Jinnah was against Muslim migration from india. Jinnah wanted the Muslims in the five provinces and in Bengal to live separately. That is the reason why Jinnah did not ask for the inclusion of Muslim majority Bihari districts adjoining Bengal to the former East Pakistan. Jinnah tried his best to keep the hindu and Sikh minorities from migrating to india. But the chaos of partition in Punjab was out of control.
Wadood. Pakistan is still a very young Nation and we are still not sure as a nation what we stand for. too many of us like to act more catholic than the pope and that's due to the fact that the country was born due to religion whether rightly or wrongly. too many of us still try to deny the indian part of our history. why aren't we proud of the 6000 year old indus valley civilisation or that indian civilisation prior to 1947 is as much our cultural heritage as it is of India? It is stupid that textbooks in pakistan act as if history began with the invasion of muhammad ibn qasim! too many of us act like wannabe Arabs and idealise invaders who killed and raped and looted the locals just because they were Muslims. in short pakistanis are still very confused as a nation and the mullah brigade doesn't help. you are right that we are slowly developing our own separate culture to india but it is also true that a large part will always be common from the food and dress to urdu language. luckily most pakistanis still are very open minded people and like to enjoy life. secondly sufism has a strong hold over much of punjab and sindh and balochistan and the sufis respected their are largely the inclusive sufis such as baba bulleh shah and sayyid waris shah who preached an inclusive form of islam full of love and criticised the dry-as-dust mullahs.
its okay AQ i get it -- and this is my last reply to you: the Islam you personally espouse is a hate-filled religious cult. i hope you enjoy it. still, next time something like Godhra happens i hope your family or loved ones aren't involved. your opinions about me don't bother me in the least. i've joined a long list of people you consider zindiqs! people like you are why a lot of Barelvis are dubbed Takfiris nowadays. as for pakistan, it can survive without your support thanks. the reason it is a mess is because of religious fanatics like you. btw you munafiq, india is a secular democracy. if it ever stops becoming one you and your kind will be the first ones to be asked to pull down their shalwars to check if you are the right religion. don't hate the system that provides you with security. an india run under hindutva will be a nightmare for all non hindus. its easy to sing the praises of a 'shariat state' when you live in a secular democracy. if one day the hindus tell you to off and go and live in an islamic state (assuming you aren't one of those hypocrites who live in the West/Gulf and hate its system) then you'll be sorry.
I would like to clarify. In Pakistan there are 5 main groups of people [ divided into hundreds of inter-linked sub-groups ] 1) Punjabis 2) Sindhis 3) Pashtuns 4) Kashmiris 5) Baloch These five groups have little in common ( in terms of culture ) with the rest of the Muslims of india across the Jamuna River, beginning at Doab, Kathiawar, and Jodhpur / Nagaur in Rajasthan. They do not consider themselves part of indian muslims . They are in agreement on this point. An overwhelming vast majority of them consider themselves as culturally different people (natives) and do not want to live with indian muslims. Some of them behave racially especially the Pashtuns (in the muhajir Pashtun Karachi wars ). But overall, according to my research, the vast majority of Pakistanis are not racists and not ultra-nationalists but consider themselves different people to the rest of india. They respect indian Muslims because of brotherhood and from a historical perspective. They claim their own heritage and languages. For example, Seraiki the language of Middle Pakistan spanning, with its dialects, the 4 provinces. It is considered an aspect of Pakistani culture that unites the 4 provinces into one and gives the feeling of uniqueness to the whole country.
