Pakistan should be a Secular State

[A1Kaid]

Already there is nothing truly Islamic about the Republic, having secularism would improve governance and help to bring legal reforms in Pakistan.

 

[dabong1]

“Come forward as servants of Islam, organize the people economically, socially, educationally and politically and I am sure that you will be a power that will be accepted by everybody.”

Presidential Address at the All India Muslim League, Lahore

March 23, 1940


“The prosperity and advancement of a nation depend upon its intelligentsia, and Muslim India is looking forward to her young generation and education classes to give a bold lead for our guidance and a brilliant record of historical achievements and traditions. Islam expect every Muslim to do this duty, and if we realize our responsibility time will come soon when we shall justify ourselves worthy of a glorious past.”

December 24, 1940


“Pakistan not only means freedom and independence but the Muslim Ideology which has to be preserved, which has come to us as a precious gift and treasure and which, we hope other will share with us”

Message to Frontier Muslim Students Federation

June 18, 1945


“You have to stand guard over the development and maintenance of Islamic democracy, Islamic social justice and the equality of manhood in your own native soil. With faith, discipline and selfless devotion to duty, there is nothing worthwhile that you cannot achieve.”

Address to the officers and men of the 5th Heavy Ack Ack and 6th Light Ack Ack Regiments in Malir, Karachi

February 21, 1948


“We should have a State in which we could live and breathe as free men and which we could develop according to our own lights and culture and where principles of Islamic social justice could find free play.”

Address to Civil, Naval, Military and Air Force Officers of Pakistan Government, Karachi

October 11, 1947


“We must work our destiny in our own way and present to the world an economic system based on true Islamic concept of equality of manhood and social justice. We will thereby be fulfilling our mission as Muslims and giving to humanity the message of peace which alone can save it and secure the welfare, happiness and prosperity of mankind”

Speech at the opening ceremony of State Bank of Pakistan, Karachi

July 1, 1948



Going of the above quotes i think we can see the central role islam played in the creation of pakistan and how secularism is not really an option.
Secularism under the guise of "freedom" "democracy" "human rights" and other fancy names has been the reason for most of the wars fought over the last century.I am pretty sure that if someone actually did the figures, more people have probably been killed for the ideals of secularism then all the religious wars in history put together.
All the fundamentals that are so great in secularism such as "freedom of speech" "freedom of religion" ect all exist in an islamic framework and have for centuries.

 

[dabong1]

Already there is nothing truly Islamic about the Republic, having secularism would improve governance and help to bring legal reforms in Pakistan.

Didnt realize that the "mullahs" have been running pakistan for the last 60 years.
I wonder which "madrassa" our recent prime ministers-presidents attended.
Blaming islam for pakistan ills and not the "secular educated" leaders is very lame.

 

[Chak Bamu]

I agree with you.Moulvis plus our policies to support USA after the 1970,s changed pakistan too much.Fundamentalism begin during zia ul haq period.Whatever religious clashes we are facing today is the product of jahil moulvis who claim that we are the descendents of arabs and warriors like muhammad bin qasim lol

Any narrative that says the above is bound to be mis-leading simply because it ignores history. A negative propensity of 'blaming' individuals and not recognizing social trends shall always lead to faulty analysis and prescription. This is particularly why 'secularists' mostly get it wrong and are seldom, if ever, trusted. Case in point - Musharraf.

There are many models of secularism. But people rooting for secularism never get into detail. There narrative is mostly a bunch of slogans and choice bits and pieces of Quaid's speeches leading to very inaccurate and biased opinions.

This particular thread is a case of a young student stumbling upon a web-page and being inspired to share his thoughts. That too when he is actually confused about the key concepts and is unable to appreciate important distinctions involved in this subject.

For starters, OP needs to keep the following in mind:

1. Our Quaid said many things during the course of his evolution as a political leader. A careful analysis indicates that he wanted a modern interpretation of an Islamic state, not a constitutionally secular state, nor a classical theocratic state.

2. Taliban do not represent anyone but themselves. They are an example of what violent power-hungry sectarianism can accomplish. If anyone thinks that this is what Pakistan would turn out to be under non-secularists, then they are vastly mistaken.

3. Two generations have passed since creation of Pakistan, and we are just now coming to terms with Democracy. That is the first step towards establishing a modern Islamic state.

4. Our Islamic heritage has a certain level of practical secularism. We can continue our evolution as a state by discussing and implementing this in context of our age and environment.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Jinnah was a very contradictory person. While he was personally secular and gave secular speeches... at the same time he also catered to Islamist ideology.
Jinnah

On the other hand - being secular is fine...but then will it be acceptable to the majority of Pakistanis?

 

[Ayush]

every country should be.

 

[ghilzai]

Well each province can decide if its Islamic or secular, i know my province and tribal areas are Islamic, now i know other province will feel the same but if there are those who dont they can promote secularism in their respective provinces.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Basically we are less islam driven and more driven by nationalism .Politicians uses islam wherever the saw the opportunity to full fill their dirty objectives .Today in our country islam mostly exists in politics and less in our real lives and we are the product of confused ideology and distorted history.I personally know many foreigners who were shocked when they saw Pakistan with their own eyes rather than the perception about pakistan they developed from media.According to them it is less islamic than most muslim countries.Tell me in which pure islamic country like saudi arabia etc people have sex and drink in mujra parties?.Where they have a vulgar film industry like ours?Our banking system is not islamic and almost all pakistanis have interest bearing accounts.In islam there is just nikkah and walima but here we celebrate mehdis and barats .In which islamic nation there is a licensed alcohol manufacturing company(muree brewary in pakistan) and 90% of their customers are muslims?Practically we are secular people living in a islamic state.

