Thread: Pakistan ,Two Nation Theory and a few lies

Respected Fellow Forum Member Vision

I find that , for the following statements you have not provided any links/sources to back up your claim.Sorry for the multiple number of posts . I just found time to do this.This post is NOT meant as an offence against any member or any theory , but will only stand testimony to the fact that you fail miserably when it comes to posting something credible with accurate, enough sources/links.

You have 888 posts to your name as i type , and you are my senior here , does it do justice to this(any) board to arrogantly post/state something without basing it on facts or atleast without posting the sources/links for your facts.

Maybe , we members are very much in need of an education from you , with regard to your historical knowledge of the region !

some parts of NOrth India were Aryanized .... but the were a small percentage

? Rajputs were originaly Saka's who came from central Asia and settled mostly in the punjab ....

sati was a Rajput tradition .... even before they came to india .... india was influenced by Rajputs .... not the other way around

if your claim that Kushans are indian despite the fact that their capital was nowhere near present day India and the limits of their state EXCLUDED 99% of India ..

The above point has been proven false , by other members.But we find no links from your side to prove that the kushan states EXCLUDED 99% of India.

Mathura was an administrative center for that part of the extended sphere of Influence ...

I doubt you have the ability to takeup this type of impartial and independent research .... since you are blinded by what has been fed to you in your biased Indian history books ...

Any idea what the bias in History books of ours are ? Any proof ? In the context of Kushans i.e. ?

Respected Member , once you are able to provide sources for above six ( 6 ) very important points , then we may discuss about crediblity and bias.

As i said before , i just found time to do this , so sorry with the multiple posts.Will try to avoid in future.

Paper no. 895

15. 01. 2004

ALLAMA IQBAL- The founder of Muslim politics in the Indian Subcontinent

by R.Upadhyay

Ever since the demise of Islamic political order in the Indian sub-continent, its Muslim population remained communally surcharged. From Shah Waliullah (1703-1762) onwards a number of Muslim thinkers like Muhammad Qasim Nanautawi (1833-77) Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (1828-1905) and Sir Sayed Ahmad Khan (1817-1898) took up the leadership of Muslims to revive the Islamic glory. The first two who had acted as commander and Qadi (Judge) of the fighting force in Shamali rebellion in 1857 against the British -launched Deoband movement to push back the Muslims into medieval era for Shariatisation of India. The third one had launched the Aligarh movement for modern education among the Muslims and for their political domination over Hindus in British India. Sir Mohammad Iqbal (1877-1938) popularly revered as Allama (Great Scholar) Iqbal on the other hand enunciated two-nation theory and separated Muslim nationalism from Indian nationalism with the same objective and became the political ideologue for Pakistan movement. He did not continue with his intellectual worldview on Indian nationalism, which he often projected during his student days. He was the first seminal Islamist, who expanded this theory of Muslim separatism in his presidential speech of Muslim League session at Allahabad in 1930 and firmly established it in Indian Muslim mind for their political exclusivism. Later Mohammad Ali Jinnah implemented it as political ideology for accelerating Pakistan movement.

Since the consolidation of British power in India, the descendant of Mogul nobility remained in the forefront of the Muslim leadership in political social and even religious matters. They could successfully produce a middle class among converted Muslims through modern education among them along with Islamic knowledge. It was their tactical move to use them as fighters for their self-seeking political interest. Sir Sayed Ahmad Khan was the first Mogul scion, who launched Aligarh movement for modern education among his community members. "The main preoccupation of these modernists was the uplift of Muslims as a group by defending their position as former rulers" (The Muslim Almanac - Edited by Azim A. Nanji, 1996, page 66).

During British colonial rule the Muslims of Indian sub-continent were profoundly influenced by the religio -political thought of Shah Waliullah and Sir Sayed Ahmad Khan. These two leaders had attempted to update the political psyche of the Muslims as former rulers of the country and their social hegemony over the Hindus. To carry forward the legacy of these leaders Iqbal created an ideological platform for Muslim national movement and created conceptual base for creation of Pakistan. With a view to fulfill their dream the educated Muslim middle class under the influence of Iqbal's political thought joined the political movement for uplift of Muslims as an exclusive social and religious group.

Unlike Sir Sayed Ahmad , who was a Mogul scion, Iqbal was a descendant of a Kshmiri Pundit and was therefore deeply rooted to the cultural tradition of Indian sub-continent in his student days. His vibrant poetic talent and academic brilliance gave him iconic status in Indian society. But deeply influenced with Aligarh movement of Sir Sayed Ahmad, who was loyal to the British and strongly opposed to the Muslims joining Indian national Congress with a plea that it was a Hindu-dominated organisation - Iqbal also became a supporter of political Islamists in the country.

