Salman Rashid is Pakistan’s most widely travelled travel writer with few places in the country that do not carry his footprint. Acclaimed as ‘the most erudite travel writer of the country’, he is the author of eight books that include anthologies of his newspaper articles. This book is the outcome of nearly a quarter century of the Deosai romance over several visits to the plateau. During the chaos of partition in 1947, something dreadful happened in the city of Jalandhar in Punjab. As a result of this, Salman Rashid's family fled Jalandhar for Pakistan, the newly created country across the border. They were among the nearly two million people uprooted from their homes in the greatest transmigration in history. Besides those who fled, other members of the family became part of a grimmer statistic: They featured among the more than one million unfortunate souls who paid with their lives for the division of India and creation of Pakistan. After living in the shadow of his family’s tragedy for decades, in 2008, Rashid made the journey back to his ancestral village to uncover the truth. A time of madness tells the story of what he discovered with great poignancy and grace. It is a tale of unspeakable brutality but it is also a testament to the uniquely human traits of forgiveness, redemption and the resilience of the human spirit. References: A Time of Madness: A Memoir of Partition 13 Dec 2017 https://www.amazon.in/Salman-Rashid/e/B001JWT62G/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1 A TIME OF MADNESS: A MEMOIR OF PARTITION BY : SALMAN RASHID http://www.libertybooks.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=44018
Introduction of Salman Rashid
And in the end, when Rashid does indeed uncover the terrible secret, when the last clue to the puzzle has fallen in place, when he finds himself standing face to face with the man whose father had led a murderous mob, when he understands the reason for his family’s long silence, he finds nothing in his heart but understanding and compassion. As to why this had to happen, the only solace, if there can be solace in a situation like this, is in the fact that such a tragedy did not just fall to his lot; it happened to millions. However, if violence and bestiality are followed by guilt and remorse, forgiveness is possible. A heart-felt apology, even after seven decades, can heal old wounds. A Time of Madness seems to be telling us that while we may fall victims to the madness unleashed by political and religious leaders causing us to fall into pits of unimaginable darkness, it is up to us to find our way back to light. Only genuine remorse and real forgiveness can show us the way. Reference: 'A Time of Madness: A Memoir of Partition' review: Darkness to light by Rakhshanda Jalil JANUARY 06, 2018 http://www.thehindu.com/books/books-reviews/a-time-of-madness-a-memoir-of-partition-review-darkness-to-light/article22382614.ece
Ammara's Adda with Salman Rashid
Salman Rashid’s latest book, published in India, is the story of his grandfather’s pre-partition household. A Time of Madness – A memoir of partition narrates how Rashid’s grandfather was murdered by a Sikh neighbour. Ten years ago, Rashid met the son of the murderer in Jalandhar and he narrated the tale of the entire household to the audience. The talk was moderated by academic Shaista Sirajuddin and senior journalist Khaled Ahmed, both close friends of the author, who had heard of these stories already and read the book closely. Sirajuddin understood the author’s sentimental relationship with the story and carefully directed the talk while giving the author room to breathe and grieve. The hall was full of Rashid’s fans, some sitting on the ground, others standing on the stairs. The audience had many interesting questions to supplement Rashid’s intriguing story. Reference : Authors, readers, bibliophiles http://tns.thenews.com.pk/authors-readers-bibliophiles/ by Ammara Ahmad March 4, 2018 ---- A Time of Madness http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/a-time-of-madness/ Shaista Sonnu Sirajuddin on Salman Rashid’s memoir of Partition – a deeply personal journey, yet one which is relevant to us all (The Friday Times 02 March 2018)
TTP considering Ansar Abbasi, Orya Maqbool Jan as negotiators February 03, 2014 PESHAWAR: Spokesman of the banned Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) Monday said two more names are likely to be finalized soon for its committee tasked to hold talks with the four-member government-appointed panel. He said the names of senior journalist Orya Maqbool Jan and Investigation Editor, The News International, Ansar Abbasi which were being considered for the Taliban committee in the past are still being reviewed for nomination. The TTP spokesman regretted the decision of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) of choosing not to be a part of the dialogue process, saying Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman does not even have confidence in his own self. Reacting to the Taliban’s claim, Ansar Abbasi talking to Geo News said he had never had any contact with the Taliban over his becoming part of the talks process. However, he said that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had sought his advice in connection with the dialogue and also offered him to join the government-appointed panel. “I expressed my willingness to offer my cooperation as a journalist but I don’t want to join in as committee member,” said Abbasi, adding, he can be part of such a committee that points out mistakes on the part of the government and the Taliban. He said if the Taliban and government accept an impartial committee he could join the same. REFERENCE: TTP considering Ansar Abbasi, Orya Maqbool Jan as negotiators February 03, 2014 - Updated 2115 PKT http://www.thenews.com.pk/article-136547-TTP-considering-Ansar-Abbasi,-Orya-Maqbool-Jan-as-negotiators
ISLAMABAD, July 8: Eminent historian and thinker Dr Mubarak Ali says the history written in Pakistan had been “dictated” by the ruling Establishment and represents its wilful perversion of facts “to accord with a fabricated ideology”.
“No authentic history has yet been written about Pakistan and its independence. There is a lot of confusion among the so-called pro-Establishment historians and educationists. Whatever has been written so far is distortion of history and entirely unbalanced,” Unless the distortions were removed and facts told as they existed, the nation could not hope to make any real progress, he said, adding: “This is the lesson history has taught us”. Dr Ali, who was interviewed over the weekend after he gave a lecture on the subject at Safma Media Centre the other day, said writing history in an ideological state was a problem.
“We project the deeds of our leaders out of proportion and ignore their crimes and blunders. Our modern history is also in a quagmire of confusion as our historians do not know the direction their work should take. They were unmindful of society’s need for truth and confused whether Pakistan’s history begins from the Indus civilization, or from Mohammad bin Qasim’s attack on Sindh or from 1947 the year it was born. “Historians like Dr Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi, S.M. Ikram and Moinul Haq wrote history, as dictated by dictators like Gen Ayub Khan, on two premises: the two-nation theory and greater national unity. There writings are more anti-Hindu than about British colonialism. “Some historians negated our ancient Indian and South Asian roots and tried to establish our links with Central Asia or with the Middle East which was historical and intellectual dishonesty,” said Dr Ali. Fanciful novels written by Maulana Abdul Haleem Sharar, Naseem Hijazi and the likes were taken for history. REFERENCE: History is different from farce: Dr Mubarak 2008-07-09 00:00:00 http://www.dawn.com/news/310892/history-is-different-from-farce-dr-mubarak
Importance of Sex Education, Orya Maqbool Jan & Ansar Abbasi.
