Adil Najam
I happen to be in Pakistan on this December 25 and have spent the last many days and specially today devouring the great out-pouring of ‘Jinnah-spection‘ that is on display all over the country, on television, in the press. As a Jinnah fan myself and having devoted so many posts on ATP on exactly the same question, part of me is delighted by the intensity and level of the discourse. More so, because I sense this is not just khanna purri, it is in fact real introspection. However, what struck me is that nearly the entire discussion is about figuring out the “real vision” of the Quaid-i-Azam, Mr. M.A. Jinnah. That after so many years we are still searching for that “vision’ is a statement not about Mr. Jinnah, but about our own national confusion.
Part of me feels that it is time that we acknowledge and confront our own national confusions without using (and misusing) Mr. Jinnah for our ideological skirmishes. Let the man be please. He did what he needed to do. And a did a remarkable job of it. What we did beyond that, was our doing and only we need to accept responsibility for it. Honor him for what he achieved, but please lets spare him the dissection; specially since the purpose seems to have little to do with understanding the essence of his achievements and much more with scoring points about what we are inclined to believe already and anyhow.
I should confess that this thought has been haunting me some weeks now, ever since I joined Dr. Akbar Ahmed at a recent panel at Harvard University marking Mr. Jinnah’s anniversary. Akbar Sahib is one of our leading authorities on the subject (including his movie and books on Mr. Jinnah) and in our conversation with the audience after his lecture the question of the “real Mr. Jinnah” came up again and again. As he pointed out, this question is not about Mr. Jinnah at all. It is about us ourselves. On this 25th of December as we celebrate Mr. Jinnah, it is time to recognize this fact. Let us please honor Mr. Jinnah for what he was, and not torture his memories with that which we ourselves have failed to become.
His achievements were a great blessing for all of us, but our failures are all our own. Let us accept that. To do so will itself be a first step in truly honoring him.
good post. tim eto grow up and take responsibility for our fate instead of constantly looking at long dead leaders or outside hidden hands for everything that goes wrong for us.
“Oh where oh where does Islam talk about democracy? Why wasnt the khilafah democratic?”
It talks of “shura”, not “democracy”. In many cases, a shura can act like a parliament of sorts. Islam says nothing about how a shura should be chosen (elected, appointed, etc). That doesn’t rule out democracy, does it?
Hey, at the very least, using the word “democratic” in the speech differentiates us from the monarchies in Muslim-majority countries of that era. Current era, too.
@fuzair, I don’t want to get into a debate about my name. Will leave that for another day.
The shariah is complete and will not change until the Day of Judgement. It is there for our guidance. With new issues arising with the passage of time, the rulings will still be according to the shariah. So I dont really know what you mean when you say you dont want 7th century fiqh/shariah. The Shariah is not bound by time. If Allah is going to send something, it has to be complete. As he says in Surah Maeda V4. may Allah guide us!
@Adnan, I am not going to respond to the Umar ibn al Khattab(may Allah be Pleased with him) and Jinnah comparison. Its just not a correct comparison.
Jinnah said: It is my belief that our salvation lies in following the golden rules of conduct set for us by our great lawgiver, the Prophet of Islam. Let us lay the foundations of our democracy on the basis of true Islamic ideals and principles.
Oh where oh where does Islam talk about democracy? Why wasnt the khilafah democratic? And why didnt the West then learn from our system. His statement is fundamentally flawed. His statement should have been “Let us lay the foundations of our government and our lives on the basis of the Shariah of the Prophet(sallAllah u alayhi wasallam)” Not use democracy and Islam together. They just don’t mix. This is Jinnah’s Islam.
Few clever thugs using the name of Islam to create Pakistan were no different than today’s religio political mullahs. Two nation theory and then a secular country for all. For all the seculars in Pakistan, do you clean your sewerage or do you look out for a non-muslim sweeper, with whom you don’t want to share your water glass or dinner plate ???? and to all the religious fanatics in Pakistan, where is your one muslim nation theory when you don’t want to offer prayer behind a imam who don’t belong to your sect of Islam???? A non-practicising muslim who was drinking alcohol, married to a parsi (then asking his daughter not to marry a parsi), living a far from muslim lifestyle, leading muslim nation to the (so called) fort of Islam is very much a hypocrisy in itself.
May we acknowledge that they all including Jinnah misled us to the island of Manora after taking payment for Dubai.
The current Germany is not standing with Hitler’s ideas, but still progressing and a proven developed nation.
Usman,
He used the religious aspect before partition and the secular one after partition. Its no wonder Pakistan is confused on its true identity.
I don’t know how do you define secularism but if you are referring 11th August speech then in this way Omar(RA) should also be considered a “secular” while in reality he was just obeying Shariah when he conquered Jerusalem and said the following great words to the Bishop of the city:
“From the servant of Allah and the Commander of the Faithful, Omar: The inhabitants of Jerusalem are granted security of life and property. Their churches and crosses shall be secure. This treaty applies to all people of the city. Their places of worship shall remain intact. These shall neither be taken over nor pulled down. People shall be quite free to follow their religion. They shall not be put to any trouble…”
Compare it with Jinnah’s speech and you would find that words are different, ideology is same. His speeches do indicate that Jinnah did study Islam and understood its implementation much better than others. For instance his following speech:
It is my belief that our salvation lies in following the golden rules of conduct set for us by our great lawgiver, the Prophet of Islam. Let us lay the foundations of our democracy on the basis of true Islamic ideals and principles(Civil, Naval, Military and Air Force Officers at Khaliqdina Hall Karachi on 11th October 1947)
Read the date, it is Oct,47. I can quote several others but I just mentioned one to let you know that he was not a hypocrite at all and he DID know Islam and its application. Needless to say, anyone has brain can figure out what does he meant by “Islamic ideals and principles”. So regardless of He was a Muslim or a Secular or something else, he did have knowledge of what he used to say infront of others.