Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
I was referring to people from Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistanis not all Pakistanis -- although Urdu does have more farsi words.
Iran and Afghanistan entered the picture when the OP decided to make a thread discussing how GREAT it would be if Pakistan (or Bangladesh) were not created as separate states. Which prompted me to say that: If that were the case, then ALL of what is now Pakistan would not be a part of this "United India" because two of the Western provinces have more in common with Afghanistan and Iran than India.
I think Pakistan's creaation was the best move within the post colonial context -- failures of subsequent leadership nonwithstanding, the concept of nationhood is still very much intact.
Give it up man... You may not want to admit you or your ancestors have anything in common with India, but you and your area has always been within the sphere of India whether you like it or not.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
Agreed this is a SHAMEFUL thread and needs to be closed. Those who do not agree with Pakistan's independence, are MOST WELCOME to join up with India or any country of choosing.
I recommend that we work on creating a true Pakistani identity, one that may take pieces from our neighbors but is unique.
I am sorry to have to talk based on "provincial" or "ethnic" basis -- any talk of merging with India WILL cause me to do it, because I value the independence.
Peace pak-one
This is not a shameful thread ... it only hurts because there is pride in places where it does not belong ... The whole of the subcontinent was under Muslims rule ... the shameful things that happened was that Muslim leadership was losing its grip and they became ugly in conduct and Allah (SWT) removed from us our torch of leadership by replacing us with those who want to vanquish the name of Islam ... We lived shamefully under British rule and we forgot what it was like to be the representatives of Allah in this world.
We did rule for many centuries the whole subcontinent and yet our more immediate forefathers settled for far less ... now I am not saying that we should take over our neighbours either ... unless that is they want to be part of us ... but who wants to be part of us? You know people in the UK don't want Muslims to populate their areas because we ruin them ... we allow rubbish to pile up, we shout in the late hours of the night and have no regard for the community ... we devalue their properties ... if we followed Islam which came to abolish elitism in this specific context and if we served humanity then we would be lifted by these people for us to lead them ...
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
Ludicrous as it may seem the division saw the Muslims split at least in 3 smaller groups and yet the Hindus managed to survive the separation mostly living in a single country.
I am surprised to see people here think that this is a thread intended to support going back to become one country ... Not at all ... This is a thread however about the lessons we can learn from history ... what went right and went wrong ... which promises were kept and which were empty statements ... let's try to wipe our biases aside and stop treating the nation's forefathers as if they were faultless visionaries. We have the advantage of knowing what happened they acted on the risk ... now we have a clearer view ... and if we care so much for Pakistan then we should for sure do something about it ... and ask ourselves how on Earth did we let ourselves get into our current predicament. Also ... we need to start thinking about Muslims all over the world and seriously start to offer and work on real solutions ... we need to stop thinking that any dirt outside our doorsteps is somebody else's to resolve we need to become an ummah ... this is advice of our prophet and whether we think ourselves wiser for not doing it because we feel it can not be achieved or we simply don't care enough we need to stop and rethink a few things ....
What are the real harms of nationalism?
Are dissenting voices really unpatriotic or can a person who questions be seeking betterment?
Let's not be proud (pride - the garment that is only befitting to Allah (SWT)) but let's be humble and grateful and usher pride in our nation by working to better ourselves ...
Is the history of Pakistan that we have learnt really as accurate as we believe?
What gain is there to be patriotic beyond reason? Or more devoted to the flag than our faith? What would our prophet Muhammad (SAW) have done? What did the Sahabah do in similar situations? Did we ever ask ourselves these questions 60 years ago? If so ... what dialogues took place demonstrating this? .... I've said it before ... this is NOT a thread justifying return to one country ... it is a critical analysis on us as Muslims of the subcontinent.
I think what Pak One meant was that we shouldnt undermine the basis of Pakistan. It became a question of whether to break up Pakistan because he assumed that is what was implied.
The problem is that there are simply those who never considered themselves Indian, even before partition, and there are many Pashtuns and others who feel this way.