Mohammad Iqbal was widely known as poet, philosopher, lawyer, jurist and spiritual Godfather of Pakistan. He was a versatile genius but "full of inner contradictions in different periods of his life" (Studies in Oriental Culture - Edited by Hafeez Malk, Columbia University, 1971, Page iv/ Iqbal And Foundation of Pakistan nationalism: Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, page iv). He proved his poetic talent as a symbol of Indian nationalism during his student days in Sialkot and Lahore, when he composed the song 'Sare Jahan Se Achha Hindostan Hamaara (Our India is best in the whole world) … Mazhab Nahin Sikhata Aapas Me Bair Rakhana'Hindi hain Ham Watan hain Hindostan Hamara (Religion does not teach animosity towards each other, we are all Indians, India is our country) in 1900.

"In the first of his poetic and philosophical statements, Iqbal still took position not of Muslim but of all-Indian nationalism and did not call for the isolation of the Muslims. However, the contradiction of his world view was manifested in the fact that while fighting to overcome religious barriers, he remained overall a Muslim" (Studies in Oriental Culture - Edited by Hafeez Malk, Columbia University, 1971, Page 112). He therefore, completely negated this initial passion in him for this country, when he turned into a political Islamist and communally divided the people of the region. The turning point in his intellectual perspective therefore, prevented his poetry to become universal, as its appeal took a turn from Indian nationalism to Muslim nationalism.

Iqbal's concept of parochial nationalism was initially floated by Shah Waliullah (1703-1762) and subsequently pronounced by Sir Sayed Ahmad Khan as two-nation theory in 1880s for communal division of Indian subcontinent. Amidst much controversy, Khan said in 1883 that Hindus and Muslims constituted two separate nations (Studies in Islamic Culture by Prof. Aziz Ahmad, 2000, Page 265). But this delusive theory was formally enunciated by Iqbal in Allahabad session of All India Muslim League presided over by him in 1930 but adopted and implemented by Jinnah ( 1876 -1948) for creation of Pakistan. Iqbal persuaded Jinnah to bargain for a separate homeland exclusively for the Muslims. "In a letter to Jinnah on June 21, 1937 Iqbal stated unequivocally: a separate federation of Muslim provinces…. is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of non-Muslims" (Studies in Oriental Culture – Edited by Hafeez Malk, Columbia University, 1971, Page XI).

Iqbal stayed in Europe (1905-1908) for higher studies and did his Ph.D. from the University of Munich in 1907. He joined the British Committee of All India Muslim League in 1908 (The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, 1995, Vol. 2, page 222) before his return to India the same year. By the time he returned from Europe the colonial authorities were preparing for splitting the national force of Hindu-Muslim unity with a grant of separate electorates for the Muslims. But Iqbal never looked back to his initial nationalist outlook to meet the challenge of this divisive game of the British. He was found guided more by his communally biased political thought, which was contrary to his natural poetic intellect. He closely monitored the Muslim psyche and became to a Muslim activist due to his mystic Islamic background and gradually became an ardent advocate of Muslim nationalism at the cost of Indian nationalism.

By first decade of twentieth century, when Indian National Congress emerged as a political force, Iqbal also joined with political Islamists for political domination of Muslims as they were against a democratic system of governance in the Hindu-majority country. He was however, never rated as a skilful politician despite the fact that he was a political ideologue for Pakistan movement. "Iqbal was not a skilful politician but provided ideological leadership articulating the Muslims' demand for a separate Muslim state …. He must be seen as a political mentor of Jinnah in regard to the creation of Pakistan"(Ibid. Page 224).

Against strong opposition of Jinnah to Khilafat movement, Iqbal gave his poetic support to it and sympathised with Muslim clerics like Maulana Mohammad Ali, Mawlana Saukat Ali, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and others, who had strong commitment to pan-Islamic cause and the temporal power of Islam vested in Caliphate. His poem along with 'Vande Mataram' of Bankim Chandra formed part of the marching songs during Khilafat and non-cooperation movements. The collapse of Ottoman Empire stirred him to play intellectual role for Muslim politics during freedom movement. His poetic intellect however, never bothered him to react even against the abusive observation against Mahatma Gandhi by Mawlana Mohammad Ali, "who publicly held that a fallen Muslim was better than Gandhi" ( Iqbal And Foundation of Pakistani Nationalism: Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, Page 236).

When Iqbal deeply understood the psyche of the Muslim community that it was not ready to live under democratic system of rule in Hindu-majority country, he entered practical politics in 1926 and was elected as a member of Punjab Legislative Council. He became a committed pan- Islamist for Muslim separatism and got national stature in Muslim politics only when Jinnah took self-political exile in London. In the absence of any Muslim leader of Jinnah's political brilliance Iqbal was elected to preside over the AIML session at Allahabad in 1930. This session of Muslim League proved to be an end of an era when Indian National Congress (INC) under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi made sincere efforts for Hindu-Muslim unity. Iqbal's on-off interpretation of nationalism set aside the Hindu-Muslim unity effort of the Indian National Congress. "Z.A.Suleri has rightly pointed out that the share of Iqbal in shaping the destiny of Indian Muslims was tremendous. As a matter of fact the entire Muslim intelligentsia who demanded Pakistan was inspired by Iqbal"( The Cambridge History of India:Vol. VI, Page 810).