On the eve of Eid-ul-Azha, I was asked by some of our rationalist society friends to do a gentle surgery of the claims made by Orya Maqbool Jan in one of his Urdu writings. The rebuttal from our respected friend came swiftly with a tinge of venom. I was declared "Jahalat ki faseel mein qaid daanishwar" (an intellectual imprisoned in the fortress of ignorance). I have no qualms about accepting the charge up to "imprisonment in ignorance" bit but the burden of being a "daanishwar" is too heavy and better be left in the exclusive domain of Jan and his tribe. Like my fellow rationalist members, from Socrates I have learnt to ask questions of the knowledgeable ones, and from Julius Fuchik acquired an inspiration to paint life on the walls of the gallows. We never claim to know it all but we are never afraid of asking questions when they crop up in our minds. It is our belief that stating a half-truth is more dangerous than a blatant lie and hence must be properly scrutinised. Jan repeated the same references that due to obscurity are not readily available to a common reader. While extolling the virtues of the Mughal rulers, especially Aurangzeb and the rulers of Bengal, he conveniently ignores well-researched and highly respected works, e.g. of Sheikh Muhammad Ikram on the rise and fall of the Mughal Empire. I do not want to become an advocate for the British colonists. The East India Company (EIC) was a business venture of London-based merchants and the British traders had come to the East Indies in search of corporate profits and not for charity. Just like any other nation, they had many self-enriching crooks and some thrill-seeking adventurists. My problem, however, is viewing history as pure black and white, as we need to be objective in our reading of past events. An important fact must not be missed that the European nations were then often at war in Europe, which had a spillover effect in the Indian subcontinent as well. They, therefore, fortified their trading positions and gradually got involved in the local wars of succession that were frequently happening among Indian rulers and were supported by rival European traders. A dispassionate analysis of history would help us learn why the British were able to conquer the whole of India with just a few thousand soldiers. Jan fondly uses some references to build a thesis that prior to the arrival of the EIC, India was teeming with knowledge and that there were thousands of educational institutions. The chief references that Jan relies upon for this bold assertion are quotes from Will Durant's Story of Civilisation and Major Basu's use of Max Muller's quotation in his book on Indian history. Using Durant and Muller for establishing the claim of a highly developed educational system in medieval India is just like using a quote from Charles Darwin to support the Intelligent Design theory of creationists. While Durant views Muslim rulers as a bunch of barbarians who did not miss a chance of looting the treasures of an advanced civilisation of those times, Muller, a German philologist, was a popular critic of the Hindu belief system and advocated its cleansing by Christian reformers. When they mention village schools, they refer to the elaborate system of Brahmin-led theology teaching in ancient India. Alexander Hamilton is also quoted as a main reference by Jan. Hamilton, a merchant and a ship's captain in the Far East, covers the period of 1688-1723 in his travelogue A New Account of the East Indies. He mainly narrates the local weather and other cultural traits of various inhabitants. There is only one mention of educational institutions when he discusses Hindu theology and its teaching in village schools of Thatta. Hamilton mentions meeting a professor of Indian history who tells him that Alexander the Great had attacked India with magical beasts due to which Porus was unable to defeat him. Perhaps Jan has taken too much inspiration from this type of interpretation of history, and hence, has translated Hamilton's account as an elaborate arrangement for teaching of 'uloom-o-funoon' in India. Perhaps the readers can judge for themselves if half-baked truths should be taken as accounts of history. REFERENCE: OVER A COFFEE : History telling the Nasim Hijazi way by— 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
The conclusion of our analysis is that OMJ cites various historical sources in a sweeping way to substantiate his argument. Known as what is called 'cherry picking' in research, he selectively picked up sentences from a number of sources to create an impression for an unwary reader that India had an elaborate scheme of education under the Muslim rulers and that the British in a very cunning way destroyed all institutions as part of some deep-rooted conspiracy. Due to paucity of space, it is not possible to discuss all the references OMJ quoted in his piece. I would restrict it to only one main source to illustrate that intellectual honesty was wanting in his piece of writing. 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. REFERENCE: OVER A COFFEE : Postcard for Orya Maqbool Jan BY— 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
Meher Bukhari, Orya Maqbool Jan & Saleem Bukhari Justify Salman Taseer Murder (AAJ TV 2011)
2009 Islam does not allow democracy or elections MINGORA: Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammadi (TNSM) chief Maulana Sufi Muhammad has warned the government to wind up its judicial system within four days and establish the appellate court of Darul Qaza for the Malakand division, or he will re-launch his protest campaign. Addressing a mammoth public meeting at Grassy Ground here on Sunday, he made it clear that the government must set up Darul Qaza before lower Qazi courts, which, he said, was the first step towards the implementation of the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation in letter and spirit. TNSM’s Nazim-e-Aala Maulana Safiullah, Sheikh Waliullah Kabalgrami, Maulana Salar Khan, Maulana Samiullah, Maulana Abdul Haq, Maulana Badshah Zeb and Maulana Fayyaz also addressed the meeting. Unprecedented security arrangements were made for the rally as 300 armed volunteers guarded the venue. In Mingora city, all shops, markets and business centres remained closed, as the TNSM had earlier made an appeal to traders and shopkeepers to keep their business shut to facilitate the participants during the rally. Maulana Sufi Muhammad urged the government to appoint Tehsil and district Qazis in the seven districts of the Malakand division and Kohistan district of Hazara division within a month. Failure to do so, he warned, would bring his followers on the streets. He said a system of justice based on Shariah was the only way out of the present unrest. “If our demands were not met within the set deadline, then we will not be held responsible for any violence in the area,” the TNSM chief warned. He said all the criminal and civil cases would be heard and decided in the Qazi courts. He added that the judgment given by the Qazi courts could not be challenged in the provincial high courts or the Supreme Court. “I consider Western democracy as a system imposed on us by the infidels. Islam does not allow democracy or elections,” he opined, adding that he would never accept the system of justice of the non-Muslims. Sufi Mohammad said the implementation of the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation would restore peace in the Malakand division, particularly Swat. He said the Taliban militants had promised to lay down arms after the enforcement of the Nizam-e-Adl. REFERENCE: End judicial system by April 23, demands Sufi Claims Islam does not allow democracy or elections BY Essa Khankhel Monday, April 20, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=21615&Cat=13&dt=4/20/2009
Sufi’s public meeting lifts climate of fear in Swat BY Rahimullah Yusufzai Monday, April 20, 2009 PESHAWAR: By holding a big public meeting in Mingora in the restive Swat district on Sunday, Maulana Sufi Muhammad contributed to overcoming the climate of fear still prevailing among the people and inspiring them with hope. However, he added to the uncertainty by reverting to his familiar tactic of setting deadlines for his demands to be met. Two deadlines were set, April 23 for doing away with the existing courts manned by civil judges and May 19 for setting up Qazi courts under the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation in all seven districts of Malakand division and Kohistan district of Hazara region. In addition, May 19 would also serve as the one-month deadline for establishing Darul Qaza, or appellate court, for Swat and rest of Malakand division. Having brought peace to Swat and obliged the government, Sufi Muhammad now feels justified in demanding Shariah-based system of justice. This has been his goal for almost three decades and he is convinced that there can be no better opportunity for pushing his agenda. The government once again has little choice but to accept his demands and that too within the stipulated time. Journalists at the Grassy Ground, the venue for the Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammadi (TNSM) public meeting, estimated the crowd at 20,000 to 25,000. The TNSM members and supporters claimed a much higher attendance. But all agreed that it was an impressive show of strength by Maulana Sufi Muhammad, who returned to the central town of Mingora after having packed up his “peace camp” there and left Swat along with hundreds of his followers on April 9 in protest against the delay by President Asif Ali Zardari and the federal government in signing the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation. It was a triumphant return for the maverick Maulana who eventually forced the president to sign the law. Maulana Sufi Muhammad has held bigger gatherings at the Grassy Ground, which is used by young men from the twin towns of Mingora and Saidu Sharif for sports activities. His 1994 public meeting, held prior to an armed uprising for enforcement of Shariah in Swat and other parts of Malakand division, at the Grassy Ground was much bigger. But the one held on Sunday had greater importance as it was organized at a time when Swat is slowly recovering from two years’ of violence and bloodshed. For so many Swatis and participants from other adjoining districts, particularly from Upper Dir and Lower Dir, to gather at one place despite the fear of suicide bombing was truly remarkable. Political parties, which due to insecurity in the NWFP now hold gatherings in closed premises, would surely envy Sufi Muhammad’s fearlessness and his crowd-pulling capability. Sufi Muhammad, ageing and in poor health, spoke inarticulately for about 45 minutes in Pashto and reporters faced difficulty in understanding his words. As expected, he repeated his assertions about democracy and existing courts in Pakistan being un-Islamic. It wasn’t the first time that the cleric from Maidan in Lower Dir district generated controversy. He manages to do so whenever he speaks. Maulana Sufi Muhammad has his own simplistic vision of Shariah. If he had his way, he would force the judges, or Qazis as they are known in Malakand division, to sit on the floor and hear cases brought to them by litigants. Lawyers have no business in his scheme of things and Qazis ought to be made accountable if they delay judgements in cases pending in their courts. Shariah for him revolves round dispensation of justice. Education, health, socio-economic issues hold secondary importance for him. The Qazi courts that are being set up under the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation might start delivering speedy justice but this isn’t the only demand and expectation of the people of Swat and elsewhere in Malakand division. They expect a lot more from the Shariah that Sufi Muhammad is insisting would henceforth be the supreme law in the area. REFERENCE: Sufi’s public meeting lifts climate of fear in Swat BY Rahimullah Yusufzai Monday, April 20, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=21616&Cat=13&dt=4/20/2009
‘Swat Taliban to welcome Osama’ Wednesday, April 22, 2009 MINGORA: The spokesman for the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which controls the valley, told The Associated Press he would welcome militants bent on battling the US troops and their Arab allies if they want to settle there. “Osama bin Laden can come here. Sure, like a brother they can stay anywhere they want,” TTP spokesman Muslim Khan said in a two-hour interview on Friday, his first with a foreign journalist since the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation was imposed. “Yes, we will help them and protect them,” he added. The Taliban spokesman counted among his allies several groups on the UN and the US terrorist lists. “If we need, we can call them and if they need, they can call us,” Muslim Khan said. He said his forces would go to help the Taliban in Afghanistan if the United States and Nato continued to fight there. “You must tell (the Americans) if they want peace ... to withdraw their forces, keep them on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean,” he added. Pakistan reacted with alarm to his comments, saying it would never let him shelter the likes of bin Laden. “We would have to go for the military operation. We would have to apply force again,” said Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira. “We simply condemn this. We are fighting this war against al-Qaida and the Taliban,” he added. Meanwhile, Afrasiab Khattak, a leader of the Awami National Party, conceded: “We lost the war. We negotiated from a position of weakness.î He said the region’s police force was too underpaid, under trained and under equipped to take on the militants. US officials said they would work with Pakistan to make sure militants were not safe anywhere. “With regard to Mulla Omar and Osama bin Laden, this is not a place where they should be welcome. We believe ... that violent extremists need to be confronted,î State Department spokesman Robert Wood said. Reiterating America’s viewpoint on this, Wood said, “Violent extremism needs to be confronted not just by Pakistan, but the entire international community.” Asserting that the US would continue to work with the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan to try to help root out these violent extremists, Wood said they were a threat to democracy and stability in the region. “We call on all those who are interested in bringing about stability to that region to work with us to root out violent extremism,” Wood said. REFERENCE: ‘Swat Taliban to welcome Osama’ Wednesday, April 22, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=21662&Cat=13&dt=4/22/2009
Recently I got the opportunity to attend Khudi’s annual Festival of Ideas in Lahore. Khudi is a progressive youth organization working for countering extremist mindset and for raising awareness about democracy. I had been following this organization on social media over the past few years and I grew to admire the remarkable work they are doing. Khudi works on various themes ranging from peace building, rights of minorities, gender issues and civic and political education. This time I applied for the annual Festival of Ideas and was luckily selected among limited number of delegates from across the country. I occasioned a remarkable hospitality upon my arrival and the organizers cordially welcomed the participants. In the matter of few minutes I started feeling like a part of the event wholeheartedly. The developments of the first day of the three-day event clearly indicated that I was among a very well organized community and a team of devoted folks who were working continuously for the better service and management of every activity.