Bottom line for me is, whats done is done. Partition, the two nation concept was not wrong. It was with good intention, but was done in a haphazard and derelict manner. And there is no reason to believe that had it not happened, that it wouldnt have happened later, or that everything would have turned out ok. If anything, the nature of Desis in general tells me coexistence would have been fraught with all sorts of problems. At the end of the day, better for there to be two nations, each repecting the other.
I would not be opposed to something akin to the European Union. For if its one thing the EU has taught us, you dont have to be one country to live in peace.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
^ Peace Med911
The fact is that our memories often only go back a number of years ... we think in the grand scheme of things that our history is 60 years old, or perhaps 100 years old ... for sure if our families lived in the same region for 150 years and acquire a certain mindset accordingly we will think that is the we have always been and more dangerously that is the way we must always be !!!
The fact is the British had nigh 200 years to divide our hearts from one another and when the left they divided our nation as well.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
^ Peace Med911
The fact is that our memories often only go back a number of years ... we think in the grand scheme of things that our history is 60 years old, or perhaps 100 years old ... for sure if our families lived in the same region for 150 years and acquire a certain mindset accordingly we will think that is the we have always been and more dangerously that is the way we must always be !!!
The fact is the British had nigh 200 years to divide our hearts from one another and when the left they divided our nation as well.
Bhai, Muslims and Hindus had been dividing for much longer then that.
Even in the gloried days of secular Akbar, there were still rebellious Rajputs etc.
There was always an air of resentment between Hindus and Muslims from the time Muslims landed in India. The claim that Babar built a mosque over a holy Indian site, is something that goes back a while I think. And there are many temples that apparently were knocked down by Muslim conquerors.
Then you also have to consider the apparent bitterness over Muslim invaders from Afghanistan and their excesses.
All culminating with the Islamic zeal of Auranghzeb. All this happened before the British.
So this animosity between the two groups didnt just start with the British, it was already there. Such is the relationship between conquerors and the conquered. I mean just look how we, just in mentioning the British and their divide and conquer policy, are expressing our own animosity and resentment towards them.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
And the partition wasnt in and of itself just a result of this precieved animosity between Muslims and Hindus, but also grounded in the understanding that in a Democracy, the Majority rules. So an inherent fear, perhaps secondary to this already existing underlying distrust, was accentuated by the realization of what an actual democracy entail by its very nature.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
It seems there is some work going on these days to negate the two nation theory, and pave the way towards a single nation. In the past it used to be the Indians doing that, and now its our turn.
Assailants of Two-Nation Theory
News & Views
Mohammad Jamil
A debate is raging in the media since Mian Nawaz Sharif during his address at the SAFMA seminar on 13th August 2011 said that India and Pakistan had a common heritage of culture; even their language and eating habits are similar, which is travesty of the truth. According to private TV channel Waqat News, Nawaz Sharif has also reportedly said that Indian and Pakistanis worship the same god. Whereas Pakistan should have good relations with all the countries of the world especially neighbouring countries, there is no need to find or contrive the commonalities that do not exist. It is true that both countries would benefit from good relations, as instead of spending on defence they would divert their resources for the welfare of their downtrodden masses. But the question is how India and Pakistan have good relations unless all outstanding disputes between th em are resolved?
A long time family friend of Sharifs,** Mr. Majid Nizami, Chairman Nazaria Pakistan Trust and Editor-in-Chief took exception to Mian Nawaz Sharif’s remarks; and during his address on Pakistan Day stated: “Pakistan was achieved on the basis of Two-Nations Theory; how the culture of two nations could be the same. We worship one God and Indians believe in idols and their gods have five heads”. One does not understand how Mian Nawaz Sharif, who is head of Pakistan Muslim League that had launched Pakistan movement under the guidance of Quaid-e-Azam and carved out a state on the basis of Two-Nation theory, could negate the very basis for the creation of Pakistan. Meanwhile, detractors of Pakistan have supported Mian Nawaz Sharif’s statement and used this opportunity occasion to lash out on the Two-Nation theory. Pseudo-intellectuals, some writers and media men often distort history and logic but the fact remains that basis for the creation of Pakistan was the Two-Nation theory which was accepted by the British, Indian National Congress and the world at large.