In his presidential address Iqbal demanded a consolidated state exclusively for Muslims. This communal and separatist demand gave him the status of a most important Muslim political thinker of Indian sub-continent, though politics was never his cup of tea. His conversion from an Indian nationalist poet-philosopher to a narrow communal interpreter of socio-political scenario of his time permanently divided the two major religious communities of this land. It was contrary to his earlier stand in 1900, when he composed his most popular song referred to.

Muslim middle class and feudal section in the community always suffered from a fear complex of Hindu domination over them in British India. They continuously remained in search of a vent for their political frustration. The period when freedom movement under Indian National Congress got momentum Iqbal created a vent to this frustration in his presidential narrative in the Allahabad session of Muslim League by expanding the two-nation theory for its logical conclusion. Satisfying the group in the community that was more interested for sharing power than for spiritual elevation he could successfully create a mad-rage of the Muslims against the Indian National Congress that was regarded by him as an organisation fighting for 'Hindu India'.

1qbal introduced religion in politics and gave intellectual interpretation to it. "As a Muslim Iqbal could not accept separation of religion and politics. According to him the foundations of politics must be found in religion. Politics divorced from Din (Islamic faith) amounted to a Machiavelian ethical system"(Iqbal And Foundation of Pakistan nationalism: Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, page 109-110).

The session of the League, which he presided – gave him the status of a pioneer Muslim thinker, who aroused the Muslims against the challenge of democracy. His contribution to arouse the collective communal consciousness of Indo-Pakistani Muslims reached to such a height that the spirituality in Islam became subservient to the political concept of the faith. He prescribed the two-nation theory as the only political solution for the Muslims to get rid of the lurking majority-Hindu-rule and thereby became founder of communal politics in India. Contrary to the pluralistic character of Indian society, which is a melting pot of various cultural and ethnic groups, Iqbal's thesis made Muslim communalism a reality in India.

Giving ideological basis for Muslim State Iqbal said: "A community which is inspired by feelings of ill-will towards other communities is low and ignoble. I entertain the highest respect for the customs, laws, religious and social institutions of other communities.. Yet I love the communal group, which is the source of my life and my behaviour; and which has formed me what I am by giving me its religion, its literature, its thought, its culture, and thereby recreating its whole past as a living operative factor, in my present consciousness. I therefore demand formation of a consolidated Muslim State in best interest of India and Islam" (The Cambridge History of India: Vol. VI, Page 809). He added, "The question of Muslim poverty could be solved only by the law of Islam which is impossible to be enforced without a free Muslim State or States". "A separate federation of Muslim provinces is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of non-Muslims" (Ibid. Page 810.). Had Iqbal been alive he could have seen how peaceful India remained after formation of a separate Muslim State of Pakistan.

Iqbql's vision for political supremacy of Muslims not only strengthened the centuries-old movement for communal separatism launched by political Islamists in India, it actually gave political ideology to Pakistan movement. The two-nation theory could ignite the imagination of Indian Muslims only when Iqbal enunciated it in his presidential address of Muslim League session. A Pakistani writer questioned him - "Did he (Iqbal) not adopt the very nationalism (akin to tribalism), which the Prophet of Islam had come to destroy?"( Iqbal and Foundation of Pakistan:Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, page iii)?

The presidential address of Iqbal in the above mentioned session of All India Muslim League not only turned the course of Indian history but permanently prevented the Indian Muslims from connecting with Indian nationalism based on cultural and religious diversity of this land. He blocked them from striving for a pluralistic Indian society with bondage of cultural Indianism. His address was the motherboard for Muslim national movement, which justified creation ,of 'Muslim India within India'.

"Unlike Jinnah, Iqbal was consistently committed to separatist tendencies and was unwilling to yield to the Congress for a greater Muslim cause" (Iqbal And Foundation of Pakistan nationalism: Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, page 261). During I936-37 Iqbal wrote "eight letters to Jinnah emphasising the partition of India into two states" (The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, 1995, Vol. 2, page 224) and convinced him with his communal and separatist politics that united Hindu-Muslim nation was not a reality. In one of his letters he strongly opposed atheist socialism of Nehru. When Jinnah failed to bargain for AIML as exclusive representative body of Muslims against Congress insistence on secularism, he adopted the separatist communal politics of Iqbal.

Iqbal died in 1938 but he successfully converted Jinnah, from ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity to a communal Muslim leader. Latter Jinnah adopted a resolution for Pakistan movement in Lahore session of the League in 1940 and made Hindu-Muslim divide a political ideology for Indian Muslims.

If we look back to the post-Mogul history of India we find that all the political Islamists since the downfall of Mogul Empire claimed themselves as custodian of Muslim society. Iqbal while consolidating their thinking in his presidential address of Muslim League accelerated the process of Islamic activism by making spiritual aspect of Islam as subservient to political power. The on going struggle for retention of religious identity by the Muslims is only the off shoot of the same religio-political agenda expanded by Iqbal and accepted by all in post-partition India. It remained a recurring theme of academic debate, which however visibly impaired the fundamental commitment of Indian Muslims to their cultural bondage with this country. He carried forward the cultural and social legacy of Islamic India and gave political ideology for Muslim separatism. His "most enduring legacy is not his 'reconstruction of Islamic thought' (title of a book written by him) but his idea of an autonomous homeland for Indian Muslims" (The Muslim Almanac - Edited by Azim A. Nanji, 1996, page 67).