The orientation session started with a lecture of a leading intellectual and public figure Mr Javed Jabbar, who delivered a beautifully crafted lecture on the idea of Pakistan and the issues that we are confronting in the contemporary age. Mr Jabbar spoke in detail about our identity crisis and ways to face the challenges posed by it. By the end of this interactive lecture followed by very interesting questions & answers session, I had realized that the event is not going to betray any of the high ideals and anticipation which it portrayed; a 10 out of 10 from my side. After that we had a brilliant Mushaira, a session of poetry, featuring young zealous poets expressing their inner feelings through their splendid verses on romantic themes. As the Mushaira moved forward and veteran poets took the stage, I was fascinated to see that the notion of romanticism of the young poets was replaced by grave issues of life, suffering, death and the existential quests. Reference: Khudi Festival of Ideas: Learning for a Way Forward by M. Fahad Ur Rehman Nov - 13 - 2013 http://www.laaltain.com/khudi-festival-of-ideas-learning-for-a-way-forward/
Former Khyber Pakhtunkhwa minister Mian Ifthikhar Hussain of the Awami National Party (ANP) delivered the keynote speech on counter-militancy and Talibanisation. He discussed the government’s policy of dialogue with the Taliban. About the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) contribution, he said, “[PTI chief Imran] Khan so far has not taken a step for the dialogue. His party’s government has approached none of the 53 factions of the Taliban.” “If ordinary people can point out where the Taliban are hiding, how can the government be unaware of where to find them?” he questioned. He said the narrative on militancy and extremism needed to changed. “If it doesn’t, the sacrifices of 850 ANP workers will go in vain,” he said. Speaking at a panel discussion, Haider Farooqi Maududi said, “The exploitation of religion for political purposes has made Pakistan hell.” He said “Pakistan had not emerged from a religious conflict but a political one.” He called for separation of religion from state matters. Other speakers in the panel Tanveer Jahan, Tahir Wadood Malik and Sulaiman Mandran agreed with him. At a panel discussion titled Democratic Transition: Hopes and Fears Tahir Mehdi, Fahd Husain and Taimur Rehman said democracy is not only a form of governance but also a way of life. “To bring true democratic change, a democratic culture has to be established at all levels, including in our homes and workplaces,” the speakers said. REFERENCE: Youth forum: ‘Democracy, too, is a way of life’ October 27, 2013 http://tribune.com.pk/story/622977/youth-forum-democracy-too-is-a-way-of-life/
In another panel discussion, Haider Farooq Maududi, the son of founder of Jamaat-e-Islami Maulana Abu al Ala Moududi said, “The misuse of religion has made Pakistan a hell”. He said “Pakistan was not result of a religious conflict but that of a political one.” He also explained why there was a need to separate religion from state matters. The other speakers including Tanveer Jahan, Tahir Wadood Malik and Sulaiman Mandran agreed. Earlier, a panel discussion titled ‘democratic transition: hopes and fears’, which consisted of Tahir Mehdi, Fahd Husain and Dr Taimur Rehman stressed that democracy was not only a form of governance but it’s a code and a way of life. “To bring a true democratic change, the democratic culture has to be established at all levels including homes and workplaces,” they were of the view. Towards the end the audience was divided into four committees to discuss various regional and international conflicts that Pakistan faces. The committees discussed in detail civil-military, Pak-India, and Pak-US relations, along with issue of militancy. Reference: Youngsters share ideas at festival October 27, 2013 ARSHAD BHATTI http://www.nation.com.pk/lahore/27-Oct-2013/youngsters-share-ideas-at-festival
Journalist and discussion moderator Mubasher Bukhari said the Pakistani press faced great pressure to censor facts from stories that challenged the established narrative. “In all my years as a journalist, I have been under pressure to censor reports, whether from political or religious parties or the establishment,” he said. Journalists often practised self-censorship, he said. This particularly applied to blasphemy cases, which often went unreported. “With such practices in place there is no space left for counter narratives,” he said. And self-censorship was not just restricted to the press, he said. “Forget media reports, even governments exercise self-censorship by not releasing reports on sensitive issues in their entirety,” he said. Lawyer Yasser Latif Hamdani advocated a separation of the state and religion. “If we want to see Pakistan as a progressive state, we have to separate state from religion,” he said. Islam’s privileged status in the Constitution meant that it was always at the centre of public discourse. Even viewed in the legal paradigm, he said, one had little room to exercise religious and individual freedoms. In a society bent on establishing a single religious practice, there was no tolerance for alternative discourse, he said.
Distorted history textbooks further strengthened the resolve not to tolerate differing views, he added. History books were not written to establish facts and context, he said, but to establish people’s roles as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’. “Why must we have a history that identifies characters as heroes or villains?” Research analyst Amir Mughal said Pakistani society was content to avoid issues by pretending they don’t exist. “Every topic deemed sensitive or controversial is brushed under the carpet by our government,” he said. Society’s natural response had been programmed such that anything varying from the established norms and narratives was either banned or censored. He questioned the ban on YouTube. But the media was not blameless, he said. “The media is quick to criticise civilian governments, but what about the security establishment?” he asked. The media also played a part in the assassination of Salmaan Taseer. “Nowadays, the easiest thing for anyone to do is to label liberals or secular people as traitors,” he said. REFERENCE: Censorship in public discourse: ‘Dogma has bred denial, killed dissent’ Published: October 28, 2013 http://tribune.com.pk/story/623371/censorship-in-public-discourse-dogma-has-bred-denial-killed-dissent/
“We are looking at a modern world through a pre-modern lens,” said lawyer and columnist Saroop Ijaz, speaking at the third session – titled ‘Pakistan on the global stage: hopes and fears’ on the last day of the Khudi Festival of Ideas. Ijaz said when seen in a global perspective, it seemed that “Pakistani history” taught people to be xenophobic. He stressed the need for alternative narratives, but acknowledged that these would make people uncomfortable. “When what you have believed for so many years is challenged, there is bound to be a certain degree of discomfort,” he said. This was the reason that there were such contrasting views on Malala Yousafzai within the country, he said. “Malala’s narrative makes us uncomfortable because it does not conform to what we have in mind as the role of a 15-year-old girl in Pakistan,” he said. Ijaz also called for greater discourse between those termed conservatives and those called liberals in Pakistan. “At some stage, liberals and seculars will need to come out of their comfort zone and engage with conservative ideologies, which are far more popular than their own,” he added. Former Radio Pakistan director general Murtaza Solangi said Pakistan’s current woes were in large part due to the deficiencies of the education system, which discouraged critical thinking. “We are not standing at a sensitive juncture in history, we are in fact in an existential crisis,” he said. The focus on parliamentarians’ fake degrees, he said, was misplaced. “I find this not to be the issue. The real issue is the presence of [people getting] genuine degrees without any knowledge,” he said. Solangi said that the country’s political institutions had performed better in the last few years. “Confusion is the first step to wisdom. That is when you start seeking and that is when single narratives are challenged,” said Dr Daanish Mustafa, who teaches at the geography department at King’s College, London. He called for greater investment in various disciplines, particularly the performing arts, so as to encourage cultural diversity and create alternative narratives. These alternative narratives needed to be taken to a broader audience in order to challenge the old narrative. Dr Mustafa said he was hopeful that the country would move forward. “All is not lost. I don’t see suicidal tendencies in the young. They are hopeful,” he said. Writer and activist Dr Mubarak Haider said Pakistan could either change itself, or the world would change it. The latter, he said, seemed more probable. “The Muslim Ummah and specifically the Pakistani nation is narcissistic, and the more you try to tell them that the more they deny it,” he said. Dr Haider said the country had no global partner. “Even countries like Saudi Arabia do not completely stand by us. We are isolated as a nation on a global platform,” he said. Because of insecurities about religion, Pakistan seemed always to be preoccupied with trying to defend the faith. The country’s supreme governing body, he said, was not parliament but the Council of Islamic Ideology. He said: “Why are we so frightened that something may happen to our religion? Why do we feel so threatened?”
