I have heard it many times and it’s repeated as a fact.. were the ‘Ulema’ at the time of creation of Pakistan or immediately before opposed to the idea of a separate country based on religion? on what grounds?
Also which parties if any or famous personalities comprised these ‘Ulema’ at that time?
I’d appreciate no lengthy copy pastes please.. just edumacate me..
Mullahs and their henchmen, who have now become the self-declared saviour of Pakistan and its fanciful ideology, had vehemently opposed to the creation of Pakistan. Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, Majlis-e- Ahrar- e-Islam and Jamat-e-Islami, all these Mullah parties were very active in those days. They opposed the idea of a seperate muslim state because they considered it against the isalmic concept of muslim brotherhood but at the same time they sided with the Congres and supported its Indian nationalism.
The Ahrar people made fun of Mr. Jinnah by calling him Kafir-e-Azam and his country NaPakistan...
Jamaat-e-Islami was one of the leading Islamic political parties during the struggle for independence and they opposed the creation of Pakistan.
Their stance was that the land which the A.I. Muslim League has identified to be part of Pakistan (provinces of Punjab, Sindh, NWFP, Bengal and Balochistan and/or Kashmir) are not enough to take in all the muslims of India. Therefore, there will be a large number of muslims who will be left in India either by choice or by necessity. And since once Pakistan is created, the will be minimal political influence left of muslims in the remaining India, so in effect, the creation of Pakistan will create enormous political problems for a large number of muslims who will be forced to or choose to remain in India.
Their solution was to keep India united, thereby giving all muslims in India greater representation (and quite possibly state rule in the muslim majority provinces).
During the elections in 1946, seems most of muslims, especially those in the muslim minority areas as well, didn't quite agree with this thought-process. AIML seemed to be on the right track.
Madhanee, I don't think fazlur Rehman was around in in the 40's he's one of the younger Maulanas around.
The religo political parties did oppose the Pakistan movement, although many religious eladers did associate themselves with the Muslim League.
I wouldn't look at this as a very clear divide, the Unionist Party in Punjabs members opposed Pakistan from the beginning, after it was created most of them joined the Party, some of their sons are now card carrying Leaguers.
well Faisal in that case the harsh critics of the creation of Pakistan should applaud these Religious parties for that foresight! Afterall, many disagree with Jinnah's creation of a separate homeland and putting millions through the trauma of migration..
You can't have it both ways.. if you disagree with Pakistan's creation the way it happened.. you have to agree with the Maulana's point of view of keeping the larger muslim body in mind rather than only those in majority areas... appears Ulema had Ummah in mind but Jinnah had other plans..
I wish these idiotic mollahs would have opted to stay in India, and Jinnahs vision of a prosperous, peace loving Pakistan would have been close to attainment now.
even now all indian become muslims still pakistan would be separate
because of ethnic differences.
Abu Al-Kalam Azad noted as one of the key ‘Maulanas’ of his time and among the top leaders of Congress who later became the education minister of a ‘secular’ India, was one time great supporter of then Pan-Islamism (followers of which in modern terms are called Islamists). Throughout the WW-I he supported the idea of Muslims as a Global Community and stressed on explicit Jihad against the British (the infidels). He was forefront in the Higrat movement (part of encouraging Muslims to fight against the British by migrating to Afghanistan) and also a staunch supporter of Khlifa’at movement. Most Pakistani don’t know about his involvement in these two Muslim League supported movements because of his flip-flopped loyalties. After the end of Khilafat movement he shunned the idea of ‘Islamic or Muslim Identity’ and became totally loyal to congress & the ideals of united India.
In 1919 the Jami'yat-e-Ulama-e-Hind was formed, which is renamed to Jami'yat-e-Ulama-e-Islam in Pakistan under the leadership of Maulana Fazlur Rahman. Throughout the independence struggle the leadership along with Jama’at-e-Islami (which they hated BTW) apposed the idea of creation of Pakistan and were true supporters of Congress and their leadership.
Mostly it’s was not the ideology or the thought of Pakistan that kept these people on the other side of fence. It was the animosity against the Muslim League leadership, which they considered lesser Muslims & too secular to be talking of religion. Most prominently they were not fond of Jinnah.
The religious leaders of that time made a mistake.
Unlike religious leaders of today Maulana Mufti Mehmood
was liked by Pakistanis. And Maulana Mawdudi was a great
Muslim scholar. His books and teachings are well known.
Do read his book "Towards understanding Islam."
Muslim League knew that Hindu Congress will use democracy
as a means to an end.And Hindus will become powerful in India.
So Muslims league opted for a separate homeland.
Scholars thought maybe they can live in India and protect all
Muslims.