People are born Hindus or Muslims by accident or conviction might be a debatable issue but the humanistic convictions of intellectuals are never shaded by religious obsession. Intellectual community might have wondered over the intellectual duplicity of Iqbal when his humanistic conviction that 'religion does not teach animosity' got diluted. Iqbal's separatist and communal ideology that the Hindus and the Muslims cannot live together was an intellectual irony. But is it not more ironical that hardly any Muslim criticised him to a level it deserves? Even though his two-nation theory gave ideological boost to Pakistan movement, Indian Muslims still revere him.

The main contribution of Iqbal in the political context of Islam was that he was instrumental in bringing about intellectual orientation of communal renaissance in the Muslim community of Indian sub-sub-continent. He separated nationalism from patriotism and thereby created an intellectual division between the two though both are two sides of the same coin. His concept of Muslim nationalism however, meant political unity of Muslims in Indian sub-continent under a common geographical boundary. He never thought about the Indian society as a whole with majority of non-Muslims. Contrary to the ushering of modern worldview, Iqbal also regarded the medieval social and political order as only option for the Muslims.

"Iqbal held that nationalism implies the Indian Muslims to leave aside their faith, their identity in the nationality of other Indian nations or Indianism" (Secularisation of Muslim Behaviour: Moin Shakir, 1973, Page 25). He declared that "the formation of the consolidated Muslim state is in the best interest of India" (Secularisation of Muslim Behaviour: Moin Shakir, 1973, Page 25). He was not ready to understand that Indian nationalism does not mean domination of Hinduism over other religion. "It is also wrong to characterise Indian Nationalism as an instrument of Hindu domination" (Secularisation of Muslim Behaviour: Moin Shakir, 1973, Page 25).

Iqbal was against secularism. For him "Islam is only an effort to realise the spiritual in a human organisation"(Iqbal And Foundation of Pakistan nationalism: Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, page -110). "Iqbal emerged from his Europeon stay as a champion of Islam. His early Indian nationalism seemed to have given way to his newly found Islamic universalism"(Iqbal And Foundation of Pakistan nationalism: Manzoor H.Khatana, 1992, Lahore, page -119).

Even with his western education Iqbal's political outlook remained completely modeled with Islamic concept of governance. Like Sir Sayed Ahmad, Iqbal also created a wedge between Hindus and Muslims. In fact Sir Sayed preached no politics to the Muslims and vehemently opposed their joining Indian National Congress, Iqbal mesmerised them to jump in communal politics against majority community.

The history of Muslim politics in post-colonial India as we see today is deeply rooted to the political philosophy of Iqbal formulated in Allahabad session of All India Muslim League. Even though Islam failed to unify the Arab world, the birthplace of this religion, Iqbal mesmerised the Muslim mass through political interpretation of Islam, which hardly had any spiritual base. The political deprivation of Muslims as they feel today is the legacy of Iqbal they have been going on even after partition of the country.

The political frustration and mistrust of Muslims a against the ruling group has not allowed the community to be the part of the national mainstream. Sharp decline in their share of government job from over 60 percent in the pre-British era to 34 percent in the British period and further decline in it in post-colonial India (India and Pakistan – Unending Conflict by Prakash Chander, 2003, Page 37) might have been the cause of concern to the community. The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education. If they want to compete with non-Muslims, they must transform the curriculum of madrasas befitting to the modern world order.

(The Views expressed are that of the author).

Email:ramashray60@rediffmail.com)

Copyright © South Asia Analysis Group
All rights reserved. Permission is given to refer this on-line document for use in research papers and articles, provided the source and the author's name are acknowledged. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes.

Ray

Thanks for the interesting, if obviously partial read. Pre-suppositons are terribly, terribly important, in fact, as a great and benevolent scholar has pointed out, ideology reflects itself in the "selection" of "facts" and the author of the piece makes little effort to temper his ideology and present a deeper picture.

Many Muslims, particularly, Indian and Pakistani Muslims seem to have forgotten the work of Shah Valliollah Dehlvi, one can hope that they will soon "rediscover" him in his work, "Hojjatallah al-Balagheh".

Of Igbal and of Muslims, the author is convinced : "the contradiction of his world view was manifested in the fact that while fighting to overcome religious barriers, he remained overall a Muslim" (Studies in Oriental Culture - Edited by Hafeez Malk, Columbia University, 1971, Page 112). He therefore, completely negated this initial passion in him for this country, when he turned into a political Islamist and communally divided the people of the region."