sorry i disagree. most muslims who have had exposure to modern philosophy tend to become in favour of reformation of islam like iqbal did because a person is a product of their culture and their education and anyone exposed to this culture cannot help bulk at the non-critical attitude of traditional islamic education. the same philosophy led to a reformation of the catholic church and the end result was the Reformation and then the Enlightenment and then the Scientific and Industrial Revolutions. The proof is in the pudding. In a nutshell if you introduce modern education into madrassahs they will produce more people like Iqbal who will reform the system. I honestly don't get why the more conservative elements are so opposed to it. no one is denying the basics of loving Allah and Rasul Allah or praying your namaz but these things are personal worship. The problem becomes when you try to run a country or state on such an idealistic system -- because human society cannot be perfect and any attempt just leads to totalitarianism. I also think this terror of going against the interpretation of past scholars is what is holding us back. Sure if you believe the Quran is the literal word of God it is still interpreted by scholars by necessity and these scholars are humans and humans can be prone to error. To give one example Ala Hazrat has followed the medieval scholars based on this 'the elders must be correct' attitude to declare the Earth stationary and said that anyone who says the Earth is spinning on its axis is a kafir and anyone who denies this is also a kafir! How narrow-minded is that? Sure, you can say Ala Hazrat was following the rulings of traditional scholars before him but when our knowledge increases to prove that the Earth is not stationary beyond all doubt, isn't it better and intellectually honest to say, 'we respect Ala Hazrat but on this issue the traditional interpretation is wrong.' If you insist it is right then the only other alternative will be to admit the Koran has scientific errors in it. We people are not enemies of Islam or mad we see that the world has moved on, we no longer live in the 7th century, human knowledge is not static so therefore the logical thing to do is interpret the verses to fit the facts not the other way round.
sorry unbeknown. was busy all day and didn't have time to address that. abu Hasan addressed the basic point. two "qaum" or "ummah" does not correlate to two separate geographical homes. i don't know what Ala Hazrat said, if at all he did say something, on Muslims having a separate geographical territory, but even if he did, there would have been umpteen numbers of caveats and riders accompanying it. not the simplistic solution that the idiot jinnah suggested - all Muslims pack your bags and leave! that is exactly what the partition was, it was a practical and logistical impossibility, it was stupid, it was unorganized, it was bloody, it was messy, and it hurt the subcontinental Muslims severely. just think about it - these are peace times - no colonial power hanging on your head, no wars, famines etc. if someone asks everyone in your area to pack your bags and just move from the konkan coast to assam, how feasible would that be? (just think about the logistical part of it, regardless of what you want or don't want to do) this mass immigration thing was a logistical impossibility to achieve and jinnah along with all the others knew it full well. i refuse to accept that Ala Hazrat could have been so criminally sloppy to suggest the jinnah-esque style "everyone pack your bags, leave your homes, ancestral lands, and livelihoods and move out" solution. besides, if he was the "architect" for this solution, why didn't his own sons like Shaykh Hamid Raza and Huzoor Mufti A3zdham Hind (radi Allahu 3anhum) not migrate and ask Muslims to continue migration even after the partition? what is Tajush Shari3ah still doing in india? notwithstanding the fact that it was accompanied by unnecessary bloodshed. if they (jinnah and co) did factor in the fact that it was a logistical impossibility, what did they suggest those who stayed back do? become minority slaves of hindus? aren't we as an ummah supposed to stick together? i consider jinnah as a power-hungry criminal against the ummah and am willing to stand up to anyone for that. i have a sense of deja vu. i might have posted these same sentiments before on this forum nj firstly, do not respond to my posts. i hate you from the bottom of my heart as i personally consider you an arrogant zindiq who likes to talk about "reforming" Islam only to suit his western whims and fancies, without even being capable to list out a few basic ahkam of taharah. if i saw a truck run you over, i'd say "good riddance to bad rubbish", and not pray your janaza. you might have the same opinion of me, and that's no skin off my back either. secondly, what you term as "help" is actually dajjalic destruction. he has made the lives of more Muslims miserable than i ever have or will - on both sides of the border. popularity does not equate to helping mankind. padri tahir for instance, has done more to harm Muslims than most "cultish" mullahs. have a look at the body counts. on an yearly average more Muslims are killed by their brethren in this safe haven than by the evil hindus did in godhra oh, and while you're at it, don't forget those dear Muslim brothers from "east pakistan" whom you so unceremoniously sent away to find another nation. talk about some integrity and shame! despite being "oppressed obc's" indian Muslims are safer and have more economic opportunities than any pakistani on any given day i don't care to sing praises of the kafir government or administration of india. i only wish to re-iterate that the partition was an act of evil against the entire Muslim population of the subcontinent, regardless of which side of the division they fell on. it has rendered the subcontinental Muslim incredibly weak, on both sides of the border. secular democracy is evil. Shari3at is good. jinnah should be defined by what he wanted for his new state. straw man. no one who stayed back is a stateless person either.