**It has to be mentioned that the concept of Two-Nation theory was relevant in the undivided India, after this concept was translated into action and implemented when Pakistan emerged on the world map on 14th August 1947, the debate should have ended. It appears that there is a systematic propaganda campaign by the enemies and so-called friends of Pakistan through palmed off media men, intellectuals and some politicians. The motivation behind this sinister scheme is to demolish founding fathers, the concept behind creation of Pakistan and also denigrate military and the ISI so that they could push Pakistan to play second fiddle to India by accepting its hegemony. It is unfortunate that some Pakistani intellectuals, politicians, and some misguided religious scholars and media men denigrate Quaid-e-Azam by giving a spin to his statements with a view to proving their respective points.
Quaid-e-Azam during his broadcast talk to the people of the United States of America had categorically stated: “The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam…In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission”. The Quaid was a great visionary, and he could visualize that scholars of different sects would go berserk if their version of Islam was not implemented. He therefore had focused on ameliorating the lot of the common people, so that they could lead their lives according to their faith. Quaid-e-Azam, in his 11th August 1947 speech had of course dwelt on almost every aspect and facet of the state.
Among other things, he had warned about the curse of corruption, nepotism and other social malaises that could eat into the vitals of society. He had assured the minorities that they would enjoy equal rights in Pakistan. Unfortunately, radicalism emerged after Afghan jihad, and there have been cases of suicide attacks on military check posts and institutions, mosques and shrines. More than five thousand military personnel and 35000 innocent people have been killed during the last ten years. A very few incidents of attacks on members of minority community have been noted, but that happens in India - the largest democracy of the world - and also in other established and entrenched democracies. It is true that inept leadership and its flawed decisions have brought Pakistan to the present pass; however people are determined to change the status quo and bring about a change in the system to end graft, corruption, social inequities and secure a respectable in the comity of nations.
However, detractors of Pakistan always find some ammo for their onslaught on Pakistan. A freelance journalist Marvi Sirmed has recently written an article in a local English daily under the caption “BAAGHI: a head-on collisions with the hawks”, after an encounter with the anchorperson of private TV channel. She appreciated Mian Nawaz Sharif’s remarks about commonality of culture and wrote: “If we still describe ourselves as a separate ‘nation’ from our own Hindu, Christian, Sikh and other religious communities and justify building borders based on this ‘separation’, just imagine what exactly we are saying. What we are saying is, every community other than Muslims is justified and entitled to demand a separate country even today”. In another article carried by the same English daily, captioned “Moving beyond Jinnah’s Pakistan”, author Fahd Ali referred to 14th August 1947 speech of the Quaid before the Constituent Assembly, and tried to disgrace the Quaid. He wrote: “In some ways perhaps Jinnah’s statement reflects the enormity of the burden that he felt by creating a nation-state that he accepted only half-heartedly; ironically making that statement Jinnah was attempting to do away with the communal politics that had brought him (and the rest of the country) to that point”. It has to be mentioned that foreigners including Indians who despite showing their aversion to creation of Pakistan have acknowledged that Congress and brute Hindu majority had pushed Muslims against the wall. One could find the following facts in many history books written by Hindu authors: ‘Medium of instructions in schools was Hindi, and despite vociferous demand by the Muslims, Urdu medium schools were not established. In schools, it was compulsory to sing Vanday Matram for all students including Muslims. And on festivals, Muslims were not allowed to celebrate with enthuse and religious fervour, which led to Hindu-Muslim riots in which mostly Muslims were killed.