Incredibly, the author finds persuasive the conclusion that "being" a Muslim and "overcoming religious barriers" is incompatible - One can understand the experience and logic of some indian authors and thinkers given the barbaric displays of a particular religiosity that has found expression in the streets and politics of India, but the author is persuaded that readers will remain innocent of his bias, both against muslims, and against religion itself.

the author charts the progress of Iqbal from nationalist to separatist, and it fails to ground this evolution in the political and social context of India - how did iqbal go from a Indian nationalist to a seperatist? The author's answer is unidimensional - it's Islam itself that is incompatible with the notion of a just India -- such a conclusion, while music to some ears, is incredibly dangerous if allowed to go unchallenged in a country that today has a Muslim population of 125 million and will within a generation come close, even surpass, doublke that number -- because if the author is right, there are but two options, drop Islam or drop Indian Muslims - like I said , music to the ears of some and dangerous to thinking Indians.

Upadhyay writes of Iqbal: "He was found guided more by his communally biased political thought, which was contrary to his natural poetic intellect. He closely monitored the Muslim psyche and became to a Muslim activist due to his mystic Islamic background and gradually became an ardent advocate of Muslim nationalism at the cost of Indian nationalism"

How did this come about?? What was the context of this development, afterall, if the answer is just Islam, why did not many other Muslims such as maulana Azad not also find a similar route?? If Iqbal turn to "communal" politics, did he do so in a larger, national, political vacuum?? Is there really any such thing as a one handed clapping -- but answering such questions is deepingly disturbing for a variety of Indian intellectuals, because it opens for them doors, they wish to keep closed, those doors lead to an examination of the responsibilty of non-Muslim actors in events and the responses of individuaLS AND the IDEAS they animated.

"When Iqbal deeply understood the psyche of the Muslim community that it was not ready to live under democratic system of rule in Hindu-majority country" -- Music to some ears - and yet some thinking Indians remain innocent or least give the impression of not realising the import of this statement, this IDEA, to the eventual creation of Pakistan - and of the massacres that followed babri and the massacres initiated in the Gujjrat.

"Contrary to the pluralistic character of Indian society, which is a melting pot of various cultural and ethnic groups, Iqbal's thesis made Muslim communalism a reality in India"

More music to some ears, it's Muslims who are into communalism - the rest of the religions and cultures of india are restful and pliant??? Apparently in India, majoritarianism and pluralism mean the same thing, if this author is to be convincing...and if further evidence of the deep seated bias that this intellectual displays without, seemingly, realizing of the dangerous ideas he "selects" to float in the guise of history.

"Iqbal was against secularism" -- incredible, this author "SELECTS" from a number of other authors he is persuaded by and this is his privelage, yet readers may want to know why the author does not quote Iqbal himslef about his ideas, especially with regard to Islam and it's understanding (as is the difference between object and subject, there in reflecting the work and influence of Shah Valliollah Dehlvi) -- from Iqbal's greatest work " The RECONSTRUCTION of Religious Thought" .

"People are born Hindus or Muslims by accident or conviction might be a debatable issue but the humanistic convictions of intellectuals are never shaded by religious obsession. Intellectual community might have wondered over the intellectual duplicity of Iqbal when his humanistic conviction that 'religion does not teach animosity' got diluted. "

Here the author reveals his own and in India, a strong "religious" sentiment that has a unique meaning, namely the confusing of "secularism" as being in service of the notion that religion may not occupy any space in the culture or the conscience of a polity (particularly if that religion is not under the rubric or collection that is today Hindu-ism) -- That the method of religion is humanism, is lost to the author and he..he would have the gall to raise the issue of intellectual duplicity???

In the long run, it is for Indians to decide what they recognize as "truth", and the meanings they infuse in that "truth", they must bear their fair share of responsibility for -- but they ought to be cognizant, that they are not alone in the effort to "select" facts and "create" history and it's meanings.

the author charts the progress of Iqbal from nationalist to separatist, and it fails to ground this evolution in the political and social context of India - how did iqbal go from a Indian nationalist to a seperatist? The author's answer is unidimensional

In another article (I dont remember where I read, so I cannot vouch for its authenticity), Iqbal was motivated for a seperate muslim cause, knowing that Hindu India will just over run the Islamic minority. He was convinced (again not my pre-supposition) with an example in his won life, Iqbal was one of the best poet of his times, but the sudden ascent of Rabinndranath Tagore and his nobel prize convinced that muslims will defnitely be overrun by hindus.

I'll try to find the link for this article.

jay

Thanks for that response -- so, it was professional jealousy that motivated Iqbal?? -- Do such things make sense ot you??

"knowing that Hindu India will just over run the Islamic minority" -- He "knew" this? and has he been proved wrong??

"Sharp decline in their share of government job from over 60 percent in the pre-British era to 34 percent in the British period and further decline in it in post-colonial India (India and Pakistan – Unending Conflict by Prakash Chander, 2003, Page 37) might have been the cause of concern to the community. The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education."

So, shouldn't readers conclude that Iqbal was right, as you acknowledge, that the indian state pre-supposes the "religious obsession" of the Muslim toward secular education? And didn't Iqbal also have a secular education??

Look, point fingers at whoever you want, like i said, in the end it's your truth, just don't imagine that you can escape taking responsibility for your share in the events and ideas that created India and Pakistan . One hears from some Indians that the muslims (muusli'ims) "broke" OUR country, as if the Indian muslim was in India by your leave, as if they were never a part of the "OUR" - this is music to the ears of some, in your effort to escape responsibility, you make even more clear the justification of that with you began with such passion to "prove", a failure -- failure, a orphan?? TNT is more like a product of many fathers, some are brought into the light, so that others may remain obscure. This is other than true???