REFERENCE: Pakistan on global stage: ‘We’re taught to be xenophobic’ By Aroosa Shaukat Published: October 28, 2013 http://tribune.com.pk/story/623369/pakistan-on-global-stage-were-taught-to-be-xenophobic/
The current state of the country is not the fault of ‘maulvis’, but of a “secular class” of political and military leaders, said writer and politician Ayaz Amir in his concluding address at the Second Khudi Festival of Ideas on Sunday. “[The maulvis] have never been so powerful that they could bring the country to this state,” Amir said. From the dismal state of education to social unrest, the “secular class” was largely to blame, he said, addressing a gathering of some 300 young people from across the country who participated in the festival. Amir, who was a member of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz before throwing his support behind the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf ahead of the May general elections, lamented the quality of leadership in the country since the death of Muhammad Ali Jinnah. “One after the other, we have been getting worse and worse leaders and that has been Pakistan’s ill fate,” he said. The current prime minister, he said, looked like “a nervous young student” at his recent press briefing alongside US President Barrack Obama at the White House. “Why is our leadership so insecure? Why do they lack the confidence to speak in front of the world?” Amir said unless the nation got the right leadership, it would get nowhere. “Those in a command position can either lead the nation in the right direction or lead it to its destruction. Unfortunately, we lack the leaders to steer it in the right direction,” he said. REFERENCE: Khudi Festival of Ideas: ‘Secular class to blame for our fate, not maulvis’ By Our Correspondent Published: October 28, 2013 http://tribune.com.pk/story/623373/khudi-festival-of-ideas-secular-class-to-blame-for-our-fate-not-maulvis/
Before you read Prof. Shahida Kazi's excellent reasearch [translation in Urdu is in the end courtesy Mr. Awais Masood] I would like to add the following:
Pakistani recruiters claimed difficulty in securing volunteers in East Pakistan. West Pakistanis held that Bengalis were not "martially inclined"--especially in comparison with Punjabis and Pathans, :REF Library of Congress Country Studies http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd%2Fcstdy :@field(DOCID+bd0139) - NOW READ: Pakistani author Hasan-Askari Rizvi notes that the limited recruitment of Bengali personnel in the Pakistan Army was because, the West Pakistanis, "could not overcome the hangover of the martial race theory". Ref: Military, State and Society in Pakistan by Hasan-Askari Rizvi. Late. K K Aziz in his magnum opus "Murder of History " had opined that every Reforme Movement or Resistance Movement against Imperialism, and against Feudal Lords were started in Bengal. [Do watch the Conversation with IDRC President David M. Malone, historian Romila Thapar, widely recognized as India's foremost historian challenged the colonial interpretations of India's past, which have created an oversimplified history that has reinforced divisions of race, religion, and caste. Courtesy: IDRCCRDI http://www.youtube.com/user/IDRCCRDI
The myth of history By Prof Shahida Kazi
History is a discipline that has never been taken seriously by anyone in Pakistan. As a result, the subject has been distorted in such a way that many a fabricated tale has become part of our collective consciousness. Does mythology have anything to do with history? Is mythology synonymous with history? Or is history mythology?
Admittedly, the line between the two is a very fine one. From time immemorial, man has always been in search of his roots. He has also been trying to find a real and tangible basis for the legends of ancient days - legends that have become a part of our collective consciousness. As a result, we witness the quest for proving the existence of King Arthur, the search for whereabouts of the city of Troy, and many expeditions organized to locate the exact site of the landing of Noah’s Ark.
During the ’60s and the ’70s, there was a worldwide movement to prove that the ’gods’ of ancient mythologies did actually exist; they came from distant galaxies; and that mankind owed all its progress to such alien superheroes. Several books were written on the subject.
We, in Pakistan, are a breed apart. Lacking a proper mythology like most other races, we have created our own, populated by a whole pantheon of superheroes who have a wide range of heroic exploits to their credit.
But the difference is that these superheroes, instead of being a part of a remote and prehistoric period, belong very much to our own times. A seemingly veritable mythology has been created around these heroes, their persona and their achievements, which is drummed into the heads of our children from the time they start going to school. So deep is this indoctrination that any attempt to uncover the facts or reveal the truth is considered nothing less than blasphemous.
Here are some of the most common myths:
Myth 1
Our history begins from 712AD, when Mohammad bin Qasim arrived in the subcontinent and conquered the port of Debal.
Take any social studies or Pakistan studies book, it starts with Mohammad bin Qasim. What was there before his arrival? Yes, cruel and despotic Hindu kings like Raja Dahir and the oppressed and uncivilized populace anxiously waiting for a ’liberator’ to free them from the clutches of such cruel kings. And when the liberator came, he was welcomed with open arms and the grateful people converted to Islam en mass.
Did it really happen? This version of our history conveniently forgets that the area where our country is situated has had a long and glorious history of 6,000 years. Forget Moenjo Daro. We do not know enough about it. But recorded history tells us that before Mohammad Bin Qasim, this area, roughly encompassing Sindh, Punjab and some parts of the NWFP, was ruled by no less than 12 different dynasties from different parts of the world, including the Persians (during the Achamaenian period), the Greeks comprising the Bactrians, Scthians and Parthians, the Kushanas from China, and the Huns (of Attila fame) who also came from China, besides a number of Hindu dynasties including great rulers like Chandragupta Maurya and Asoka.
During the Gandhara period, this region had the distinction of being home to one of the biggest and most important universities of the world at our very own Taxila. We used to be highly civilized, well-educated, prosperous, creative and economically productive people, and many countries benefited a lot from us, intellectually as well as economically. This is something we better not forget. But do we tell this to our children? No. And so the myth continues from generation to generation.
Myth 2
Mohammad Bin Qasim came to India to help oppressed widows and orphan girls.
Because of our blissful ignorance of history, we don’t know, or don’t bother to know, that this period was the age of expansion of the Islamic empire. The Arabs had conquered a large portion of the world, comprising the entire Middle East, Persia, North Africa and Spain. Therefore, it defies logic that they would not seek to conquer India, the land of legendary treasures.
In fact, the Arabs had sent their first expedition to India during Hazrat Umar Farooq’s tenure. A subsequent expedition had come to Makran during Hazrat Usman’s rule. But they had been unsuccessful in making any in-roads into the region. Later on, following the refusal of the king to give compensation for the ships captured by pirates (which incidentally included eight ships full of treasures from Sri Lanka, and not just women and girls), two expeditions had already been sent to India, but they proved unsuccessful. It was the third expedition brought by Mohammad Bin Qasim which succeeded in capturing Sindh, from Mansura to Multan. However, because of the Arabs’ internal dissension and political infighting, Sindh remained a neglected outpost of the Arab empire, and soon reverted to local kings.
Myth 3
The myth of the idol-breaker.
Mahmood Ghaznavi, the great son of Islam and idol-breaker par excellence, took upon himself to destroy idols all over India and spread Islam in the subcontinent.
Mahmud, who came from neighbouring Ghazni, Central Asia, invaded India no less than 17 times. But except Punjab, he made no attempt to conquer any other part of the country or to try and consolidate his rule over the rest of India. In fact, the only thing that attracted him was the treasures of India, gold and precious stones, of which he took care and carried back home a considerable amount every time he raided the country. Temples in India were a repository of large amounts of treasure at the time, as were the churches in Europe, hence his special interest in temples and idols.
Contrary to popular belief, it was not the kings, the Central Asian sultans who ruled for over 300 years and the Mughals who ruled for another 300 years, who brought Islam to the subcontinent. That work was accomplished by the Sufi Sheikhs who came to India mainly to escape persecution from the fundamentalists back home, and who, through their high-mindedness, love for humanity, compassion, tolerance and simple living won the hearts of the people of all religions.
Myth 4
The myth of the cap-stitcher.
Of all the kings who have ruled the subcontinent, the one singled out for greatest praise in our text books is Aurangzeb, the last of the great Mughals. Baber built the empire; Humayun lost it and got it back; Akbar expanded and consolidated it; Jahangir was known for his sense of justice; Shahjehan for his magnificent buildings. But it is Aurangzeb, known as a pious man, who grabs the most attention. The prevalent myth is that he did not spend money from the treasury for his personal needs, but fulfilled them by stitching caps and copying out the Holy Quran. Is there any real need for discussing this assertion? Anyone who’s least bit familiar with the Mughal lifestyle would know how expensive it was to maintain their dozens of palaces. The Mughals used to have many wives, children, courtiers, concubines and slaves who would be present in each palace, whose needs had to be met. Could such expenses be met by stitching caps? And even if the king was stitching caps, would people buy them and use them as ordinary caps? Would they not pay exorbitant prices for them and keep them as heirlooms? Would a king, whose focus had to be on military threats surrounding him from all sides and on the need to save and consolidate a huge empire, have the time and leisure to sit and stitch caps? Let’s not forget that the person we are referring to as a pious Muslim was the same who became king after he imprisoned his won father in a cell in his palace and killed all his brothers to prevent them from taking over the throne.
Myth 5
It was the Muslims who were responsible for the war of 1857; and it was the Muslims who bore the brunt of persecution in the aftermath of the war, while the Hindus were natural collaborators of the British.
