Historical evidences for engagement of Islamic scholars by the government after Pakistan was founded and while Jinnah was alive

[Ssan]

That's the only thing that actually matters, everything else you wrote is just the usual nonsense you routinely post

Please provide the letter itself or provide the precise reference or file number where we can locate and access the letter. If the record copying team at the National Archives is to be trusted, the alleged letter is not archived under file number DO 142/476 at Kew Gardens, as stated in OP.

If you are unable to fulfill either of these requests, then we can consider this discussion concluded.

Trust me, I already consider the conversation finished. You are clearly a waster of my precious time.

I will post the letter here fully for the regular readers. After I resolve the small case of obtaining digital rights to do so. Waiting on that.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Trust me, I already consider the conversation finished. You are clearly a waster of my precious time.

I will post the letter here fully for the regular readers. After I resolve the small case of obtaining digital rights to do so. Waiting on that.

You are contradicting yourself again. Is this letter you're referring to the original one written by Jinnah himself, or is it simply an interpretation deduced by an alleged infallible British spy based on the communication between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Pakistan government?

 

[M. Sarmad]

The letter in the British archives is independently verified by two separate individuals, Ayesha Jalal and Dr Ishtiaq.

That too is incorrect. Ishtiaq Lahori sb has personally confirmed via email that he did not independently verify the letter and instead relied on Dr. Ayesha's 2017 article and the note she shared with him later on.

 

[Ssan]

Here is the letter from the archives- it is exactly reproduced properly by Dr Siddiqa and Dr Ishtiaq. I reproduce it after obtaining the rights to do so- but it is still copyrighted belonging to Kews Garden Archives. If one wants to use this elsewhere, they will have to cite this post- unless I can gather this elsewhere. Which I intend to do.

Also, this letter finds mention through out the document- I have attached one other letter that does so- the name of the docket here is the following:- “Relations between Pakistan and the Muslim states in the Middle East”- then it also has “including the Qadiriya order” and then also later and “the visit by Egyptian journalists traveling to Pakistan”. The portions that track the visit by the journalist here is reported with great detail.

Actually a lot of this document is really a treasure trove of cool info. I will create a separate thread attached to the main thread on what the British foreign office was thinking on Pakistan during this period.

Also, a quick note- after speaking to some folk, I have been given the impression that the underlined portion of the text here in this letter is quite possibly the translated or transliterated portion of the letter. The FO certainly believed that the rest of the letter had been transcribed exactly - given that it is in quotations.

 

[Ssan]

@Jango , I was trying to edit the 3rd post of mine in this thread and attach the letter as an update to that post- but I seem unable to do so. Can you please help me attach the pdf file above to the 3rd post so that readers that read this thread will have access to the digital copy on the third post as opposed to waddling through this thread to the last post here.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Here is the letter from the archives- it is exactly reproduced properly by Dr Siddiqa and Dr Ishtiaq. I reproduce it after obtaining the rights to do so- but it is still copyrighted belonging to Kews Garden Archives. If one wants to use this elsewhere, they will have to cite this post- unless I can gather this elsewhere. Which I intend to do.

Also, this letter finds mention through out the document- I have attached one other letter that does so- the name of the docket here is the following:- “Relations between Pakistan and the Muslim states in the Middle East”- then it also has “including the Qadiriya order” and then also later and “the visit by Egyptian journalists traveling to Pakistan”. The portions that track the visit by the journalist here is reported with great detail.

Actually a lot of this document is really a treasure trove of cool info. I will create a separate thread attached to the main thread on what the British foreign office was thinking on Pakistan during this period.

Also, a quick note- after speaking to some folk, I have been given the impression that the underlined portion of the text here in this letter is quite possibly the translated or transliterated portion of the letter.

So it turns out, the facts align precisely with what I previously mentioned. There is no trace of the original letter itself; instead, we have an alleged translation of what Jinnah purportedly wrote to Al-Banna in an unidentified language. This alleged letter was supposedly obtained through an unknown acquaintance of Al-Banna, who then passed it on to an unidentified Egyptian individual. Subsequently, this individual purportedly translated the letter into English and forwarded its contents to a British diplomat, who, in turn, provided his opinion that the claims being made are plausible and sent a note to the UK. This is the document we currently have in the British archives, and not the original letter itself. The record copying team at National Archives was correct in informing me that the specific letter I was searching for is not present in their archives.

 

[Signalian]

Seeing this thread, Molana Rumi did the right thing by saying goodbye to being an islamic scholar and becoming a divine lover of Allah, so did Iqbal.

 

[Jango]

@Jango , I was trying to edit the 3rd post of mine in this thread and attach the letter as an update to that post- but I seem unable to do so. Can you please help me attach the pdf file above to the 3rd post so that readers that read this thread will have access to the digital copy on the third post as opposed to waddling through this thread to the last post here.

I see the PDF attached.

 

[Ssan]

I see the PDF attached.

There is a different pdf attached to post #4 that is the pac bill. I wanted to attach the pdf in post #184 to post #3 as that is ideally where it should be.

 

[M. Sarmad]

There is a different pdf attached to post #4 that is the pac bill. I wanted to attach the pdf in post #184 to post #3 as that is ideally where it should be.

@Jango

The sequence in this debate is clear, and adding this PDF file to the OP now would only create confusion. The PDF file is exactly where it should be. So, are the rebuttals

 

[Ssan]

@SaadH @Sayfullah @Ikbal ,
Brothers, I was wondering if you guys would be interested in sorting through the dump of documents I have received from the British archives in this docket.