[QUOTE=tarek]jay

"knowing that Hindu India will just over run the Islamic minority" -- He "knew" this? and has he been proved wrong??

"Sharp decline in their share of government job from over 60 percent in the pre-British era to 34 percent in the British period and further decline in it in post-colonial India (India and Pakistan – Unending Conflict by Prakash Chander, 2003, Page 37) might have been the cause of concern to the community. The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education.The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education.The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education."

So, shouldn't readers conclude that Iqbal was right, as you acknowledge, that the indian state pre-supposes the "religious obsession" of the Muslim toward secular education? And didn't Iqbal also have a secular education??

Look, point fingers at whoever you want, like i said, in the end it's your truth, just don't imagine that you can escape taking responsibility for your share in the events and ideas that created India and Pakistan . One hears from some Indians that the muslims (muusli'ims) "broke" OUR country, as if the Indian muslim was in India by your leave, as if they were never a part of the "OUR" - this is music to the ears of some, in your effort to escape responsibility, you make even more clear the justification of that with you began with such passion to "prove", a failure -- failure, a orphan?? TNT is more like a product of many fathers, some are brought into the light, so that others may remain obscure. This is other than true???

The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education.

That is true. In so far as Iqbal is concerned, none is surprised with what he wants. Even the sane and educated gets converted with radical views. He wrote the beautiful poem, 'Sara jahan se achha, Hindustan hamara" (Hindustan (India) of ours is the most beautiful (best) country in the world!), which is still as important to us as the National Anthem. It is sung at most national events too. The Indian Army Marches to this tune with pride.

I refuse to believe that the multitude of fundamentalist holding this world at ransom are all illiterates and stupid. There are many educated people too. That is what astounds me and also makes me grudingly admire the power of Islam! What a powerful motivator in the religious opium to sedate common sense and intelligence! Better than LSD, I presume.

Take a count of those who are fighting for Islam, rightly or wrongly. They are a vast multitudes. And they have great support, morally and financially (or else the weaponry would not be there!). Therefore, they are scary!

For all we know, one may show a pacifist face, here and elsewhere, to lull us; but then secretly fund the jihad and supply weapons! Who knows? History is replete with under-hand deals of Moslems. I am no expert on that and since I have Moslem friends I rather not delve in that. I leave it to experts like Major Armstrong.

Indian Moslems are of course Indians. But some are too steeped in their religious bigotry.

Do not think they are for Pakistan. Pakistan is peanuts for them.

It is Arabia. That is their homeland. They want the desert to swamp India.

Pakistan? Who cares. It is big deal to them. Their eyes are set on greater kingdom that the Islamic theory of Ummah (one Moslem Nation) ordains!

Imagine doing 'waju' (cleaning the hand and feet etc before prayer) with a handful of water from a tap that is overflowing and left to do so and waste water . Why so? Because that is what is ordained because Arabia runs low on water!

So India is Arabia!

If that is what you bite, then its OK with me.

But it makes no sense.

That is true. In so far as Iqbal is concerned, none are surprised with what he wants, even the sane and educated gets converted with radical views.He wrote the beautiful pwom, 'Hindustan hamara" (Hindustan is ours) which is still as important to us as the National Anthem.

Sir,
Is it Sareh Jahan Se Acha, Hindustan Hamara??

Originally Posted by Jay

Sir,
Is it Sareh Jahan Se Acha, Hindustan Hamara??

Sure. It is a great song.

I have marched to this tune with great pride!

Ray

Thank you for that illuminating example of pre-suppositions and the role they play , you say:

"History is replete with under-hand deals of Moslems. I am no expert on that and since I have Moslem friends I rather not delve in that."

On one hand you assert that history is replete with Moslem under-handedness and on the other you say you are no expert, then again you say these same underhanded moslems are among your friends - You are too coy if your understanding of history and moslem underhandedness does not entitle you to being a expert, further proof of your expertise is that these underhanded are among your firends - but with friends like... Indian speaks with forked tongue?? One may recall a "yatra" by the Advani and one may also recall the massacres of Gujjrat, one may recall the case of the Dalis or "untouchables", and if we were to recall these, could we charcaterize the "religious obsession" of the Hindu towards communal violence?? Could we not point to the fact that for thousands of years Hidnu psyche moulded as it is by it's "religious obsession" remains unable to break past "religious barriers" created by Hindu teachings?? and then would we not offer the "clear minded" these "evidences" of their psyche and behaviour of the Hindu through out history - how "replete that history may be in comparison with those of others, is for all to judge

You may yet offer that you understand Iqbal and you may do this by familiarizing yourself with "Reconstruction of religious Thought" -- Perhaps the name of the book may serve as a clue.

There is a dissonance among Indian intellectuals and lay persons when it comes ot the ideas and events of the partition, and we can understand this, after all, it was painful, traumatic - however; unless the courage is mustered to accept the proposition that non-Muslim Indians shared then, and share today, responsibility, for their experience.

