What's new

Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’

Status
Not open for further replies.

ajtr

BANNED
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
9,357
Reaction score
0
Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’

LAHORE:
Speakers and the audience at a seminar Jinnah ka Pakistan (Jinnah’s Pakistan) on Saturday agreed that the Quaid had wanted to keep religion and state separate.
The seminar was organised by the Awami Party in Model Town to mark Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s August 11, 1947 speech.
Jamil Omar, the party’s general secretary, compared Jinnah’s August 11 speech with the Gettysburg address by Abraham Lincoln and Jawaharal Nehru’s August 15 speech. Every child in the United States and India knows these speeches by heart since it is part of their syllabi, Omar said, but in Pakistan this speech has been censored from the press and never included in school syllabi.
The people of Pakistan should know the speech by heart, he said, but the few who know about it have seen only a censored version of it. Omar said the speech had touched upon four important points: that nepotism will not be tolerated; that the government’s “first, second and last” responsibility is the people’s welfare; that citizens of all faiths will be treated equally; and that Pakistan is an independent and a self-sufficient country.
He said it was the third point which had led to the speech being blacked out. Jinnah had reiterated secularism and wanted to keep state and religion apart, said Omar. If these four points had been adhered to, he said, Pakistan could have been the best country in the world.
Wajahat Masood cited references from several books quoting from Jinnah’s speeches that promote a tolerant Pakistan where religious minorities had equal rights.
He said the Quaid had objected to slogan Pakistan ka matlab kia, La ilaha illallah. Quoting from Malik Ghulam Nabi’s book Daghon ki Bahar he said during his last address to All India Muslim League in December, 1947, a man had asked the Quaid if the slogan was the foundation of Pakistan’s ideology. The Quaid had told him that was not what Pakistan stood for, Masood said.
He said three articles of the national constitution needed to be expunged – Article 2 (a) upholding the Objectives Resolution; Article 227, which says that no law can be repugnant to Quran or Sunnah and Article 203 that gives the Federal Shariat Court the power to strike down any law passed by the parliament that is repugnant to Quran or Sunnah.
He also quoted Thomas Jefferson who had warned that if church was not separated from the state half the people will be hypocrites and the other half stupid. “We should not care if Jinnah was a mullah, a secularist or a pluralist; a nation-state by definition is a secular entity,” he said.
He ended his speech by quoting Jinnah, “In the course of time, Muslims will cease being Muslims; Hindus will cease being Hindus, not religiously, but politically.”
IA Rehman urged the participants to reflect on Jinnah’s views. He said Jinnah had wanted a government that worked for the citizens’ welfare and a country where everyone had equal rights.
After the speeches, the participants asked the party to demand that the clauses added to constitution during General Zia’s rule be removed and the Objectives Resolution declaring Pakistan an Islamic state be denounced. They also demanded that the federation should retain minimal authority and give more powers to the provinces.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knowing the speech by heart is not the solution. real solution is implementation.
 
.
One Pakistani commented," If Pakistan will become secular, we would be no different from Hindustan."
 
.
Very enlightening post indeed. Thanks Ajtr!
 
.
Can we just stop this islamic-secular debate for good please?
 
.
Pakistan should bring back its very own culture & tradition of Sufiesm. Sufiesm is Islam too & teaches us real Islam that means tolerance & freedom for everyone.

IMO Quaid E Azam also wanted Pakistan of this kind thats why he said that it will be Islamic Welfare state with equal rights for minorities, so people who fights that Quaid e Azam wants secular or religious Pakistan both are wrong cuz Quaid (R.A) want Pakistan with it's original culture Sufiesm.
 
.
Pakistan should bring back its very own culture & tradition of Sufiesm. Sufiesm is Islam too & teaches us real Islam that means tolerance & freedom for everyone.

IMO Quaid E Azam also wanted Pakistan of this kind thats why he said that it will be Islamic Welfare state with equal rights for minorities, so people who fights that Quaid e Azam wants secular or religious Pakistan both are wrong cuz Quaid (R.A) want Pakistan with it's original culture Sufiesm.

Exactly...an inclusive, pluralistic and above all democratic Pakistan where all will be equal and some of the communal aspects of Islam such 'a system of finance free from Ri'bah or a certain kind of interest' will be realized but people like Justice (R) Rana Bhagwandas, a Hindu, can be proudly elected as Our President !
 
.

August 11 speech , which doesn't exist on any format ?

What about those dozens of speeches made by Jinnah where he clearly and explicitly laid out foundations of Pakistan on Islamic ideology ?

He clearly said that Pakistan will not be a theocracy but an Islamic state which guarantees the rights of minorities. I wonder why Pakistani english press chooses to disregard all that is on record to support the later argument ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Jinnah was a politician, and no disrespect, but like any politician he spoke what was convenient at that moment. A politicians words do not carry the weight of the paper they are printed on.

What Jinnah DID is more important than choosing selective quotes and trying to second guess what he really wanted.

What he wanted he did
. Based on that, to call Jinnah secular, is just offering an apology.

He clearly said that Pakistan will not be a theocracy but an Islamic state which guarantees the rights of minorities
.
Rights of minorities can also be guaranteed under a theocracy right?
 
.

August 11 speech , which doesn't exist on any format ?

What about those dozens of speeches made by Jinnah where he clearly and explicitly laid out foundations of Pakistan on Islamic ideology ?

He clearly said that Pakistan will not be a theocracy but an Islamic state which guarantees the rights of minorities. I wonder why Pakistani english press chooses to disregard all that is on record to support the later argument ?