no, i do not know the details; i read it in a devbandi book that iqbal retorted to takfir by calling people of alwar as donkeys or something like that similar to his ridicule of husayn ahmed tandwi. yes, as a saviour of the ummah or whatever. but as far as his poetry and expression is concerned, it cannot be over-rated; it is top rate. shikwah/jawab-e-shikwah apart, his poetry overall is very deep, insightful and inspiring. do not mistake my outburst below to mean that i am against everything about iqbal or that i do not acknowledge his genius or he was totally ignorant of islam; on the contrary, he was well-informed but most of his knowledge in this department (i suppose) was received through mediums such as masnavi and sa'adi's works; which is in itself not a small thing. but that does not make one a specialist faqih or a mufassir or a muhaddith. i found his english work "reconstruction" only on the internet and only a few years ago - one couldn't find that easily in bookshops back home, compared to his kulliyat and shuruh by prof.salim chishti. some analogies etc below are exaggerated just to tip over NJ. i like iqbal for a number of reasons, for some of his memorable lines which only a person with true love of the Messenger SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam can utter. i protest his 'call' for reformation in that manner - which coming from a man like him is very sad and unfortunate, apart from being uninformed, as you can easily tell. if you take away the religious component away from the debate, his poems are indeed thought provoking. i also generously admit the notion that he repented in his last days and they say that he regularly prayed too. so, the takfir/non-takfir are all previous matters which i assume were resolved as it appears. may Allah ta'ala forgive him and Allah ta'ala knows best. ==== so do not call me a hypocrite if i quote his poems - or if i say that they are moving, invigorating and inspiring. Allah ta'ala knows best.
Iqbal passed away before the formation of Pakistan, therefore he would be considered an Indian poet. Ethnically he was Kashmiri. He is over rated by Pakistani nationalists and wannabe reformers. To AH: Did Mawlana Didar A'li retract the takfir after 'Jawab e Shikwa' or any other time? I heard a Wahabi (Ihsan Ilahi Zaheer) mention this.
how utterly disgusting!!! you're just a backward indian mulla if you were an arts 'n philosophy infatuated elite-intellectual metrosexual, you'd be having "brunch" on a saturday morning, and not breakfast. i can almost say on oath you've probably never walked into a fine dining white linen restaurant in a black tux - to savor a seven course meal. you've probably only ever had your meals in a sarong and a white tunic, sitting on the ground, eating with your hands
http://www.historytoday.com/michael-pollitt/warning-history-google-translate-generation However, when Robert of Ketton, the first to translate the Quran into Latin, came across this word in 1143, he scrolled through his lexicon with all the blinkered literalism of an automated translation service. Selecting a definition seemingly at random, he found that the verb akbara could also be used to describe an unrelated physiological process. The first Latin translation thus became quo uiso omnes menstruatae sunt (‘when they saw him they all menstruated’), a literal but improbable interpretation. ===== you will perhaps empathise with my anger on iqbal's bull-in-a-chinashop rampage.
i don't think that is the core of the matter. but i agree with you that the madrasah system and syllabus is outdated in not just secular sciences. i still don't understand why they don't teach notational algebra instead of chaghmeni; and i don't know how many can teach chaghmeni today, though i suppose ordinary college students can work with more algebra than you can find in chaghmeni (haven't touched for years, but i guess with some reading i can still manage laplace transforms and fourier transforms we'd learned in degree math; and i was a poor student). we discussed it here. instead of teaching aristotlean philosophy, students should be given an introduction to modern philosophy, including perennialist philosophies and cults, economic systems, political correctness and western obsession with those who are not PC; geographies, systems of government, technologies and how they are used in daily life, medical practices and so forth. but it is also a myth that scholars are not addressing these issues. the fiqh seminars actively debate and discuss modern issues (as we have read in the final reports). the old accusation that scholars are locked away in a labyrinth and use pigeons to deliver messages does not hold anymore.