If today, as the intellectual, Upadhyay laments the curricullum of the madaress and the "religious obsession" of the Muslim, then this intellectual is remiss and misleads readers that the Indian state bears no responsibility for this development -- in fact, Iqbal stands justified, the interests of the muslims of India reflect neglect and abandonment by both the leadership with the Muslim community, of every stripe, and by the Indian state, that has found it all too convenient to outsouce it's responsibility to "religious" leaders within the Indian muslim community - If you were somewhat more familiar with Iqbal, you would know exactly what he thought of these "religious leaders"....by the way the one group that was against partition was these same "religious leaders", who referred to the the "Quaid e Azam" as "Kafir e azam" -- for Iqbal's love of liquor and women, "Kafir" was not enuff.

Originally Posted by tarek

Thanks for that response -- so, it was professional jealousy that motivated Iqbal?? -- Do such things make sense ot you??

Well, it may or may not. I want to be apologetic here, I dont know much about Iqbal, sure I read about him, but mostly from Indian sources and so far I havent seen any sources from the Pakistani side that decries what I read.

"knowing that Hindu India will just over run the Islamic minority" -- He "knew" this? and has he been proved wrong??

Just for the face value, he has been proved wrong. India prides itself being a secular democracy and still remains so. We have positive discrimination for muslims in almost all aspect of life.

"Sharp decline in their share of government job from over 60 percent in the pre-British era to 34 percent in the British period and further decline in it in post-colonial India (India and Pakistan – Unending Conflict by Prakash Chander, 2003, Page 37) might have been the cause of concern to the community. The decline is not due to any anti-Muslim policy of the government but it is all due to religious obsession of the larger section of the community towards government sponsored secular education."

So, shouldn't readers conclude that Iqbal was right, as you acknowledge, that the indian state pre-supposes the "religious obsession" of the Muslim toward secular education? And didn't Iqbal also have a secular education??

So are you attributing that the reduction of muslims in govt jobs validates Iqbal's thot??
I dont know what kind of education Iqbal got, but it doesnt really matter, coz he advocated for a nation based on religion.

Look, point fingers at whoever you want, like i said, in the end it's your truth, just don't imagine that you can escape taking responsibility for your share in the events and ideas that created India and Pakistan.

Actually, I (not litreally I, but Indians) do take responsibility that the Congress couldnt bust Jinnah's/Iqbal's aspiration - a nation for muslims , whether right or wrong, even though Congress had overwhelming support in the areas of Present day Pakistan and even when people rejected Jinnah's call for a seperate muslim nation.

One hears from some Indians that the muslims (muusli'ims) "broke" OUR country, as if the Indian muslim was in India by your leave, as if they were never a part of the "OUR" -

Atleast I'm not one of those "some". Muslims never broke India, an overzealous nationalistic person did. Any muslims who stayed in India, believed in the concept of India, they are our citizens, our equals and we embrace them.

this is music to the ears of some, in your effort to escape responsibility, you make even more clear the justification of that with you began with such passion to "prove", a failure -- failure, a orphan?? TNT is more like a product of many fathers, some are brought into the light, so that others may remain obscure. This is other than true???

Well, I dont know how many fathers were present for TNT. But I set to prove that Jinnah's notion of having Pakistan for the muslims is based on wrong reasons. Well, it just means I still disagree/not convinced with your views after all these meaningless arguements about Kushans

jay

The more "secular" India points towards the religion of it's political leadership, the more doubt it casts on it's claim to secular orientation -- lets events speak for themselves -- see, it's a muddled picture, claiming secular credentials, while so extraordinarily concerned by with pointing out the religon of political leaders is a net negative (like trying too hard), similarly the fact massacres of Muslims and those officials who lent the support oif the state to this catastrophy also sends a mixed signal -- recall, by "secular" we mean that that state is neutral in the matters of religion - the state being a active participant by commission or by omission, again sends mixed signals. you say: "We have positive discrimination for muslims" - Does that sound neutral to you??

"...I set to prove that Jinnah's notion of having Pakistan for the muslims is based on wrong reasons" -- - Just read this statement over a couple of times -- read it for pre-suppositons :
I know what the "RIGHT" reasons for the creation of Pakistan were or ought to have been.
You even concede that there are reasons for the creation of Pakistan, it's just that Jinnah was articulating the wrong ones."

You are entirely too ambitious, see theories rarely die at once, recall they are THEORIES, not "the truth" - being theories, they are Provisional, as in bound by particularities -- now if you argued that one leg of TNT, religious that defines itself primarily in opposition to the other, as national glue, failed in just mission in Pakistan, you would have a formidable position, instead of deconstructing TNT's relevance and appeal segment by segment, today, you go for the jugular, the quick kill and the thing is not ammenable to the quick kill. Now if you also argued that in Pakistan, among large segments , the relevence ofthe TNT is being questioned, now that would be a genuinely thought provoking position.

"I dont know what kind of education Iqbal got, but it doesnt really matter, coz he advocated for a nation based on religion."

