Adil Najam
To me, the 23rd of March is a day to reflect on the message of Mohammad Iqbal, just like the 14th of August is to ponder on the legacy of Mohammad Ali Jinnah.
We, as Pakistanis, have not really been kind to the legacy of either man. We turned both into idols. And once we convinced ourselves that these were ‘supermen’ we conveniently absolved ourselves of the responsibility to learn from – let alone emulate – either. We are fond of celebrating but incapable of incorporating either the actions of Mr. Jinnah nor the thoughts of Mohammad Iqbal.
After all, once we turned Mr. Jinnah into the ‘Quaid-i-Azam’ and conferred near-divine status on him it became all too easy to say that we, mere mortals, could not be expected to act in the way – or even on the principles – that he did. His blemishes were to be denied, not just because we hold him in reverence but also because to acknowledge them is to accept that maybe ordinary – even flawed – human beings can stil have principles worth following. We have done the same to Iqbal. Because his the ‘the’ Allama, he is to be put on a pedestal. His work read with respect and honor; to be savored, but not really to be understood. Certainly not to be questioned, and absolutely not to be allowed to influence that we do. After all, he is an Allama; and we are not.
The Allama-ization of Iqbal, just like the Quaid-i-Azam-ization of Jinnah has been a disservice to both. For ultimately it has turned these two giants into mere statues; the iconography of the ‘Allama’ and the ‘Quaid’ have enabled us to turn them into dieties of reverence while at the same time distancing ourselves – if not outright disowning – the thought of the first and the actions of the later.
We at ATP have been rather remiss in not paying enough tribute to Mohammad Iqbal. This is a mistake I have been wanting to rectify. Today, the eve of Pakistan Day is a good time to begin doing so. The events and the idea behind the 23rd of March owes more to Iqbal than anyone else. And as a first offering of tribute to Iqbal I offer you this wonderful video. I found it on YouTube:
I do not really know who produced it although for some reason the voice sounds familiar. The selection of poetry as well as the pictures are excellent. Indeed, I wou urge you to focus on both. The pictures are not the ones you usually see of him and many of them evoke a humanness that is lost in many of our ‘official’ portraits on the man. But also focus on the ideas. This is a work less known that, say, Shikwa and Jawab i Shikwa, but it has ideas that are so contemporary that he may as well have been talking about the events of last week. For example:
anpay watan meiN houN kay ghareeb-ud-diyar houN
Darta houN daikh daikh kay iss dasht-o-dar ko meiN
Iqbal and Jinnah were instrumental in dividing India but we have divided their person even.
Iqbal had sung:
“Hindi hein ham watan he Hindostan hamara”
and had accepted the knighthood bestowed on him by the British imperialism about which Moulana Zafar Ali had said:
“Turkon ne shujaat se Samarna ko kia sar
Aur Angrez ki dehliiz pih ‘Sir’ ho gaey Iqbal”.
The Tarana-i-Hindi of Iqbbal is still sung in Bharat which country the Pakies treat an ‘Azli dushman’.
We divided even the Indian Muslim League which had passed the Pakisan Resolution of 1940 into Pakistan Muslim League and Indian (Bharti) Muslim League. Why? In accordance with the ideology of TNT, perhaps!
Is it not the time to look back and think though Sufi Mohammad’s sharia says, “Discussing the past events is ‘Harram’ “.
Dear Dr. Najam,
Can we discuss this? How is 23rd March a day to reflect on the legacy of Allama Muhammad Iqbal? This is not cant or a loaded question. I am seriously trying to learn here.
Consider: Iqbal died in April 1938… a good two years before 1940 resolution. The Lahore Resolution was drafted and vetted by either Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan or Ch. Zafrullah Khan… Ch. Zafrullah Khan admitted to vetting it…. but Wali Khan claimed that he drafted it. Sir Sikandar atleast had no love lost for Iqbal and the feeling was mutual.
Nor did the Lahore Resolution have anything to do with Iqbal’s advice 10 years earlier… for one thing the Lahore Resolution spoke of North Western and North Easter units… as a political compromise … whereas Iqbal had spoken about North west alone. Secondly Lahore Resolution had envisaged negotiation on the issue of a center and was aimed at giving Jinnah an ambiguous enough document for him to play ball with the Congress and the British on his own terms.
Finally … the Lahore Resolution spoke of autonomous and sovereign constituent units… and therefore the provincial autonomy was a main feature… and the second feature were “adequate, effective and mandatory” safeguards for minorities arrived at by “consultation” with them… their advice being mandatory here for good measure. Iqbal spoke of no such thing in 1930. The Lahore Resolution scheme itself was adopted from Mian Kifayet Ali’s “A Confederacy of India” (originally written under the pseudonym “a Punjabi” and titled “PAKISTAN” which was changed at Jinnah’s insistence)
The star of the show in Lahore in March 1940 was Jinnah… right from the time he arrived in Lahore and managed to control the Khaksar rioting he proved himself as a statesman of the highest order. By this resolution and adept leadership, Jinnah managed to carry with him two main leaders of the Muslim majority provinces … Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan (the author) and AK Fazlul Haq (the mover) … neither of whom were “Muslim Nationalists” by any stretch of imagination. As the Hindustan Times said the next day “Triumph for Mr. Jinnah’s leadership”. The Lahore Resolution was Jinnah’s crowning glory and epitome of his vision. From a leader whose party had been trounced in the Muslim Majority areas, Jinnah became from this point onwards the sole spokesman of the Muslims of India.