It is true that more Muslim regiments than Hindu rose up against the British in 1857. But the Hindus also played a major role in the battle (the courageous Rani of Jhansi is a prime example); and if Muslim soldiers were inflamed by the rumour that the cartridges were laced with pig fat, in the case of Hindus, the rumour was that it was cow fat. And a large number of Muslims remained loyal to the British to the very end. (The most illustrious of them being Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.)
Furthermore, the Muslims did not lose their empire after 1857. The British had already become masters of most of India before that time, having grasped vast territories from both Hindu and Muslim rulers through guile and subterfuge.
The Mughal emperor at the time was a ruler in name only; his jurisdiction did not extend beyond Delhi. After 1857, the Hindus prospered, because they were clever enough to acquire modern education, learn the English language, and take to trade and commerce. The Muslims were only land owners, wedded to the dreams of the past pomp and glory, and when their lands were taken away, they were left with nothing; their madressah education and proficiency in Persian proved to be of no help. As a matter of fact, it was a hindrance in such changing times.
Myth 6
The Muslims were in the forefront of the struggle against the British and were singled out for unfair treatment by the latter.
Not at all. In fact, the first ’gift’ given to the Muslims by the British was in 1905 in the form of partition of Bengal (later revoked in 1911). The Shimla delegation of 1906 has rightly been called a ’command performance’; the Muslims were assured by the viceroy of separate electorates and weightage as soon as their leaders asked for them. After that, he Muslim League came into being, established by pro-British stalwarts like the Aga Khan, Justice Amir Ali, some other nawabs and feudal lords. And the first objective of the Muslim League manifesto read: "To promote feelings of loyalty to the British government."
The Muslim League never carried out any agitation against the British. The only time the Muslims agitated was during the Khilafat Movement in the early ’20s, led by the Ali brothers and other radical leaders. Not a single Muslim League leader, including the Quaid-i-Azam, ever went to jail. It was the Congress which continued the anti-British non-violent and non-cooperation movement in the ’30s and ’40s, including the famous ’Quit India’ movement, while Muslim League leaders continued to denounce such movements and exhorted their followers not to take part in them.
Myth 7
The Muslim League was the only representative body of the Muslims.
It is an incontrovertible fact that it was only after 1940 that the Muslim League established itself as a popular party among the Muslims. Prior to that, as evident in the 1937 elections, the Muslim League did not succeed in forming the government in any of the Muslim majority provinces. In those elections, out of the total of 482 Muslim seats, the Muslim League won only 103 (less than one-fourth of the total). Other seats went either to Congress Muslims or to nationalist parties such as the Punjab Unionist Party, the Sind Unionist Party and the Krishak Proja Party of Bengal.
Myth 8
Allama Iqbal was the first person to come up with the idea of a separate Muslim state.
This is one of the most deeply embedded myths in our country and the one which has been propagated by all governments. In fact, the idea that Muslim majority provinces of the north-west formed a natural group and should be considered a single bloc had been mooted by the British as far back as 1858 and freely discussed in various newspaper articles and on political platforms. Several variations of the idea had come from important public personalities, including British, Muslims and some Hindus. By the time Allama Iqbal gave his famous speech in 1930, the idea had been put forward at least 64 times. So, Iqbal voiced something which was already there, and was not an original ’dream’. After his speech at Allahbad was reported, Allama Iqbal published a ’retraction’ in a British newspaper that he had not been talking of a separate Muslim sate, but only of a Muslim bloc within the Indian federation.
Myth 9
The Pakistan Resolution envisaged a single Muslim state.
The fact is that none of the proposals regarding the Muslim bloc mooted by different individuals or parties had included East Bengal in it. The emphasis had always been on north-western provinces, which shared common frontiers, while other Muslim majority states, such as Bengal and Hyderabad, were envisaged as separate blocs. So, it was in the Pakistan Resolution. The resolution reads: "The areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority as in the north-western and eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states, in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign."
Leaving aside the poor and ambiguous drafting of the entire resolution, the part about states (in plural) is very clear. It was only in 1946, at a convention of the Muslim League legislators in Delhi, that the original resolution was amended, which was adopted at a general Muslim League session and the objective became a single state.
Myth 10
March 23, 1940 is celebrated because the Pakistan Resolution was adopted on that day.The fact of the matter is that the Pakistan Resolution was only introduced on March 23 and was finally adopted on March 24 (the second and final day of the session).
As to why we celebrate March 23 is another story altogether. The day was never celebrated before 1956. It was first celebrated that year as the Republic Day to mark the passage of the first constitution and Pakistan’s emergence as a truly independent republic. It had the same importance for us as January 26 for India. But when Gen Ayub abrogated the constitution and established martial law in 1958, he was faced with a dilemma. He could not let the country celebrate a day commemorating the constitution that he had himself torn apart, nor could he cancel the celebration altogether. A way-out was found by keeping the celebration, but giving it another name: the Pakistan Resolution Day.
Myth 11
It was Ghulam Muhammad who created imbalance of power between the prime minister and head of state, and it was he who sought to establish the supremacy of the governor-general over the prime minister and parliament.
When Pakistan came into being, the British government’s India Act of 1935 was adopted as the working constitution. And it was the Quaid-i-Azam himself who introduced certain amendments to the act to make the governor-general the supreme authority. It was under these powers that the Quaid-i-Azam dismissed the government of Dr Khan Sahib in the NWFP in August 1947 and that of Mr Ayub Khuhro in Sindh in 1948.
Besides being governor-general, the Quaid-i-Azam also continued as president of the Muslim League and president of the Constituent Assembly.
It was these same powers under which Mr Daultana’s government was dismissed in Punjab in 1949 by Khawaja Nazimuddin, who himself was dismissed as prime minister in 1953 by Ghulam Mohammad.
However, in 1954, a move was started by members of the then Constituent Assembly to table an amendment to the act, taking away excessive powers of the governor-general. It was this move which provoked the governor-general, Ghulam Mohammad, to dismiss the Constituent Assembly in 1954, and thereby change the course of Pakistan’s history.
These are some of the myths that have been drummed into our heads from childhood and have become part of our consciousness. There are scores more, pervading our everyday life. And there are many unanswered questions such as:
• What is Pakistan’s ideology and when was the term first coined? (It was never heard of before 1907.)
• Why was Gandhi murdered? (He was supposedly guarding Pakistan’s interest.)
• What is the truth about the so-called traitors, Shaikh Mujeeb, Wali Khan, and G.M. Syed?
• What caused the break-away of East Pakistan?
• Why was Bhutto put to death?
• Are all our politicians corrupt and self-serving?
• Why does our history repeat itself after every 10 years?
