Pakistan was created on the basis of group nationalism and not religion

[Leader]

Don't get stuck to little things like "names". We have our proud history and our names.

We don't jump around trying to assume the identity of our own invaders and getting only contempt in return.

thats my point. being indian or hindu is not who bharties are !

 

[Leader]

Some Indians get furious if called Hindu, because we are Indians first and Hindu/Muslim etc second. We don't use religion to divide people and propogate hatred.

what indian ? a name allowed to be used by Jinnah ? that it self came from greeks for the people of subcontinent ?

---------- Post added at 11:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 AM ----------

its idenitiy crisis... you need to realize who you were actually !! find out your roots...or you will remain rootless !!

 

[Omar1984]

Did you even read the quotes that I posted earlier? Believe and "think" what you want but the reality is different.

Personally, if Pakistanis actually followed Iqbal's vision, Pakistan would be doing the opposite of what it was doing today. Just spend some time in reading his 1930 speech. If Iqbal is that important to you, then read his works from the source and not a Pakistanised version of it.

Besides, the point I am making was completely different. When both Allama Iqbal and MA Jinnah were proud to be Indian and Muslim, why should Indian Muslims of today be any less proud? Being an Indian Muslim is not an oxymoron as much as you would like it to be. And building a country around political religious ideology as some have tried in Pakistan will not help.

Its good that there are some people like YLF questioning the need to hold political Islam as the basis of Pakistan. The Two nation theory does not work for a progressive country. Group nationalism based on plurality and multi-faith nationalism or similar aspect will do better in the long term for Pakistan. That's all.

It doesnt matter what you Indian Muslims say or do. It will never effect Pakistan because India and Pakistan are two different soveriegn independent countries.

Allama Iqbal is not like you Indian Muslims of today who go out of your way to prove your loyalty to India. Allama Iqbal cared less about hindus, he was more concerned about Muslims, particularly the Muslims of the NORTH-WEST (present day PAKISTAN).

"Personally, I would go farther than the demands embodied in it. I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India." Allama Iqbal in 1930


If you bharati muslims care so much about what Allama Iqbal said, why dont you unite the Muslim majority areas of india into a single state like he said in 1930.

As for Jinnah, this is enough to show what he felt about india:

 

[Vinod2070]

what indian ? a name allowed to be used by Jinnah ? that it self came from greeks for the people of subcontinent ?

---------- Post added at 11:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 AM ----------

its idenitiy crisis... you need to realize who you were actually !! find out your roots...or you will remain rootless !!

Watch this:

Frankly, you guys are just our apostates. We think of you as having gone astray but it happens.

I guess we didn't lose much.

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

An Indian does not need a religious, racial or ethnic identity to define himself. India is a great flow of cultures, faiths and colors. People here are secure enough to identify themselves as just 'Indians'. That is why you don't see an Indian identity crisis unlike your country.

 

[Vinod2070]

An Indian does not need a religious, racial or ethnic identity to define himself. India is a great flow of cultures, faiths and colors. People here are secure enough to identify themselves as just 'Indians'. That is why you don't see an Indian identity crisis unlike your country.

Many of them keep on repeating like a parrot what was taught to them. When they were of a very impressionable age.

 

[Omar1984]

Ok Omar1984,

you have no proof that Allama Iqbal talked about the two nation theory as you claim to. And I have given you direct quotes where he refers to himself as well as the people of present day Pakistan as Indians. About how the autonomous states would defend India as loyal citizens if if attacked by Central Asian nations like in the past. This was his vision of autonomous muslim majority states in NW British India.

And please do some research on what was Chaudary Rehmat Ali and his end like. What he thought about Jinnah after Pakistan was created and why he was hounded out of Pakistan and is buried in England today. You will know who is delusional then. You can begin here

"To my mind the new constitution with its idea of a single Indian federation is completely hopeless. A separate federation of Muslim Provinces, reformed on the lines I have suggested above, is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of Non-Muslims. Why should not the Muslims of North-West India and Bengal be considered as nations entitled to self-determination just as other nations in India and outside India are."Allama Iqbal

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/txt_iqbal_tojinnah_1937.html


If that is not talking about the two nation theory then I dont know what is.