the 'chap' was an accomplished scholar. and even otherwise, i have said myself that iqbal's poetry has blasphemous elements. having a working knowledge of a language is not the same as being an expert to be able to suggest reformation. those who don't know the sources iqbal quotes, will not know that he quotes blindly assuming that he has understood it. but when you go back to the references, you will realise how shallow it is. this expose requires a lot of time, because iqbal drops a thousand names - and a serious critical review requires time that i cannot devote at the moment. besides, having been fortunate to read a number of arabic and urdu books by religious scholars, and even pretenders who have directly accessed qur'an hadith, i can confidently state that iqbal did not refer to original qur'an and hadith or tafsir. with his working knowledge of arabic, he drew his own conclusions and made his own interpretations. this is evident for someone who can appreciate arabic idiom, usage, and indeed, has some level of experience in tafsir. how would you feel if someone made judgement on hamlet's soliloquy based on a high-school essay by a student who is unable to differentiate between sons-in-law and son-in-laws? i don't say that iqbal did not have the capability - he was after all a poet with a wizard-like command of urdu and farsi (or perhaps german and english as well). one who can learn so many languages can certainly master arabic; but "mastery" does not come from merely knowing the rules. "mastery" comes by reading books in that language written by masters. for whatever reasons, a person with iqbal's intelligence and talent would not commit such grave mistakes, IF he had spent time reading arabic works on fiqh, tafsir and hadith. notice, how copiously and how accurately he uses persian phrases and terms in his poetry - but sparingly, and cautiously when it comes to arabic terms. that is because, he was aware that he would be safe with generic, vague statements; overstepping would expose his ignorance - so he does not dwell on arabic texts. look at the stupid comment he made about the verse: and iqbal said: The Koran indicates the possibility of other creators than God. anyone with basic knowledge of tafsir or kalam would not say that. most people are dumb and ignorant and simply follow the crowd. it is your choice anyway. mawlana didar ali alwari was alahazrat's khalifah and about whom alahazrat himself said: mawlana didar ali ko kab didar dikhatey ye haiN!
The "I don't care" remark is sad. Someone as intelligent as you happily takes the side of a chap who called Iqbal a non-Muslim when according to your own rules that should be the last thing to call any Muslim. Oh well, too much naql must devolve the aql. You hit the nail on the head when you said that the philosophy taught in the dars e nizami is outdated. By about half a millenium. That's the core of the matter. Our leaders are still learning medieval philosophy in the 21st century and then Muslims wonder why traditional ulema can't cope with the problems of modernity. Don't blame them blame their education system. And you're right I don't know Arabic but Iqbal did. He was lecturer in Arabic (or Reader) at Govt. college Lahore. So he could read the original sources. Anyway between Iqbal and Didar Ali I'll put my lot in with Allama Iqbal like most people. Wa salaam
i don't care. iqbal was a fasiq, if a sayyid like mawlana didar ali alwari made takfir, i side with him. iqbal's asrar e khudi and its explanations are contradictory and even his own teacher/admirer nicholson implied that his logic could be inconsistent, though his poetry will never let you down. (the poetic aspect). yes as i have mentioned in my previous post, there are lines in his poetry which border on, or are outright blasphemy. go ahead, hang me for my opinion. and call me a backward mulla if you want to. as if i care. (now my tea got cold...) ---- i have read, both his english translation and urdu commentary of prof.salim chishti, printed as early as 1944. that is to indicate that i have also received his poetry from those are deemed iqbal-experts.