It was true that Quaid-e-Azam had been trying to secure rights of the Muslim of the sub-continent. However, when Gandhi categorically stated that Congress alone represented India, and Nehru was not willing to give sterling guarantees to the Muslims, Quaid-e-Azam made up his mind that at an opportune time he would not accept less than a separate homeland for the Muslims. Jaswant Singh’s book titled “Jinnah, India, Independence and Partition” released on August 17, 2009 exposed Indian leaders’ mindset during struggle for independence, and like any other historian has put the blame for partition of India in 1947 on Jawaharlal Nehru and other Congress leaders. He wrote in the book: “However, it has to be said, and with great sadness, that despite some early indications to the contrary, the leaders of the Indian National Congress, in the period between the outbreak of war in 1939 and the country’s partition in 1947, showed in general, a sad lack of realism, of foresight, of purpose and of will.”
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
Useless discussion with prospects of creating more division in the society. OP living in western world and with the mentality that everything is wrong in Pakistan doesn't give you right to start questioning the very foundation of Pakistan which is two nation theory. I will just give one example for your numbers rambling. Ever after the breakup of Pakistan Bangladesh still exists as separate nation regardless of more cultural & linguistic ties with Indian Bengal.
If you are going through identity crises, then deal with it or just take up whatever identity you are fond off. Any discussion towards the denial of existence of Pakistan or in this case Pakistaniyat must not be promoted here, IMO.
Jinnah Presidential Address on March 23, 1940
[QUOTE]
It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders, and it is a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality, and this misconception of one Indian nation has troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, litterateurs. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built for the government of such a state
[/QUOTE]
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
The two nation theory is wrong when its applied by some in expression of their own racism... That is not what it was intended to be.
The Two nation theory, as a means of safeguarding the political and social interests of a minority, against the majority, is still relevant. In fact, there have been many countries where such a concept has resulted in a division of land among parties.
Who cares however. Times change, truths that were relevant a century ago may or may not apply today. Even if tomorrow the entire notion of the two nation theory is refuted, does that make Pakistan any less of reality? It may have been a relevant debate during the creation of Pakistan, but today, its only a matter of scholorship, and has no bearing on the realities we face today. Either way, Pak is here to stay.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
Agreed this is a SHAMEFUL thread and needs to be closed. Those who do not agree with Pakistan's independence, are MOST WELCOME to join up with India or any country of choosing.
I recommend that we work on creating a true Pakistani identity, one that may take pieces from our neighbors but is unique.
I am sorry to have to talk based on "provincial" or "ethnic" basis -- any talk of merging with India WILL cause me to do it, because I value the independence.
Agreed completely.It is a very sad state of affairs when the sacrifices of millions of muslims into creating this country with their blood and efforts,is disregarded.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
This has never been a thread about Hindus and it has never been a thread about becoming united with Hindus ... It is indeed an attack on the mindset of Muslims in both Pakistan and India who feel their national, ethnic/racial and linguistic differences are more important than their religious ties ...
Islam in the hands of the pioneers of the religion and upon the hands of our beloved prophet Muhammad (SAW) showed us that people of differing tribes can be united under the banner of Islam and this was not the basis for the formation of Pakistan - yet we stubbornly claim that Pakistan was made on the basis of Islam ... it was not ... and the reasons given here to support Pakistan's formation are all secular and nationalistic opinions ... People feel they need to reignite their allegiances by shouting "Pakistan zindabad" ... If Pakistan is so dear especially to those who claim to be patriotic ... then let's get rid of the corrupt rulers, take care of the sick and poor, make it a country outsiders are in awe of and if there are people who bring criticism for the intention to better the vision and improve conditions for Muslims and all Pakistanis then they should not be gunned down by ultra-nationalistic slogans ... To be patriotic means to sacrifice ones own desires for the needs of the country it does not mean being blind to the inefficiencies of the nation if they are clearly present.
I have not even brought the conspiracy theories about the formation of Pakistan yet !!! To be honest this is enough ... let's be Muslim first and then Pakistani ... and let's not become so defensive that you feel a person needs to be treated as though he is being treacherous. Perhaps ... it could be true that what you have been taught in history is biased. How would you know if you don't question the validity of the arguments by testing them against reasoned discussions the opinions of all parties?