The above is an example of what one gleans from own background and state, and makes the mistake of projecting it onto the nation as a whole.

Basic mistakes:

1. Our present situation would seem to indicate that we are actually LESS motivated by Nationalism.

2. Politicians do seem to use the name of Islam, just because in most Islamic countries it is such an important part of language and higher social ethos. However OP issues a blanket statement making it seem as though All politicians use the name of Islam All the time and always for a 'dirty' purpose. OP needs to learn a bit more about our society, its norms, and the place religion is customarily given.

3. OP is concerned that 'we' are a product of confused ideology and distorted history. He really should be talking about himself here. His opinions are mostly about himself. He does not seem to appreciate the fact that Pakistanis are confronting open-ended questions, answers to which are crucial for our future in light of our back-ground. When he talks about 'Islam' being more in politics than being in 'our' lives, he is again projecting his self-perception onto the nation as a whole.

4. The OP then talks about personal experience and asks in which country do people drink and have sex in Mujra parties. OP needs to understand that A) Mujra is something specific to Northern parts of South Asia, B) Orgies happen in many places, presumably including Pakistan, C) As far as personal experiences go, I doubt 99.9% Pakistanis have ever participated in any such thing. So again we have a situation where OP is projecting his perception onto the nation as a whole.

5. OP's contention that 'almost all Pakistanis have interest bearing accounts' is laughable. He really should be more careful about how he phrases his contentions and refrain from projecting his personal opinions with such gusto.

6. OP's observations about cultural practices have no bearing upon his contention. No need to discuss.

7. Lastly, OP's views about Murree Brewrey's business are noted with utmost regret. I am rather fond of their non-alcoholic beverages. Plus we do have non-Muslims, for whom Alcohol is OK. It would be an attack on their liberties to deny them that. So one significant part of Islam's practical secular heritage is irksome to the OP. He really should just chill.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Islam has its own system. KHILAFAT.
People in Pakistan have adopted the western form of government and blame Islam for not being compatible with it. WHICH IS WRONG!!

Our own system - Khilafat, has been out of use for the past 1400 years (almost). In this day and age we can not have a looney living in a cave somewhere declaring himself as Khalifah and expect others to accept him as such.

Plus the first time the people failed this system within a generation.

Any modern interpretation of this system would have to be along the lines of democratic institutions, transparency, openness, and checks & balances. I doubt any of the most vocal supporters of Khilafat have any faith in any of these. So, for now, we are not worthy.

 

[Skallagrim]

Can anyone tell me why all secular rulers in Muslim countries are thieves?

 

[Dance]

3rd Line
Wherein the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed
Wherein the Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and Sunnah;

http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/preamble.html
So Much for being secular

That wasnt written or said by Jinnah.

It was drafted by Bhutto in the 1973 constitution

 

[Dance]

The problem is that Jinnah wasn't clear about what he wanted exactly and he died too early. So no one really knows

Personally I think Jinnah wanted a state that based on Islamic ideals and principles , just like how a lot of western democracies are based on Christian ideals but that was primarily secular in governance.

Remember Pakistan wasn't a declared an Islamic republic until 1956 and Islam being the state religion did not come until the 1973 constitution under Bhutto.

Also remember the first constitution was written in 1956, long after Jinnah's death. So again we don't know what exactly he wanted

 

[Dubious]

Can anyone tell me how secular countries are ANY better and dont have THEIR share of problems?

 

[HRK]

The concept of Secularism in Islam has been claimed to have religious sanction too. The Sahih of Imam Muslim, the second most authentic book on Hadith, dating from the 2nd century Hijrah, contains a chapter headed as follows:

“Whatever the Prophet has said in matters of religion must be followed, but this does not apply to worldly affairs.”

In other words, according to the prophet himself (PBUH), religion and politics of state governance, should not be mixed. They are two separate entities. But nowadays we have 'Political Islam' which is contrary to the Hadith and where secularism is considered to be un-Islamic.

Would you please post link for that......as per my knowledge the narrative of quote is different

As Jinnah's own famous words go by : Religion should not be allowed to come into Politics….Religion is merely a matter between man and God”.

Would request your source.....of these "very famous" words....plz

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

The events as they have unfolded over the past few months have once again underscored the need for Pakistan to be a constitutionally secular state.

Instead of getting into the debate as to whether Pakistan was meant to be a secular state (which I believe it was but that is not the point here) or a modern Islamic state (whatever that means), let us be very clear- it was NOT meant to be a state where rogue raggle taggle groups like the Taliban would challenge the writ of the state and then establish its own system of “justice” based on a misinterpretation of Islam. Islam is not the problem here. I tend to agree with the interpretation of Islam that is favored by Allama Ghamidi but the question that comes up is “which Islam?” Ghamidi’s? Or Israr Ahmad’s? Rahman Baba’s ? or the Taliban’s? Iqbal’s? or Maududi’s?


Since easly 70s we’ve seen a steady erosion of fundamental rights in this country, all justified by the Islamic provisions of the constitution.

Now therefore we must learn a lesson from this. Islam is a rational and pragmatic religion which aims to create a just and egalitarian society. It does not favor any exclusivism of any kind and treats faith as a matter between man and god. Islam also does not favor form over substance. A state does not become Islamic simply because it is called Islamic. [/B]

You sir, NAILED IT


Most important and to the point reply in this entire thread.


Well stated my friend.