. This is typical, and enjoyable, Akbar Bugti logic. His Islam did not prohibit him from making a bet with a Kafir, only from accepting a Kafir’s money. He has his own views on Zardosht as he calls him, and why not? He must have had fun with Saifur Rahman (I would have loved to have been with them at their meeting). Nawaz Sharif sits within three cabinets. Firstly, in the Raiwind cabinet, headed by Abbaji who is advised by his cardiologist Dr Shahryar, Judge Afzal Lone, Son Shahbaz, and Child Prodigy Hussain. Second is the kitchen cabinet he himself heads, made up of his Mians and Chaudhrys ( ‘Lahore Lahore hai’). The third, in order of importance, is the official cabinet at Islamabad.

Crisis or no crisis, the third cabinet probably meets formally twice or so in a hundred days. It can broadly be divided into three groups. One comprises the gung-ho table-thumpers, who hang on Nawaz Sharif’s every utterance, echoing each one with a ‘Wah-wah, Mian Sahib’ before he has even completed his sentence, pride of performance going to ‘Mushahidsaab’. Then there is the group made up of the sour-faced, grim and silent lot, whose lips remain sealed unless they are specifically urged to speak up on their own specific subjects. To this second group belongs Khalid Anwer, an intelligent man who has proved to be a bitter disappointment. He cannot match his predecessor in office, law champion of all governments, Jadoogar Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, who at least is honest enough to laugh and say. ‘Accept me as I am, with warts, blemishes, briefcases and all. If it were not for all the weak and corrupt governments of Pakistan, I would not be where I am today.’ Sharifuddin never places himself on a pedestal, seldom looks down on a lesser mortal, Khalid Anwar would do well to re-read paragraph 301 of his written statement, filed in the Supreme Court in response to Benazir Bhutto’s petition against her 1996 dismissal:

"The doctrine of collective responsibility has different facets and aspects. At its most basic, the doctrine means that the ministers are collectively, and as a body, known as the cabinet, responsible to the National Assembly. Individual ministers do not have the choice or luxury of agreeing only with some government decisions and not others. However much a minister may disagree with a policy or decision taken by the cabinet, he must in public and in particular before the National Assembly give it his full and unstinting support. If he finds it impossible to accept or abide by the decision or to support it, he must then resign from office. A minister’s choice to remain in the cabinet is tantamount to his accepting responsibility for all cabinet decisions and government policy."

The third cabinet group is headed by those of practical pragmatic minds, such as Ghous Ali Shah, whose decisions are based on the fear of where they would be should Nawaz Sharif fall. Dogged by the misfortunes that have beset them since the death of Jinnah, the people of Pakistan now face the daunting prospect of Nawaz Sharif manipulating his Fifteenth Amendment through Parliament and then declaring himself, Amirul Momineen and Commander of the Faithful for life. His duties, as he presumably sees them, would enable him, inter alia, to:

Pass an Act whereby a constitutional amendment can go through Parliament by a simple majority (at present the Constitution provides for a two-thirds majority).

Declare the Quran and Sunnah to be the constitution and nominate a body of ‘pious’ Muslims to interpret it.

Declare that all state functionaries, including judges, must strictly follow government directives whether they consider them to be right or wrong.

Dissolve the provinces as being contrary to the concept of Millat.

Abolish Parliament, or just the senate, and nominate a Shoora of ‘pious’ Muslims.

Declare opposition to be un-Islamic, hence banned.

Declare that public offices be restricted to ‘pious’ Muslims.

Declare restrictions on the rights of women, thus banning them from holding public office (bye-bye BB).

Declare any sect of Muslims to be non-Muslim and thus minorities.

Declare that minorities have no rights other than the practice of their religion, of their personal laws, traditions and customs, thus depriving them of their right to vote and other fundamental rights. Subject them to payment of Jazya.

Introduce flogging, amputation, lapidation, the death penalty, and public executions for various major and minor offences.

prohibit western education and declare Islamic education to be compulsory.

Restrict communications with the outside world, such as the Taliban -style banning of television.

Declare interest to be haram and thus not payable on international debts.

All this will be done in the name of a good religion as interpreted at Raiwind.

REFERENCE: Not the business of the state Ardeshir Cowasjee DAWN WIRE SERVICE Week Ending : 12 September 1998 Issue : 04/36 http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/1998/12Sep98.html#nott