Yes I haven't been to India and I'd love to go but it's actually very hard for Brits of Pakistani origin to get visas to go. Open discrimination old chap. But surely you're not arguing that India itself doesn't have a myriad problems including overpopulation in its cities like Bombay , and more poor children than sub Saharan Africa? People sleeping and defecating on the streets, massive poverty etc. If it was so shining Indians wouldn't be leaving in their droves still for the Gulf and Europe and America. Sure a proportion of Indians - the middle classes and above --are doing well and good luck to them. Any five minute Google search about India and poverty or demographics can give us the info we need or just watch any documentary on it or read Arundhati Roy. She's not a Pakistani!
The maulvis made takfir of Allama Iqbal based on his poetry and not his philosophical writings which they weren't capable of accessing due to language barriers. This is the first time I've heard a Barelvi admit that Barelvi ulema did make takfir of Allama Sahib. That's not surprising as masha Allah maulvi Sahibs thrive on making takfir (from wearing hats and ties to believing in a heliocentric solar system with a rotating earth is enough to make you a kafir according to some!) but what is hypocritical is that these same maulvi hazraat and mashaikh e usa am now quote Iqbal and present him as a Sunni like them when it suits them! Wasn't Iqbal's attack on Deedar Ali due to him having written that Iqbal is a kafir and anyone who doubts his kufr is also a kafir? You know, something gentle like that!
much of your comments about india are uninformed and i am not interested in arguing about that. the myth of population is another....myth. as i said, you as a brit can travel to india anytime. take a break and go around - see for yourself.
as usual, comments on the sailor's skill who has been sailing on the seas for twenty years, by a person who has not even dipped his foot in the sea! i agree that you are like iqbal in this department - making wholesale generalisations without even bothering to look at our corpus. i am revolted at this nonsensical, outright stupid and disgusting accusation against our ulama and our sciences, whether iqbal or some other fasiq. as they say, those who probably don't even know how to do istinja, commenting on the fiqh of people who spend their lives in it. my dare to you: if you are that capable, and intellectually superior, prove that you can learn as much arabic as you can to read an arabic book and refute what you think is wrong in it. if not, don't carp about it. --- none of these liberals have the ability to learn a key skill such as arabic language skills; if they have, they are not interested in learning it. but they want to overhaul our system without learning anything about it. [just look up to your colonial masters, those white orientalists; at least learn from those whom you admire: most orientalists, including those inimical to islam spent years learning our languages to read the texts in original.] imagine a village carpenter lecturing boeing on how to arrange their seats and offering them his services to overhaul their furnishing design? in fact, i ask any of these liberal thinkers to contribute in such a way to any of these fields instead of trying to 'revamp' islam? if iqbal was really serious (or even capable) he should have given a examples on how the system could be improved. but he was a jahil when it comes to core islamic sciences. most of what he talks about is general knowledge one can easily gain from reading the masnavi sharif, gulistan and bustan. the truth is that they need legitimacy for their profligate ideas and free-thinking; many of them for a hedonistic/materialistic life. instead of adapting to islam, they want islam to adapt to their new found way of living. what could he fix? he was jahil about qur'an and hadith. if he had basic knowledge, a competent - even if average - mulla has, he could quote stuff on his own. rather, he falls back on orientalist and second-hand quotes. ==== in the west successful people take to some useful activity after they retire. bill gates is a successful software entrepreneur and when he retired he took to a cause and public service. unfortunately, among muslims, people become experts on qur'an and hadith even without reading it. why don't they just take up a cause like harvesting rain water or starving children or something like that? it does not require much learning, and it is appreciated by all; and with a good intention, you earn thawab for your akhirah too. particularly, when academics and professors retire - after having spent years without even praying or fasting in ramadan - they take to reforming islam. sir, why don't you make use of the precious few years left to complete your qaDa that is due upon you? so they spend the rest of their lives proving that qaDa is not necessary and it is the backward mulla who makes your life unbearable. ----- my note to students and scholars alike: if you are challenged by some deluded individual, hand them an arabic copy of nuz'hatu'n nazar or usul shashi or fawz al-kabir or even sharh al-aqayid, to tell them how to improve it; and that you are willing to discuss it. if he says he cannot read arabic, tell him to first go learn arabic and then come back with his proposals. will anyone engage with a person who cannot read english, attempting to critique shakespeare?