But thanks to Allah that we are not living in India.
your knowledge of Pakistan
Tell me seriously, do you think these “Ulema” are responsible for holding back Pakistan’s progress?
I think its a separate discussion of what kept Pakistan behind in terms of progress, development, foreign investment, research and development etc.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *He was forefront in the Higrat movement (part of encouraging Muslims to fight against the British by migrating to Afghanistan) and also a staunch supporter of Khlifa’at movement. Most Pakistani don’t know about his involvement in these two Muslim League supported movements because of his flip-flopped loyalties. After the end of Khilafat movement he shunned the idea of ‘Islamic or Muslim Identity’ and became totally loyal to congress & the ideals of united India.
[/QUOTE]
Are you sure these two movements were being supported by the AIML? As far as I know Jinnha opposed the Khilafat movement but Gandhi supported it. Anyway, both movements ended in a complete chaos and the dreamers of muslim brotherhood/ummah didn't learn any lesson out of it.
Pakistan Abroad: If you check your history most of the people that lived in constituted modern day Pakistan opposed it's creation. The Strongest support for Pakistan prior to 1946 came from Muslims in modern day india and East Bengal.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zakk: *
Pakistan Abroad: If you check your history most of the people that lived in constituted modern day Pakistan opposed it's creation. The Strongest support for Pakistan prior to 1946 came from Muslims in modern day india and East Bengal.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. The leader of K. Khimatgar and UP had their own vision. But it should be made clear that when the masses were given a chance to decide they opted for the AIML. In the elections of 1945-46, the AIML swept the Muslim votes. In Bengal and Sindh the AIML had enough seats to form ministries of their own. In two other NW provinces the League though turned out to be the largest single party, but the coalition of Congress and KK in NWFP and the coalition of UP and Congress in Panjab managed to keep the League out of the power.
I think only 3 or 4 parties are spreading hate in Pak.
Some hate mongers in this forum are dragging Islam
and all Ulemas as secterian parties.
I think Pakistanis must take extra precaution in replying to
this hate mongers i-e so called seculars and Indians.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Madhanee: *
Shawaiz, not to sidetrack, but after the creation of Pakistan, these same Mullahs (particularly of Jamat Ulma Hind – that later became Jamat Ulma-e-Pakistan) continued with their dirty trickery of dividing the nation along sectarian lines, and it continues to date. Jamat Ulma e Pakistan is not only the root cause of all what’s evil, but also the main reason for keeping Pakistan in stone age. Other big party (Jamat-e-Islami) has matured somewhat and is tolerable (somewhat).
[/QUOTE]
I think you will find that the Jamat Ulema Hind became the Jamat Ulema Islam and not JUP.
The JUP follows the ideology of great scholrs such as Allama Abdul Ghaffoor Hazarvi and Sheikh ul Hadith Allama Mohamad Sardar Lyalpuri both of whom supported the creation of Pakistan.
Faisal Bhai (or someone else)
Do you have a reference to the above from the writings of that time? I would really like to read it. I have heard/read this reasoning only from the 'Ulema' who ended up in Pakistan as an excuse to not support Pakistan after the partition.
In the writings or Fatwas of before the creation of Pakistan they considered 'Nationalism' alien (or at times totally unIslamic) to Islamic religious thought and as bad as the idea of secularism. And so they opposed the creation of Pakistan. Not to mention their dissatisfaction with the (Westernized) League leaders of that time.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Their stance was that the land which the A.I. Muslim League has identified to be part of Pakistan (provinces of Punjab, Sindh, NWFP, Bengal and Balochistan and/or Kashmir) are not enough to take in all the muslims of India. Therefore, there will be a large number of muslims who will be left in India either by choice or by necessity. And since once Pakistan is created, the will be minimal political influence left of muslims in the remaining India, so in effect, the creation of Pakistan will create enormous political problems for a large number of muslims who will be forced to or choose to remain in India.
Their solution was to keep India united, thereby giving all muslims in India greater representation (and quite possibly state rule in the muslim majority provinces).
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Madhanee: *
Moudoodi, Fazul-ur-Rehman, and Mufti Mehmood all were against the creation of Pakistan. Mufti is on the record saying that “I am glad not be part of the sin of creating Pakistan”. Now these same Molvis and their fanatic followers have become thekaydar of Pakistan. How ironic? These morons deserve to be bulldozed over. MaNNch.....
[/QUOTE]
hmm.........this shows how welresourced ur about paki politics madhanee........
actually ulema were split in 2 groups on this......
we know who were aginst but ....moulana ashraf ali and all his followers supported pakistan......any one who have read apki politics know that moulana shabbir aahmad and moulna zafar ahmad waved paki flags for the first time....and many other contributions.......