Meanwhile…. 14th August 1947 marked a reversal of that fortune for Mr. Jinnah.. or accurately June 3rd did… when Jinnah was all but forced to accept the plan which for all practical purposes was a negation of his own idea of Pakistan.
Now this is not to down play the significance of Allama Iqbal and his ideas about a separate Muslim state in the North West… but I would like to learn humbly how Iqbal had anything to do with Lahore Resolution….
First of all , my best wishes for Dr. Iqbal. He was as well as is a great and respectable personlaity in the muslim community. His peotry reflects his visions and thinking. At the current stuiation of pakistan, pakistani nation is looking forward for a person like Allam Iqbal. My God bless you Sir Iqbal.
@ Lutf ul Islam …. if Iqbal is made an idol by Jihadis or someone whom u dont like … it doesnt mean that its Iqbal’s fault and you discredit him. Suggesting that Iqbal was influenced by any pressure or anything else during last 3 years of his life, shows your own “sincerity” in analyzing the poet, making you no different than these jihadis.
Growing up in Pakistani educational system, I was made aware of Allama Iqbal from the first day when I heard “lab pe aati hay dua” being recited in the school. During my middle years, I was told that Iqbal was the person who dreamt of Pakistan and Quaid e Azam fulfilled his dream. In these days, I became fond of Iqbal and borrowed his poetry books from the library and tried to memorize many of his poems. His shaheen momin was my hero, my ideal. His rhetoric of superiority of a praciticing muslim and his message of revolution was very appeasing to me. At that time, I was also a keen reader of Naseem Hijazi and felt that Iqbal was right. How bravely did he stand up to the British and Hindus to tell muslims to find their pride and recover their prestige. And muslims of India did just that by creating Pakistan. I read about Captain Sarwar, Major Aziz Bhatti etc. and thought of them as personifications of Iqbal’s Shaheen. Gen. Zia’s american Jihad was taught in school books. India was always evil, Israel a mortal enemy and Russian was the official language in Hell. Iqbal’s selective poetry in school books, and many Jamaat e Islami type teachers, no wonder Pakistanis have such a one-sided view of Iqbal.
Then I found Ghalib and Meer. Iqbal’s poetry did not seem as brilliant when I compared them. I found out in college, that to consider Ghalib better than Iqbal was to confess that you preferred wine and women over your faith. But Ghalib’s poetry agreed with my thoughts more than Iqbal. Ghalib’s honesty and humour had much more to offer than Iqbal’s dry slogans. But when it came to politics, I was still in agreement with Iqbal. But then I found Faiz. Ghalib had a match. Iqbal was No. 3 in the list.
What was my reason to demote Iqbal from my list of literary heroes? I read a comment here saying that Ghalib resorted to writing Qaseedahs for the British Monarch. I also found a lament Iqbal wrote at the death of Queen Victoria, where he equated the day of her death to Muharram. I have no problems with people writing praises for the Kings and Queens. Both did what they though was right. But Iqbal’s deep study of Greek and modern European philosophy had an impact on his own thinking. He was a student of history, but was not such a great revolutionary as portrayed in the books. He himself denied in a letter that he never wanted a separate homeland for muslims, but was only throwing options to ensure peace in India. I think muslims in India made Iqbal into a celebrity too soon. As soon as he returned after his overseas education, he was treated like a leader. His poetry was lauded as the best in the whole country. But was his phiolsophy as sound as his linguisitic abilities? I find that today, everyone claims Iqbal to be one of them. Secularists love him because he condemned the mullah. Mullah quotes him as he was a Jihadist. Scholars like Ghulam Ahmad Pervez (of Tolu-e-Islam) claim that Iqbal was a rationalist like Sir Syed. Indians revere him, Pakistanis claim the ownership over Iqbal. What was Iqbal? I think, he was a poet, who could never make up his mind.
A freethinker like he was, Iqbal dismissed orthodoxy for most of his life, until he required guidance (or was pushed to seek) by the Ahrar. In 1935, just three years before his death, Dr. Iqbal felt the urge to oppose the Ahmadiyya Sect, despite his four decades long active relationship with them. His close relatives were Ahmadis. His eldest son, Aftab Iqbal was sent to Qadian to study in the Ahmadiyya boarding school. These last three years of his life, gave Iqbal the popularity among the orthodox Ahrar, and later Jamaat e Islami and other deobad and even salafi-wahabi movements.
I would like to believe that Iqbal’s vision was a federation of fucntioning muslim provinces who followed rationalist islamic ideology like his. But who can tell. Our Jihadis find the ailing, angry and vindictive Iqbal more agreeable.