The documents as a whole are really interesting and actually relate to the calculation that the British have about what the state of Pakistan represents or could represent to the Muslim world at large. It also includes within it the British assessment of what sort of state Pakistan was formed to be in passing.

It is really really interesting stuff. I promise. The issue is that there are some 80 documents that need to be sorted through. Given that this is all going through the foreign office, it is influencing policy at the highest levels of government.

I wanted to sort through it and organize it before I could dump the lot of it here. I have the rights to publish these documents publicly too. Would you be interested in helping me sort through these docs if you have time.

Alternatively, there might be other brothers who might be interested too?

As far as the gaslighter on this thread, I have blocked him as I promised to do after the individual showed a lack of essential skills necessary to have discourse. I’m sure he is continuing to gaslight but I can’t see it anymore. Good riddance for that I guess! He wasted a month gaslighting the existence of documents in official British archives while it took me three days to procure them from Monday.

Next steps, I want to collate all the speeches of Jinnah and Iqbal on this topic together in a parallel thread too. Would love help on that if anyone has bandwidth.

Seeing this thread, Molana Rumi did the right thing by saying goodbye to being an islamic scholar and becoming a divine lover of Allah, so did Iqbal.

Lol, all the gaslighting was done from one side. If you pour through the thread you will see who was being like Rumi and who was not.

 

[M. Sarmad]

He wasted a month gaslighting the existence of documents in official British archives while it took me three days to procure them from Monday.

Except that you have failed to produce the original letter. And you have ended up proving exactly what I had been saying all along

for example, I wrote in

post (#117) :
"It is possible that it could be feedback from British diplomats in Cairo to their government regarding Jinnah's relationship with Banna, but in that case, it may not qualify as a letter per se."

post#174:
"I think the document we have in the National Archives is the note sent by the British diplomat, not the letter itself."

And the concluding post:
"our discussion revolved around the presence or absence of the letter in the British National archives, and it has been confirmed that no such letter exists. Any information provided by British staff in Cairo regarding Jinnah's relationship with Hassan al Banna, or the perspectives of British diplomats in Pakistan, are irrelevant in this context."




And regarding your claim that you have blocked me, You're saying that after inviting me to this thread and dragging out this debate for a whole month, you suddenly decide to block me?... I interpret it as your acknowledgment of conceding defeat in our argument.

Have a nice Day

 

[EternalMortal]

Personally, I don’t get the point of this debate. Did Jinnah & other founding fathers want a secular or Islamic Pakistan? Clearly it was the latter which both sides seem to agree, so what is the purpose of the debate?

As someone else put it earlier: they’ve all been dead for a long time & they didn’t create Pakistan for themselves. At the end of the day it’s the Pakistanis who are alive that decide what Pakistan is. Vast majority want an Islamic state & it’s not something that will be compromised on so that’s what we have even though the elite is secular.

 

[Ssan]

Personally, I don’t get the point of this debate. Did Jinnah & other founding fathers want a secular or Islamic Pakistan? Clearly it was the latter which both sides seem to agree, so what is the purpose of the debate?

As someone else put it earlier: they’ve all been dead for a long time & they didn’t create Pakistan for themselves. At the end of the day it’s the Pakistanis who are alive that decide what Pakistan is. Vast majority want an Islamic state & it’s not something that will be compromised on so that’s what we have even though the elite is secular.

I believe you are right- unf, our secular friends are split into two broad camps. One admit that he did proclaim to want an Islamic republic but he was being either a hypocrite, or didn’t know what an Islamic republic was or was actually unclear about what degree of an islamic republic he wanted. The other camp flatly denies that he wanted an islamic republic at all, claiming instead that he wanted a plainly secular state or at best a Muslim state that was secular like Turkey.

As we are going through a dark period in our country’s history, I have found this side hobby beneficial to myself- because it has convinced me that Pakistan was indeed formed in the name of Islam. And that all our secular friends claiming otherwise are simply and flatly wrong. Indeed, even from the docket that I have quoted here, it is clear that even the British FO understood how important Pakistan was to the Muslim world, or as they quote, Islamic bloc and Muslim bloc in other places.

 

[Ssan]

I had a private correspondence with a brother and he was wondering if it made sense that the fact that the letter to the High Commissioner which includes the Jinnah letter to Banna is proof of some sort that Jinnah communicated in any language other than English as possibly the “precautions” he was taking.

Indeed, after consulting with some PhDs it seems unlikely this is the case. First, the word translate is used in passing and not much should be read into it. Indeed translate is often used just to mean transcribe colloquially as any thesaurus will show- https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/translate#.

The fact that it also doesn’t specify the language almost certainly means that it was almost certainly just copied. Indeed, the portion attributed to Jinnah’s letter is in quotations, meaning an exact copying of Jinnah’s letter. This doesn’t mean that some portions of the letter were not translated as maybe some foreign words, like, Ikhwan Al muslimun are underlined and might have been translated or transliterated. It is also possible that the secretary is referring to the communication from the spy that includes both translated and transcribed documents as it surely would. But the overall text of the letter to Jinnah is almost certainly to be considered transcribed as opposed to translated.

In any case, the letter is considered so meaningful that it is sent to the British High Commissioner and its implications are considered very thoroughly by the FO. I will include all those documents in a separate thread but essentially the journey of the journalists in question is tracked with great interest by the FO and indeed even of all future foreign journalists visiting Pakistan too. So the FO, certainly considered the letter to be genuine and the words to be from Jinnah himself. This is apparent. Will dump more from the docket shortly.

If any brothers have private questions, or want to take part in this effort, please message me and we can take it from there.