The answers to all these questions require a thorough study of history, not mythology. But history unfortunately is a discipline that has never been taken seriously by anyone in our country. It’s time things changed. REFERENCE: The myth of history By Prof Shahida Kazi Posted: Mar 28, 2005 Mon 01:12 am http://www.chowk.com/ilogs/38007/35925 [The Article had appeared in Daily Dawn in 2005] The myth of history By Prof Shahida Kazi March 27, 2005 http://www.dawn.com/weekly/dmag/archive/050327/dmag1.htm
Romila Thapar: India's past and present — how history informs contemporary narrative
In February 1899, British novelist and poet Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem entitled “The White Man’s Burden: The United States and The Philippine Islands.” In this poem, Kipling urged the U.S. to take up the “burden” of empire, as had Britain and other European nations. Published in the February, 1899 issue of McClure’s Magazine,The White Man’s Burden”: Kipling’s Hymn to U.S. Imperialism http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5478/
Take up the White Man’s burden—
Send forth the best ye breed—
Go send your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need
To wait in heavy harness
On fluttered folk and wild—
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child
Take up the White Man’s burden
تاریخ کی دیو مالا ز پروفیسر شاہدہ قاضی
تاریخ ایک ایسا شعبہ تعلیم ہے جسے پاکستانیوں نے کبھی سنجیدگی سے نہیں لیا۔ نتیجہ یہ ہے کہ اس شعبے کو اس بری طرح مسخ کردیا گیا ہے کہ بہت سی گھڑی ہوئی کہانیاں ہمارے اجتماعی شعور کا حصہ بن گئی ہیں۔
کیا سچ میں دیومالا کا تاریخ سے کوئی تعلق ہے؟ کیا دیومالا اور تاریخ ایک ہی چیز کے دو نام ہیں؟ یا تاریخ ہی دیومالا ہے؟
بلاشک ان دونوں میں بہت نازک سا فرق ہے۔ زمانہ قبل از تاریخ سے ہی انسان ہمیشہ اپنی جڑوں کی تلاش میں رہا ہے۔ وہ عہد گزشتہ کے افسانوی کرداروں کے بارے میں حقیقی اور ٹھوس معلومات کی تلاش میں بھی رہا ہے، وہ کردار جو ہمارے اجتماعی شعور کا حصہ بن چکے ہیں۔ نتیجتًا ہم دیکھتے ہیں کہ کنگ آرتھر نامی کسی بادشاہ کی تاریخ میں موجودگی ثابت کرنے کی جستجو کی جاتی ہے، افسانوی شہر ٹرائے کی باقیات تلاش کی جاتی ہیں، اور نوح علیہ السلام کی کشتی کے رکنے کا مقام تلاش کرنے کے لیے کئی مہمات وضع کی جاتی ہیں۔
ساٹھ اور ستر کے عشروں میں عالمی سطح پر ایک تحریک چلائی گئی تاکہ دیومالائی داستانوں میں موجود ’خداؤں‘ کی موجودگی ثابت کی جائے؛ کہ وہ دوسری کہکشاؤں سے آئے تھے؛ اور یہ کہ انسانیت کی ساری ترقی ان اجنبی فوق البشر ہیروز کی مرہون منت ہے۔ اس موضوع پر کئی ایک کتابیں لکھی گئیں۔
ہم، یہاں پاکستان میں، الگ ہی مزاج کے حامل ہیں۔ دوسری قومیتوں کی طرح کوئی باقاعدہ دیو مالا نہیں تو کیا ہوا، ہم نے اپنی دیومالائی داستانیں بنا لیں، جن میں ایسے ایسے ہیروز کی یادیں ہیں جن کے ساتھ بے شمار کارنامے منسوب ہیں۔
لیکن فرق یہ ہے کہ ہمارے افسانوی ہیرو قبل از تاریخ اور بہت پرانے دور کے نہیں بلکہ ہمارے آج کے دور سے ہی تعلق رکھتے ہیں۔ ان ہیروز کے گرد بالکل حقیقی لگنے والی دیومالا کھڑی کی گئی ہے، ان کی شخصیت اور کارنامے، جو کہ ہمارے بچوں کے کانوں میں اس وقت سے انڈیلنا شروع کردئیے جاتے ہیں جیسے ہی وہ سکول جانے کے قابل ہوجائیں۔ یہ تلقین اتنی گہری ہوتی ہے کہ حقائق سے پردہ اٹھانے یا سچائی کا چہرہ دکھانے کی ہر کوشش کو ہرزہ سرائی سے کم پر محمول نہیں کیا جاتا۔
ذیل میں ایسی ہی کچھ بہت عام سی دیومالائیں موجود ہیں:
دیو مالا 1
ہماری تاریخ 712 عیسوی سے شروع ہوتی ہے جب محمد بن قاسم برصغیر میں آیا اور اس نے دیبل کی بندرگاہ کو فتح کیا۔
کسی بھی معاشرتی علوم یا معالعہ پاکستان کی کتاب کو اٹھا لیں،وہ محمد بن قاسم سے ہی شروع ہوتی ہے۔ اس کی آمد سے پہلے کیا تھا؟ جی ہاں، راجہ داہر جیسے ظالم و جابر ہندو حکمران اور پسی ہوئی غیر تہذیب یافتہ آبادی جو کسی ’نجات دہندہ‘ کی آمد کی شدت سے منتظر تھی تاکہ وہ انھیں ظالم حکمرانوں کے پنجوں سے نجات دلائے۔ اور جب نجات دہندہ آیا، تو اس کا کھلی باہنوں سے استقبال کیا گیا، اور شکرگزار لوگ جوق در جوق اسلام میں داخل ہوگئے۔
کیا ایسا ہی ہوا تھا؟ تاریخ کا یہ ورژن بڑی آسانی سے نظر انداز کر دیا جاتا ہے کہ وہ علاقہ جہاں ہمارا ملک واقع ہے کی بڑی شاندار 6000 سالہ تاریخ ہے۔ موہن جودڑو کو بھول جائیں۔ ہم ان کے بارے میں بہت زیادہ نہیں جانتے۔ لیکن معلومہ تاریخ ہمیں بتاتی ہے کہ محمد بن قاسم سے پہلے، اس علاقے میں، جو تقریبًا پنجاب، سندھ، سرحد پر مشتمل ہے پر کم سے کم بارہ مختلف بادشاہوں نے حکومت کی جو دینا کے مختلف حصوں سے تعلق رکھتے تھے، جیسے کہ خسرو سے داریوش تک کے ایرانی حکمران، یونانی جن میں بیکتیریائی، سچیانی، پارتھئین، چین سے کشانا، اور (اٹیلا کے خاندان سے تعلق رکھنے والے) ہُن جو چین سے ہی آئے تھے، یہ ان ہندو خاندانوں کے علاوہ تھے جن میں اشوک، چندر گپت اور موریا جیسے عظیم حکمران شامل ہیں۔
گندھارا کے دور میں اس علاقے کو دنیا کی سب سے بڑی اور اہم یونیورسٹی کا وطن ہونے کا اعزاز حاصل رہا، ہمارا شہر جسے ہم آج ٹیکسلا کہتے ہیں۔ ہم اعلٰی تہذیب یافتہ، پڑھے لکھے، آسودہ حال، تخلیقی اور معاشی طور پر زرخیز لوگ رہے ہیں، اور بہت سے ممالک نے ہم سے علمی اور معاشی دونوں طرح سے فیوض حاصل کیے۔ یہ ایسی چیز ہے جو ہمیں بھولنی نہیں چاہیے۔ لیکن کیا ہم اپنے بچوں کو یہ سب بتاتے ہیں؟ نہیں۔ چناچہ یہ دیو مالا نسل در نسل چلتی ہے۔
دیو مالا 2
محمد بن قاسم ہندوستان آیا تاکہ وہ مظلوم بیواؤں اور یتیم لڑکیوں کی مدد کرے۔
تاریخ سے ہماری خوش فہمانہ چشم پوشی کی وجہ سے ہم جانتے ہی نہیں یا جاننے کی کوشش ہی نہیں کرتے کہ وہ دور اسلامی سلطنت کو وسعت دینے کا دور تھا۔ عربوں نے دنیا کا بڑا حصہ فتح کرلیا تھا، جس میں پورا مشرق وسطی، فارس، شمالی افریقہ اور سپین شامل ہیں۔ چناچہ منطقی لحاظ سے یہ نہیں کہا جاسکتا کہ انھوں نے ہندوستان جیسے روائتی خزانوں کے ملک کو فتح کرنے کا نہ سوچا ہو۔