Rubbish - do some research, you will know exactly what kinds of education he recieved -- once again, the positon that he advocated a nation based on religion is simplistic over-reach - lets not forget that Gandhi was a practicng Hindu, that he sought a ethical Hindu who by his example of the force of his ethics made obvious that he was free and self determing, does not mean that Gandhi wanted a nation based on his religious beliefs -- did gandhi's ethics come from his religious convictions? you bet, does that mean the state was then, Hindu?? No , it does not, simplistc over-reach will not serve us.

BTW, I have a couple of pages of Iqbal's intor to the "Reconstruction..." I will post it if you like - actually I willl post it because it's important for you guys to better understand that while iqbal is the poet/hero of the idea of Pakistan, this does not mean that Pride in his genius and accomplishment need remain s exclusively Pakistani.

I'll reply to your post in a while.
I'm reading this,
http://hir.harvard.edu/articles/inde...?id=759&page=1

Jay

Below are the first two pages from the Intro to "Reconstruction of Religious Thought" - Note parag settings are off



"Religion in its more advanced forms, rises higher than poetry. It moves from individual to society. In its attitude toward ultimate Reality it is opposed to the limitations of man; it enlarges his claims and hold out the prospect of nothing less than direct vision of Reality.

Is it then possible to apply the purely rational method of philosophy to Religion? The spirit of philosophy is one of free inquiry. It suspects all authority. Its function is to trace the uncritical assumptions of human thought to their hiding place, And in this pursuit it may finally end in denial or a frank admission of the incapacity of pure reason to reach ultimate Reality.

The essence of religion, on the other hand, is faith; and faith, like the bird, sees its “trackless way” unattended by intellect which in the words of the great mystic poet of Islam “only waylays the living heart of man and robs it of the invisible wealth of life that lies within”. Yet it cannot be denied that faith is more than feeling. It has something like a cognitive content, and the existence of rival parties-scholastics and mystics- in the history of religion shows that idea is a vital element in religion.

Apart from this, Religion on its doctrinal side, as defined by Professor Whitehead, is a “system of general truths, which have the effect of transforming character when they are sincerely held and vividly apprehended”.

Now, since the transformation and guidance of man’s inner and outer life is the essential aim of religion, it is obvious that the general truths which it embodies must not remain unsettled. No one would hazard action based on the basis of a doubtful principle of conduct. Indeed, in view of its function, religion stands in greater need of a rational foundation of its ultimate principles than even the dogmas of science. Science may ignore a rational metaphysics; indeed, it has ignored it so far. Religion can hardly afford to ignore the search for a reconciliation of the oppositions of experience and a justification of the environment in which humanity finds itself. That is why Professor Whitehead has acutely remarked that “ the ages of faith are the ages of rationalism.”

But to rationalize faith is not to admit the superiority of philosophy over religion. Philosophy, no doubt, has jurisdiction to judge religion, but what is to be judged is of such a nature that it will not submit to the jurisdiction of philosophy except on its own terms. While sitting in judgement on religion, philosophy cannot give religion an inferior place in its data. Religion is not a departmental affair; it is neither mere thought, nor mere feeling, nor mere action; it the expression of the whole man. Thus, in the evaluation of religion, philosophy must recognize the central position of religion and has no other alternative but to admit it as something focal in the process of reflective synthesis. Nor is there any reason to suppose that thought and intuition are essentially opposed to each other. They spring up from the same root and complement each other. The one grasps reality piecemeal, and the other grasps it in its wholeness. The one fixes it gaze on the eternal, the other on the temporal aspect of Reality. The one is present enjoyment of the whole of Reality; the other aims at traversing the whole by slowly specifying and closing up the various regions of the whole for exclusive observation. Both are in need of each other for mutual rejuvenation. Both seek visions of the same reality which reveals itself to them in accordance with their function in life. In fact, intuition, as Bergson rightly says, is only a higher kind of intellect."

I found three articles on Rediff.com about Mohammed Iqbal.
I believe they are relevant to what Jay,Ray and Tarek are talking about in here.

Part One Part Two Part Three

"In view of the visible and invisible points of contact between the various communities of India I do believe in the possibility of constructing a harmonious whole, whose unity cannot be disturbed by the rich diversity which it must carry within its bosom. The problem of ancient Indian thought was how the One became many without sacrificing its oneness. Today the problem has come down from its heights to the grosser plane of our political life, and we have to solve it in its inverse form, i e how the many can become One without sacrificing its plural character..."

Tarek

in fact, Iqbal stands justified, the interests of the muslims of India reflect neglect and abandonment by both the leadership with the Muslim community, of every stripe, and by the Indian state, that has found it all too convenient to outsouce it's responsibility to "religious" leaders within the Indian muslim community

What results from the religious obsessions of muslims , tarek , i believe we have discussed them in other forums.Make this point clear that the curriculums among most madrassas are something to lament about.Pervez Musharaff afterall is trying to battle these things too ,i hear.Iqbal will not be happy ? Do we conclude then Pakistan has abandoned the musilms ?