As for Indians, thats the name the foreigners came up for all the people of the subcontinent before the independence of Pakistan. The word India is derived form the river Indus which is dervived from the province Sindh. Bharatis kept the word India because they want to claim all of the subcontinent's history.

The British called everyone in their empire Indians. Allama Iqbal wrote that speech in English so the English audience would also understand.

A Punjabi Muslim came up with the word PAKISTAN. A person of our own race, we didnt need the europeans to come up with the name of our land and our people.

Thats why I call you a bharati muslim because for us India = British India Empire that died in 1947, and two separate independent sovereign nations were born Pakistan and Bharat.

 

[Leader]

An Indian does not need a religious, racial or ethnic identity to define himself. India is a great flow of cultures, faiths and colors. People here are secure enough to identify themselves as just 'Indians'. That is why you don't see an Indian identity crisis unlike your country.

connotation has changed because you found western nationalism to describe it as an idenitity.... go look for your roots. borrowed concepts dont last !

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

connotation has changed because you found western nationalism to describe it as an idenitity.... go look for your roots. borrowed concepts dont last !

Haven't you guys borrowed the concept of Islam?

 

[Leader]

Haven't you guys borrowed the concept of Islam?

teh chalo.... no, we converted to a way of life. it automatically makes us different.

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

teh chalo.... no, we converted to a way of life. it automatically makes us different.

Of course you chose a different way of life. That's not the point here.

The point is that you say India as a nation state won't last because it's a borrowed concept. Well, not only is your 'different way of life' a borrowed concept, you guys are using it to define the nation state of Pakistan, another borrowed concept according to you!!!

Edit: Anyways, I don't agree with you. There is no harm in adapting to conventional practices around the world. India as I said is known to assimilate within itself different identities and concepts. That's the beauty of being an Indian.

 

[Leader]

Of course you chose a different way of life. That's not the point here.

The point is that you say India as a nation state won't last because it's a borrowed concept. Well, not only is your 'different way of life' a borrowed concept, you guys are using it to define the nation state of Pakistan, another borrowed concept according to you!!!

borrowed from whom? our core ideology is this man !!

 

[Omar1984]

This was the reason Pakistan was necessary:

Private and Confidential
Lahore
June 21st, 1937

My dear Mr. Jinnah,

Thank you so much for your letter which I received yesterday. I know you are a busy man; but I do hope you won't mind my writing to you so often, as you are the only Muslim in India today to whom the community has a right to look up for safe guidance through the storm which is coming to NorthWest India and perhaps to the whole of India. I tell you that we are actually living in a state of civil war which, but for the police and military, would become universal in no time.

During the last few months there has been a series of Hindu-Muslim riots in India. In North-West India alone there have been at least three riots during the last three months and at least four cases of vilification of the Prophet by Hindus and Sikhs. In each of these four cases, the vilifier has been murdered. There have also been cases of burning of the Qur'an in Sind. I have carefully studied the whole situation and believe that the real cause of these events is nither religious nor economic. It is purely political. I.e., the desire of the Sikhs and Hindus to intimidate Muslims even in the Muslim majority provinces. And the new constitution is such that even in the Muslim majority provinces, the Muslims are made entirely dependent on non-Muslims.

The result is that the Muslim Ministry can take no proper action and are even driven to do injustice to Musiims partly to please those on whom they depend, and partly to show that they are absolutely impartial. Thus it is clear that we have our specific reasons to reject this constitution. It seems to me that the new constitution is devised only to placate the Hindus. In the Hindu majority provinces, the Hindus have of course absolute majorities, and can ignore Muslims altogether. In Muslim majority provinces, the Muslims are made entirely dependent on Hindus. I have no doubt in my mind that this constitution is calculated to do infinite harm to the Indian Muslims. Apart from this it is no solution of the economic problem which is so acute among Muslims.