حقیت یہ ہے کہ عربوں نے ہندوستان کی طرف اپنی پہلی مہم حضرت عمرؓ کے دور میں بھیجی تھی۔ اسی کے تسلسل میں ایک مہم حضرت عثمانؓ کے دور میں مکران بھی آئی۔ لیکن وہ اس علاقے میں کوئی حکومت قائم کرنے میں ناکام رہے تھے۔ بعد میں راجہ کی جانب سے سمندری قذاقوں کے ہاتھوں اغوا شدہ بحری جہازوں (جو اتفاقًا عورتوں اور لڑکیوں کے ساتھ ساتھ سری لنکا کے خزانوں سے بھی بھرے ہوئے تھے) کا معاوضہ دینے سے انکار پر دو مہمات پہلے ہی ہندوستان روانہ کی جاچکی تھیں لیکن وہ بھی ناکام رہی تھیں۔ یہ تیسری مہم تھی جو محمد بن قاسم کی قیادت میں سندھ بھجی گئی اور کامیاب ہوئی جس کا مقصد منصورہ سے ملتان تک کے علاقے کو قبضے میں کرنا تھا۔ تاہم عربوں کی اندرونی رنجش اور سیاسی رسہ کشی کی وجہ سے سندھ عرب سلطنت کا نظراندازشدہ کنارہ بنا رہا، اور جلد ہی اس پر مقامی حکمران قابض ہوگئے۔
دیو مالا 3
بت شکن کی دیو مالا۔
محمود غزنوی، بیک وقت اسلام کا عظیم بیٹا اور عظیم بت شکن، نے پورے ہندوستان سے بت شکنی کا بیڑہ اٹھایا اور برصغیر میں اسلام کو پھیلا دیا۔
محمود، جو کہ قریبی ریاست غزنی وسط ایشیا سے آیا تھا، نے انڈیا پر کم از کم 17 بار حملہ کیا۔ لیکن پنجاب کے علاوہ اس نے ملک کے کسی اور حصے کو فتح کرنے یا ہندوستان کے دوسرے حصوں پر اپنا اقتدار مضبوط کرنے کی کوئی کوشش نہ کی۔ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ اسے صرف ہندوستان کے زر و جواہرات نے للچایا، سونا اور قیمتی پتھر، جن کا اس نے خیال کیا اور ہر بار اپنے حملے کے بعد ان کی اچھی خاصی مقدار اپنے ساتھ واپس لے کر گیا۔ ہندوستان کے مندر اس وقت زر و جواہر اور خزانوں کا مخزن تھے، جیسا کہ یورپ میں کلیسا کا کام تھا، چناچہ مندروں اور بتوں میں اس کی خصوصی توجہ کا مرکز یہی زر و جواہر تھے۔
عام عقیدے کے برعکس، نہ یہاں پرحکومت کرنے والے بادشاہوں، وسط ایشیا کے سلاطین جنہوں نے 300 سال حکومت کی، اور نہ ہی مغل جنہوں نے بعد کے 300 سال حکومت کی، نے یہاں اسلام متعارف کرایا۔ یہ کام ہندوستان آنے والے صوفی بزرگوں نے کیا جو اپنے وطن میں بنیاد پرستوں کی ایذارسانیوں سے تنگ آکر ہندوستان چلے آئے تھے، جن کے اعلٰی اخلاق ، انسانیت کے لیے محبت، دردمندی، رواداری اور سادہ طرز زندگی نے تمام مذاہب کے لوگوں کے دل جیت لیے۔
دیو مالا 4
ٹوپیاں سینے والے کی دیو مالا
برصغیر پر حکومت کرنے والے تمام بادشاہوں میں سے، جس کی تعریف ہماری کتابوں میں سب سے زیادہ کی جاتی ہے وہ اورنگزیب ہے، مغلوں کا آخری عظیم تاجدار۔ بابر نے سلطنت بنائی؛ ہمایوں نے گنوائی اور پھر واپس حاصل کی؛ اکبر نے اسے پھیلایا اور مستحکم کیا؛ جہانگیر اپنے عدل کی وجہ سے جانا جاتا تھا؛ اور شاہجہاں اپنی عظیم تعمیرات کی وجہ سے۔ لیکن اورنگزیب جسے ایک متقی انسان سمجھا جاتا ہے سب سے زیادہ توجہ کا مستحق ٹھہرتا ہے۔ پائی جانے والی دیومالا یہ ہے کہ وہ خزانے میں سے اپنے ذاتی خرچ کے لیے رقم نہیں لیتا تھا، بلکہ وہ اپنی ضروریات ٹوپیاں سی کر اور قرآن کی کتابت کرکے پوری کرتا تھا۔ کیا اس دعوے کو بار بار دوہرانے کی کوئی خاص ضرورت ہے؟ کوئی بھی جو مغلوں کے طرز زندگی سے تھوڑی سی واقفیت رکھتا ہے یہ جانتا ہوگا کہ درجنوں کے حساب سے محلات کو چلانے کا خرچ کتنا تھا۔ مغلوں کی کئی بیویاں، بچے، مصاحب، داشتائیں، اور غلام ہوا کرتے تھے جو کہ ہر محل میں ہوا کرتے ہونگے اور جن کی ضروریات بھی پوری کرنا ہوتی ہونگی۔ کیا ایسے اخراجات ٹوپیاں سینے سے پورے ہوسکتے تھے؟ اور اگر بادشاہ ٹوپیاں سیتا بھی تھا تو کیا لوگ انھیں خریدتے تھے اور عام ٹوپیوں کی طرح پہنتے تھے؟ کیا وہ ان کے لیے بہت زیادہ رقم خرچ نہیں کرتے ہونگے اور بطور مقدس ورثہ نہیں سنبھالتے ہونگے؟ کیا ایک بادشاہ، جس کی نظر اپنے اردگرد موجود جنگی خطروں اور ایک عظیم سلطنت کو محفوظ اور مستحکم رکھنے پر رہتی تھی، کے پاس اتنا وقت ہوگا کہ وہ آرام سے بیٹھ کر ٹوپیاں سی سکے؟ یہ نہ بھولیے کہ وہ شخص جسے ہم متقی مسلمان کہہ رہے ہیں اپنے ہی باپ کو اپنے محل کی ایک کوٹھڑی میں قید کرکے اور اپنے بھائیوں قتل کرکے برسر اقتدار آیا تھا تاکہ وہ اس کے اقتدار کے لیے خطرہ نہ بن سکیں۔
دیو مالا 5
یہ مسلمان تھے جو 1857 کی جنگ کے ذمہ دار ہیں؛ اور یہ مسلمان ہی تھے جنہوں نے جنگ کے بعد ایذارسانیاں اور تکلیفیں برداشت کیں، جبکہ ہندو انگریزوں کے قدرتی اتحادی تھے۔
یہ سچ ہے کہ ہندوؤں کی نسبت زیادہ مسلمان رجمنٹوں نے 1857 میں علم بغاوت بلند کیا۔ لیکن ہندؤں نے بھی لڑائی میں اہم کردار ادا کیا (جھانسی کی رانی اس کی بہترین مثال ہے)؛ نیز اگرمسلمان فوجی اس افواہ پر برافروختہ ہوگئے تھے کہ کارتوسوں کا سرا خنزیر کی چربی سے بنا ہے تو ہندو بھی اس افواہ پر کہ کارتوس کا سرا گائے کی چربی سے بنا ہے پر آپے سے باہر ہوگئے تھے۔ اور مسلمانوں کی بڑی اکثریت انگریزوں کے ساتھ آخر تک وفادار بھی رہی۔ (ان میں سب سے زیادہ مشہور سرسید احمد خان ہیں۔)
مزید یہ کہ مسلمانوں نے 1857 کے بعد اپنی سلطنت نہیں کھوئی تھی۔ انگریز اس سے پہلے ہی ہندوستان کے بہت سے علاقے کے آقا بن بیٹھے تھے، مسلمان اور ہندو حکمرانوں سے حیلے بازی اور فریب کاری سے بہت سا علاقہ ہتھیا چکے تھے۔
اس وقت مغل بادشاہ کی موجودگی برائے نام ہی تھی؛ اس کی عمل داری دہلی سے باہر نہیں تھی۔ 1857 کے بعد ہندوؤں نے تیزی سے ترقی کی، چونکہ وہ جدید تعلیم حاصل کرنے، انگریزی زبان سیکھنے، اور کامرس و تجارت میں آگے بڑھنے میں تیز نکلے۔ مسلمان صرف جاگیر دار تھے، ماضی کی عظمت اور شان و شوکت کے خوابوں سے بندھے ہوئے، اور جب ان کی جاگیریں ضبط کرلی گئیں تو ان کے پاس کچھ بھی نہ رہا؛ ان کی درس نظامی کی تعلیم اور فارسی میں مہارت ان کے کچھ کام نہ آسکی۔ یہ حقیقت ہے کہ یہ سب بدلتے ہوئے زمانے کے ساتھ بدلنے میں رکاوٹ تھا۔
دیو مالا 6
مسلمان انگریزوں کے خلاف جدوجہد میں سب سے آگے تھے اور بعد میں ان سے خصوصًا ناانصافی پر مشتمل سلوک کیا گیا۔
بالکل بھی نہیں۔ بلکہ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ مسلمانوں کو پہلا ’تحفہ‘ انگریزوں نے 1905 میں بنگال کی تقسیم کی شکل میں دیا (جسے 1911 میں واپس لے لیا گیا) 1906 کے شملہ وفد کو صحیح طور پر ’حکمیہ کارکردگی‘ کا حامل کہا جاتا ہے؛ مسلمانوں کو ان کے رہنماؤں کے مطالبے پر وائسرائے نے بلا تاخیر جداگانہ انتخاب اور رائے دہندگی کا یقین دلایا۔ اس کے بعد مسلم لیگ وجود میں آئی، جسے انگریزوں سے قرب رکھنے والے رہنماؤں جیسے آغا خان، جسٹس امیر علی، کچھ دوسرے نوابین اور جاگیر داروں نے قائم کیا۔ اور مسلم لیگ کے منشور کا پہلا مقصد کچھ یوں ہے:”برطانوی حکومت کے بارے میں وفادارانہ خیالات کو فروغ دیا جائے۔”
مسلم لیگ نے برطانیہ عظمی کے خلاف کبھی بھی تحریک نہ چلائی۔ اکلوتا موقع جب مسلمانوں نے تحریک چلائی 20 کے عشرے کی تحریک خلافت تھی جس کی قیادت علی برادران اور دوسرے بچے کھچے رہنماؤں نے کی۔ مسلم لیگ کا ایک بھی رہنما، قائد اعظم سمیت، کبھی بھی جیل نہیں گیا۔ یہ کانگرس تھی جس نے برطانیہ مخالف عدم تشدد اور عدم تعاون پر مشتمل تحریک 30 اور 40 کے عشرے میں جاری رکھی جس میں مشہور زمانہ ’ہندوستان چھوڑ دو‘ تحریک بھی شامل ہے، جبکہ مسلم لیگی رہنماؤں نے ان تحریکوں کی مذمت کرنے اور اپنے پیروؤں کو ان میں حصہ لینے سے روکنا جاری رکھا۔