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
Agreed completely.It is a very sad state of affairs when the sacrifices of millions of muslims into creating this country with their blood and efforts,is disregarded.
Pakistan zindabad!inshallah.
Peace Apricot
The drop of blood of a Muslim is more sacred to Allah (SWT) than the holy cities combined ... What this means is that Allah (SWT) will sooner allow the destruction of the holy sites in Islam than allow a Muslim to be harmed ... Yet, on the say so of our forefathers we had no choice to cross the borders and suffer many deaths ... No formation of a country justifies loss of innocent life - unless it was done for Islam ... and it clearly was done on other than Islam with all the argumentation here being about ethnicity and language and half of the Muslims being left in the other country.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
The patriotism amongst Pakistanis is mostly overlapping with unity in the Islamic way too IMO. It goes together. When something bad happens in our country, people from all walks of life step in to help the poor. Sure there are bad people everywhere (the ones who loot or steal during such phases) but on the whole the duty of charity as a Muslim as well as patriotism and love for the people of the country binds them together and helps create a stronger effort over all. We have seen this during the devestating Earthquake of '05 and then the floods etc. People have also been donating generously for Somalia and Aid for Africa.
It's the government that is to blame! They rob those hard earned money generously given for charity and use it for their own means. If these people were true Muslims would they ever have done such things?
Remember Hazrat Umer (R.A)'s justice that an ordinary person could stand up and hold him accountable to using extra amount of cloth for his clothes from Bait-ul-maal. And look at the shameful deeds our leaders are doing (Hajj scandal and other countless examples).
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
i still don't get what the thread is about??
is it about the false pretense for creation of pakistan?
or
about the failure of founders of pakistan?
or
about islamic identity>nation state identity?
Yes ... Pakistan should only have been created if it served Islam ... this does not mean serving the interests of some Muslims whilst leaving other Muslims to suffer a loss. I believe the founders of Pakistan did not have Islam in mind more than having their own country and after getting our country our elite ingrained in the populous "the importance of our independence" without instilling "the importance of our role as Muslims" to each other and to the wider world of Muslims.
As a result we have created a country generally of zealous nationalists instead of Islam loving patriots and as importantly allowed our army to enter in to politics and enabled the feudal lords and gangsters to become the democratic leaders. Some people are reacting to this positively ... I was making a point of it.
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
The weakness I think came out of the manner in which partition occurred. Had it been amicable, had their not been mass genocide and forced displacement, if Kashmir had been resolved peaceful, I think the situation could have been different. If we are to oppose partition, it would be for these reasons. The principle as I said is yet sound, but if in practical terms we couldnt have accomplished it without such mass misery, then it was not worth it.
Partition was not meant to be a racist and xenophobic endeavor, as Jinnah was not any of these things. However, it did become that, and that will be the eternal tragedy.
there are certain ideas, however good they may sound, should not be executed because of the cost of execution. I think partition is one of those where the immediate cost as well as on-going costs have more than overwhelmed any intended benefits to any community or religion.
but for that we wouldn't have this situation where huge number of lives and huge proportion of revenues are spent in defending against each other. I am sure you have heard of the story of the monkey that came to adjudicate the division of a roti between two feuding brothers. We have several monkeys wanting to adjudicate
Re: Split of Population by Religion - India and Pakistan (On Hindsight)
there are certain ideas, however good they may sound, should not be executed because of the cost of execution. I think partition is one of those where the immediate cost as well as on-going costs have more than overwhelmed any intended benefits to any community or religion.
but for that we wouldn't have this situation where huge number of lives and huge proportion of revenues are spent in defending against each other. I am sure you have heard of the story of the monkey that came to adjudicate the division of a roti between two feuding brothers. We have several monkeys wanting to adjudicate
Yes that is the only sticking point. If you cant do something good, without doing immense harm, your probably better of not doing it. Perhaps it could have been done with more tact, but history sort of conspired to turn the whole thing into a debacle.
The principle on which it was based, and intention was noble. The execution was deeply flawed.