The only thing that the communal award grants to Muslims is the recognition of their political existence in India. But such a recognition granted to a people whom this constitution does not and cannot help in solving their problem of poverty can be of no value to them. The Congress. President has denied the political existence of Muslims in no unmistakable terms. The other Hindu political body, i.e., the Mahasabha, whom I regard as the real representative of the masses of the Hindus, has declared more than once that a united HinduMuslim nation is impossible in India. In these cirecumstances it is obvious that the only way to a peaceful India is a redistribution of the country on the lines of racial, religious and linguistic affinities. Many British statesmen also realise this, and the Hindu-Muslim riots which are rapidly coming in the wake of this constitution are sure further to open their eyes to the real situation in the country. I remember Lord Lothian told me before I left England that my scheme was the only possible solution of the troubles of India, but that may take 25 years to come.

Some Muslims in the Punjab are already suggesting the holding of [a] North-West Indian Muslim Conference, and the idea is rapidly spreading. I agree with you, however, that our community is not yet sufficiently organised and disciplined and perhaps the time for holding such a conference is not yet ripe. But I feel that it would be highly advisable for you to indicate in your address at least the line of action that the Muslims of North-West India would be finally driven to take.

To my mind the new constitution with its idea of a single Indian federation is completely hopeless. A separate federation of Muslim provinces, reformed on the lines I have suggested above, is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of nonMuslims. Why should not the Muslims of North-West India and Bengal be considered as nations entitled to self-determination just as other nations in India and outside India are?

Personally I think that the Muslims of North-West India and Bengal ought at present to ignore Muslim[-minority] provinces. This is the best course to adopt in the interests of both Muslim majority and minority provinces. It will therefore be better to hold the coming session of the League in the Punjab, and not in a Muslim minority province. The month of August is bad in Lahore. I think you should seriously consider the advisability of holding the coming session at Lahore in the middle of October when the weather is quite good in Lahore. The interest in the All-India Muslim League is rapidly growing in the Punjab, and the holding of the coming session in Lahore is likely to give a fresh political awakening to the Punjab Muslims.

Yours sincerely,
(Sd). Mohammad Iqbal
Bar-at-Law

Iqbal to Jinnah: two letters, 1937

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

It doesnt matter what you Indian Muslims say or do. It will never effect Pakistan because India and Pakistan are two different soveriegn independent countries.

That is correct.

Allama Iqbal is not like you Indian Muslims of today who go out of your way to prove your loyalty to India. Allama Iqbal cared less about hindus, he was more concerned about Muslims, particularly the Muslims of the NORTH-WEST (present day PAKISTAN).

It would not be right to expect Indian Muslims to be disloyal to their Motherland, India. To expect people to be 'namak haram' is possible too queer a call.

And anyway, since many Muslim claim Arab/ Persian descent, if indeed one feels that the Indian Muslim should be disloyal to their salt, I reckon, as a Muslim, it would be a matter of honour to claim loyalty to Saudi Arabia or Iran, since that would be more logical as such, and not Pakistan.

That apart, I don't think Indian Muslims are disloyal nor are they ready to harken to such call to disloyalty.

"Personally, I would go farther than the demands embodied in it. I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India." Allama Iqbal in 1930

A stirring call no doubt, but then many Indian Muslims thought the song, Sare jahan se Achha, Hindustan Hamara of his, more stirring.

If you bharati muslims care so much about what Allama Iqbal said, why dont you unite the Muslim majority areas of india into a single state like he said in 1930.

Could they have been clairvoyant or blessed with the power of khasf?

Jinnah was a great man in his own right. He has said many thing in different times. He also spoke of a secular country called Pakistan in his Aug 11 address to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. However, Pakistan ignore him outright.

Therefore, to use Jinnah selectively to forward a point, would do disservice to a great man as him.

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

borrowed from whom? our core ideology is this man !!

The Arabs, the Mongols etc. who brought this 'way of life' with them. It might be your core ideology, but it is borrowed from the raiders of the past.