دیو مالا 7
صرف مسلم لیگ ہی مسلمانوں کی نمائندہ جماعت تھی۔
یہ ناقابل تردید حقیقت ہے کہ1940 کے بعد مسلم لیگ نے مسلمانوں میں مقبول ترین جماعت کے طور پر اپنا تشخص قائم کرلیا۔ لیکن اس سے پہلے، 1937 کے انتخابات سے یہ ثابت ہے کہ مسلم لیگ کسی بھی مسلم اکثریت والے صوبے میں حکومت نہیں بنا سکی تھی۔ ان انتخابات میں، 482 مسلم نشستوں میں سے مسلم لیگ کو صرف 103 ملی تھیں (جو کہ کل میزان کے ایک چوتھائی سے بھی کم ہے۔) دوسری نشستیں یا تو کانگریس کے مسلمانوں کو مل گئیں، یا پھر دوسری قوم پرست جماعتوں جیسے پنجاب یوننیسٹ پارٹی، سندھ یونینسٹ پارٹی اور بنگال کریشک پوجا پارٹی کو چلی گئی تھیں۔
دیو مالا 8
علامہ اقبال پہلے انسان تھے جنہوں نے الگ مسلم ریاست کا خیال پیش کیا۔
یہ ان گہری راسخ شدہ دیومالاؤں میں سے ہے جن کا پروپیگنڈہ ہر حکومت نے کیا۔ حقیقت میں، شمال مغربی علاقے کے مسلم اکثریتی صوبے ایک قدرتی گروپ بناتے ہیں اور انھیں ایک اکائی تصور کیا جانا چاہیے کا خیال 1858 سے برطانویوں کے ہاں زیر بحث تھا اور اسے مختلف سیاسی پلیٹ فارمز اور اخباری مضامین میں بھی اکثر زیر بحث لایا گیا۔ اس تصور کی مختلف صورتیں اہم عوامی شخصیات نے پیش کیں، جن میں برطانوی، ہندو اور مسلمان سب شامل ہیں۔ جب علامہ اقبال نے اپنا 1930 کا مشہور خطبہ پیش کیا، اس وقت تک کم از کم 64 بار یہ تصور پیش کیا جاچکا تھا۔ چناچہ اقبال نے جو کچھ کہا وہ پہلے ہی سے موجود تھا، اور یہ کوئی طبع زاد ’خواب‘ نہ تھا۔ ان کے الہ آباد کے خطبے کی اشاعت کے بعد، علامہ اقبال نے ایک برطانوی اخبار میں ایک ’تردید‘ شائع کروائی کہ ان کا مقصد الگ مسلم ریاست کا مطالبہ نہیں تھا، بلکہ ان کی مراد ہندوستان کے وفاق میں رہتے ہوئے ایک مسلم بلاک سے تھی۔
دیو مالا 9
قراردادِ پاکستان نے ایک متحدہ مسلم ریاست کا تصور پیش کیا۔
حقیقت یہ ہے کہ مسلم بلاک کے بارے میں پیش کردہ مختلف تصورات میں ،جو انفرادی اور اجتماعی طور پر پیش ہوئے، مشرقی بنگال شامل نہیں تھا۔ ہمیشہ شمال مشرقی صوبوں پر زور دیا جاتا رہا، جن کی سرحدیں مشترک تھیں جبکہ دوسری مسلم اکثریتی ریاستوں جیسے بنگال اور حیدرآباد دکن کو الگ بلاک خیال کیا جاتا تھا۔ چناچہ یہ تھی قراردادِ پاکستان۔ جس کے مطابق: “علاقے جہاں مسلمان عددی اکثریت میں ہیں جیسا کہ ہندوستان کے شمال مغربی اور مشرقی علاقے، کو آزاد ریاستوں میں بدل دینا چاہیے، جہاں متعلقہ اکائیاں خودمُختار اور حکومت سازی میں آزاد ہوں۔
پوری قرارداد کے ادنی اور مبہم مسودے کو پرے رکھتے ہوئے، ریاستوں (جو کہ جمع ہے) والا حصہ بالکل واضح ہے۔ یہ صرف 1946 میں، مسلم لیگ کے نمائندوں کے اجلاس منعقدہ دہلی میں ہوا کہ قرارداد میں ترمیم کی گئی اور اسے مسلم لیگ کے ایک عمومی اجلاس میں اپنا لیا گیا اور مقصد ایک متحدہ ریاست کا قیام قرار پایا۔
دیو مالا 10
23 مارچ 1940 اس لیے منایا جاتا ہے کہ قراردادِ پاکستان کو اس دن نصب العین قرار دیا گیا۔ حقیقت حال یہ ہے کہ قراردادِ پاکستان 23 مارچ کو صرف پیش کی گئی تھی جبکہ اس کو منظور اور اپنایا 24 مارچ کو گیا تھا ( جو کہ اس اجلاس کی دوسری اور حتمی نشست تھی)۔
یہ ایک الگ کہانی ہے کہ ہم 23 مارچ کیوں مناتے ہیں۔ یہ دن 1956 سے پہلی کبھی نہیں منایا گیا۔ اس سال یہ پہلی بار یوم جمہوریہ کے طور پر منایا گیا تھا چونکہ ہمارا پہلا آئین منظور ہوا تھا اور پاکستان ایک حقیقی آزاد جمہوریہ بنا تھا۔ ہمارے لیے اس کی اہمیت ایسے ہی ہے جیسے ہندوستان کے لیے 26 جنوری کی۔ لیکن جب جنرل ایوب خان نے 1958 میں آئین منسوخ کرکے مارشل لاء نافذ کیا تو اسے اس دُبدھا کا سامنا کرنا پڑا۔ وہ ملک کو ایک ایسا دن نہیں منانے دے سکتا تھا جو اس آئین کی یادگار تھا جس کی اس نے خود دھجیاں اڑائی تھیں، اور نہ ہی وہ اس جشن کو روک سکتا تھا۔ چناچہ حل یہ نکالا گیا کہ جشن کو جاری رکھا گیا، لیکن اس کا نام بدل دیا گیا: قراردادِ پاکستان کا دن۔
دیو مالا 11
یہ غلام محمد تھا جس نے وزیر اعظم اور ریاست کے سربراہ کے مابین اختیارات کا عدم توازن پیدا کیا، اور وہی گورنر جنرل کی فوقیت کو وزیراعظم اور پارلیمنٹ پر مسلط کرنا چاہتا تھا۔
جب پاکستان وجود میں آیا تو ابتدا میں برطانوی حکومت کا 1935 کا ہندوستانی حکومت کا ایکٹ بطور عبوری آئین اپنایا گیا۔ اور قائداعظم نے بذات خود اس ایکٹ میں ایسی ترامیم متعارف کروائیں جس کی وجہ سے گورنر جنرل بالادست اور مقتدر ہوگیا۔ انھی اختیارات کی رو سے قائد اعظم نے اگست 1947 میں سرحد میں ڈاکٹر خان صاحب کی حکومت اور 1948 میں سندھ میں مسٹر ایوب کھوسو کی حکومت کو برطرف کیا۔
گورنر جنرل رہنے کے ساتھ ساتھ قائد اعظم مسلم لیگ کے صدر اور قانون ساز اسمبلی کے صدر بھی رہے۔
یہی اختیارات تھے جن کے تحت پنجاب میں 1949 میں مسٹر دولتانہ کی حکومت کو خواجہ ناظم الدین نے برطرف کیا، جن کی حکومت کو 1953 میں غلام محمد نے برطرف کیا تھا۔
تاہم 1954 میں اس وقت کی قانون ساز اسمبلی کے اراکین کی طرف سے ایک تحریک چلائی گئی تاکہ ایکٹ میں ترامیم کرکے گورنر جنرل سے اضافی اختیارات واپس لے لیے جائیں۔ اسی تحریک نے گورنر جنرل غلام محمد کو مشتعل کیا اور اس نے قانون ساز اسمبلی 1954 میں توڑ دی، اور پاکستان کی تاریخ کا دھارا بدل ڈالا۔
یہ کچھ دیومالائی داستانیں ہیں جنہیں بچپن سے ہی ہمارے کانوں میں انڈیلا جاتا ہے اور جو ہمارے شعور کا حصہ بن جاتی ہیں۔ ایسے بے شمار اور افسانے ہماری روزمرہ کی زندگی میں سرایت کیے ہوئے ہیں۔ اور یہاں بہت سے سوالات ہیں جن کے جواب موجود نہیں جیسے:
• نظریہ پاکستان کیا ہے اور یہ اصطلاح سب سے پہلے کب ایجاد ہوئی؟ (یہ 1907 سے پہلے کبھی نہیں سنی گئی۔)
گاندھی کا قتل کیوں کیا گیا؟
(چونکہ وہ شاید پاکستان کے مفادات کا تحفظ کررہا تھا۔)
• نام نہاد باغیوں شیخ مجیب، ولی خان، اور جی ایم سید کی حقیقت کیا ہے؟
• سقوط مشرقی پاکستانی کی وجہ کیا تھی؟
• بھٹو کو کیوں موت کے حوالے کیا گیا؟
• کیا تمام سیاستدان کرپٹ اور مفادپرست ہیں؟
•ہماری تاریخ ہر 10 سال بعد اپنے آپ کو کیوں دوہراتی ہے؟
ان تمام سوالات کے جوابات دیو مالا کی بجائے تاریخ کے مکمل مطالعے کے متقاضی ہیں۔ لیکن بدقسمتی سے تاریخ ایک ایسا شعبہ تعلیم ہے جسے ہمارے ملک میں کبھی بھی سنجیدگی سے نہیں لیا گیا۔ یہ وقت ہے کہ چیزوں کو بدلا جائے۔
Courtesy: Mr Awais Masood http://roshnipk.com/blog/?p=130
