why does it matter what jinnah wanted, figure out what most of the pakistanis want today? we have a confused generation parenting the children in this era.
Ur right, it really doesn't matter given the mess we are in now and even if we weren't it still doesn't matter. He created it for reasons back then and not now.
but opposition to his daughter's marriage was to avoid political implications, embarrassment rather than strictly religious reasons..
don't discuss anything bad about a person who is no more!
whatever it may be, if you say you are pakistani, it is because of him
did he ask you to fight among yourselves with ethical differences, did he asked you to follow mullahs who are not good,
it is public's fault that they follow everyone blindly
don't discuss anything bad about a person who is no more!
whatever it may be, if you say you are pakistani, it is because of him
did he ask you to fight among yourselves with ethical differences, did he asked you to follow mullahs who are not good,
it is public's fault that they follow everyone blindly
wha?
what did i say against him. Someone else called him an athiest, and I responded by saying who knows what he was and that it didnt matter.... you must have misunderstood me.
what did i say against him. Someone else called him an athiest, and I responded by saying who knows what he was and that it didnt matter.... you must have misunderstood me.
hey
sorry i just reply to post at the end and i didn't mean to comment on your post
i'm saying this to others who are commenting on him :)
but opposition to his daughter's marriage was to avoid political implications, embarrassment rather than strictly religious reasons..
All accounts have it as something very personal between the two.
This is not to say Jinnah was a traditionalist. But he did identify as a Muslim...strong enough to take a very personal objection to his daughters choice of husband.
Also, that was 1947. Here's what the man said in 1948:
A circular argument, to which I'd say..you can't compare the first speech to a smaller speech..it's like comparing the gettysburg address with a small speech by lincoln advocating peace with the south. By it's very nature and the fact that the GoP in the past tried to remove that speech from books, means the speech is the cornerstone for what he believed Pakistan should be...
Whether Pakistan was created to be a theocratic islamic state can be answered by looking at the role of clerics/mullahs/"ulema" in the Pakistan movement. How many "ulema" were part of Pakistan movement? How many "ulema" were in the leadership of All India Muslim League? Answer is none. What was the stance of madarsas of deoband, Maulana Maududi, Jamiat ulema Hind? They were are all in opposition of Pakistan movement. The kind of oppresive sharia imposed state that the mullahs want is not what the movement of Pakistan was all about.
The objective of this topic is purely to understand if Jinnah wanted a religious state or not. I will be ever thankful to him for separating us from India. No ifs or buts about it. I just can not for a second think about living in India as a minority.
is there any country (excluding turkey) with a muslim-majority population that isn't pushing for an islamic state? in other words, is separation of governance and religion even acceptable to muslims?
is there any country (excluding turkey) with a muslim-majority population that isn't pushing for an islamic state? in other words, is separation of governance and religion even acceptable to muslims?
Pakistani society, through lack of education (both formal and informal )has deterioriated to the point that very few among them have an understanding of political science and functioning of a civil society. Most of them are poor, ill informed, and are an easy prey to people who create a victim mentality among them, and tell them that Islamization is the solution to all their problems. An overwhelming majority of people have no idea what Islamization would be like beyond the institution of severe punishments for crimes. Most of the Islamization movement runs on "faith based" fuel -- which is -- once these "punishments" are introduced, and society's "vice and virtue" is restored, God will magically remove all their sufferings. No one makes the connection that running a country of 160 million is a big administrative task, something the religious leaders are least capable of.
The people who are leading this movement are the biggest bigots in our society, and they don't just want Isslamization, they want THEIR version of Islam too, which means 'persecution' (not prosecution) of all sects who they consider to be non Islamic. I grew up in parts of Punjab where these guys were at each other's throats 9 out of 12 months in a year. I can only imagine what these guys will do if they manage to grab power!
What was the stance of madarsas of deoband, Maulana Maududi, Jamiat ulema Hind? They were are all in opposition of Pakistan movement. The kind of oppresive sharia imposed state that the mullahs want is not what the movement of Pakistan was all about.
The Indian Mullahs did not advocate a separate homeland...so what "oppressive" sharia model are you talking about? They were more than willing to work in a secular framework, in a united India.
Yes, they were pro-Caliphate, but that was in Turkey post WWI, not in India.
If anything, Jinnah's (and Iqbal's) TNT is closest to the Islamist line, which thought that a separate state was required to safeguard (and implement?) Muslim culture and religion.
is there any country (excluding turkey) with a muslim-majority population that isn't pushing for an islamic state? in other words, is separation of governance and religion even acceptable to muslims?
Ever Turkey does that. Thankfully they are in minority. But division of secular votes has created a situation in turkey which could be easily exploited by the islamist. Besides if turkish people in european countries were to vote then the islamist vote share would go up, eventually leading to a fully islamic state.
The objective of this topic is purely to understand if Jinnah wanted a religious state or not. I** will be ever thankful to him for separating us from India. No ifs or buts about it. I just can not for a second think about living in India as a minority**.
i totally agree with you there.thus my eternal respect for the guy.
An overwhelming majority of people have no idea what Islamization would be like beyond the institution of severe punishments for crimes. Most of the Islamization movement runs on "faith based" fuel -- which is -- once these "punishments" are introduced, and society's "vice and virtue" is restored, God will magically remove all their sufferings. No one makes the connection that running a country of 160 million is a big administrative task, something the religious leaders are least capable of.
Pakistani society, through lack of education (both formal and informal )has deterioriated to the point that very few among them have an understanding of political science and functioning of a civil society. Most of them are poor, ill informed, and are an easy prey to people who create a victim mentality among them, and tell them that Islamization is the solution to all their problems. An overwhelming majority of people have no idea what Islamization would be like beyond the institution of severe punishments for crimes. Most of the Islamization movement runs on "faith based" fuel -- which is -- once these "punishments" are introduced, and society's "vice and virtue" is restored, God will magically remove all their sufferings. No one makes the connection that running a country of 160 million is a big administrative task, something the religious leaders are least capable of.
The people who are leading this movement are the biggest bigots in our society, and they don't just want Isslamization, they want THEIR version of Islam too, which means 'persecution' (not prosecution) of all sects who they consider to be non Islamic. I grew up in parts of Punjab where these guys were at each other's throats 9 out of 12 months in a year. I can only imagine what these guys will do if they manage to grab power!
with all due respect, what you wrote is hard to believe. hardliner islamists get less than 10% of votes in elections in pak. forgetting population to the west of the indus, the people's leadership of choice has never been the vice-and-virtue campaigners. pakistanis have always aligned strongly along ethnic lines when picking leaders, overt religiousity has never been a necessity to be a popular pakistani leader. also, religious leaders do not seem to hold any significant sway in the administrative structure.
imho, pakistanis arent religious enough to have a serious movement towards islamization, but cultural religion still plays way too big a role in daily public life for any real chance of western-style secularism.