This is enough for any sane person to stop his Secular BS propaganda. And to add more, please everyone, ready my signature :) Enough said!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
I don't know why Pakistanis love to confuse each other. Jinnah (R.A) clearly said that he want Islamic Welfare State with equal rights for minorities, that means he pointed towards Sufiesm.

Can't all Pakistanis agree on this fact & move forward? It is Pakistanis who give opportunity to outsiders to point fingers at our honourable leaders & motherland. Stop confusing yourselves & other Pakistanis.
 
.
Jinnah was a politician, and no disrespect, but like any politician he spoke what was convenient at that moment. A politicians words do not carry the weight of the paper they are printed on.

What Jinnah DID is more important than choosing selective quotes and trying to second guess what he really wanted.

What he wanted he did
. Based on that, to call Jinnah secular, is just offering an apology.

.
Rights of minorities can also be guaranteed under a theocracy right?

Depends on the theocratic model we are talking about , no holocaust has happened in Iran so far for example. We can't base a state over principles designed to provide protection to minorities alone. We only have 3% minorities , there are issues , and they are real but it doesn't mean that we will give up what 90% Pakistanis want.Also , people must not forget that Pakistan's ideologue was not Jinnah but Iqbal which the fascist leftists choose to overlook.

Awami Party

Is it ANP or some other basement party ?

I don't know why Pakistanis love to confuse each other. Jinnah (R.A) clearly said that he want Islamic Welfare State with equal rights for minorities, that means he pointed towards Sufiesm.

Can't all Pakistanis agree on this fact & move forward? It is Pakistanis who give opportunity to outsiders to point fingers at our honourable leaders & motherland. Stop confusing yourselves & other Pakistanis.

Democratic Islamic Welfare State: Yes

Sufis don't want governance , sufism is a way of life which can be adopted by anyone.
 
.
Depends on the theocratic model we are talking about , no holocaust has happened in Iran so far for example. We can't base a state over principles designed to provide protection to minorities alone. We only have 3% minorities , there are issues , and they are real but it doesn't mean that we will give up what 90% Pakistanis want.Also , people must not forget that Pakistan's ideologue was not Jinnah but Iqbal which the fascist leftists choose to overlook.



Is it ANP or some other basement party ?



Democratic Islamic Welfare State: Yes

Sufis don't want governance , sufism is a way of life which can be adopted by anyone.

I see your point. It is not about what Jinnah or Iqbal wanted, but what common Pakistanis want. If 90% of Pakistanis wants a sharia state, world should not have problem. harping on what Jinnah wanted and imposing them on 90% of Pakistanis is gross injustice.
 
.
Depends on the theocratic model we are talking about , no holocaust has happened in Iran so far for example. We can't base a state over principles designed to provide protection to minorities alone. We only have 3% minorities , there are issues , and they are real but it doesn't mean that we will give up what 90% Pakistanis want.Also , people must not forget that Pakistan's ideologue was not Jinnah but Iqbal which the fascist leftists choose to overlook.

Minority rights is one of the duties of the state, not the only one - agreed. (also lets ignore the persecution of bahais, the largest religious minority in Iran that will lead to other issues like why holocaust is the yardstick, or whether iran is a ''true'' theocracy etc)

However in my opinion, the 97% (not all of them, just a figure of speech) seem to have a very negative view of the 3%? This seems to be an outcome of the policies Zia implemented. So to that extent can we agree that Zia indeed DID deviate Pakistan away from Jinnah''s idea?

I agree with you fully that Jinnah was not secular. But do you think his idea of ''islamic welfare state where minority rights will be protected'' is practical or even well defined? What does that even mean if its Islamic but does not follow Islamic divine law?

Can you give me an example of one such nation that comes close to Jinnah's idea?
 
.
The people of Pakistan should know the speech by heart, he said, but the few who know about it have seen only a censored version of it. Omar said the speech had touched upon four important points: that nepotism will not be tolerated; that the government’s “first, second and last” responsibility is the people’s welfare; that citizens of all faiths will be treated equally; and that Pakistan is an independent and a self-sufficient country.
He said it was the third point which had led to the speech being blacked out. Jinnah had reiterated secularism and wanted to keep state and religion apart, said Omar. If these four points had been adhered to, he said, Pakistan could have been the best country in the world.
Wajahat Masood cited references from several books quoting from Jinnah’s speeches that promote a tolerant Pakistan where religious minorities had equal rights.
He said the Quaid had objected to slogan Pakistan ka matlab kia, La ilaha illallah. Quoting from Malik Ghulam Nabi’s book Daghon ki Bahar he said during his last address to All India Muslim League in December, 1947, a man had asked the Quaid if the slogan was the foundation of Pakistan’s ideology. The Quaid had told him that was not what Pakistan stood for, Masood said.
He said three articles of the national constitution needed to be expunged – Article 2 (a) upholding the Objectives Resolution; Article 227, which says that no law can be repugnant to Quran or Sunnah and Article 203 that gives the Federal Shariat Court the power to strike down any law passed by the parliament that is repugnant to Quran or Sunnah.
He also quoted Thomas Jefferson who had warned that if church was not separated from the state half the people will be hypocrites and the other half stupid. “We should not care if Jinnah was a mullah, a secularist or a pluralist; a nation-state by definition is a secular entity,” he said.
He ended his speech by quoting Jinnah, “In the course of time, Muslims will cease being Muslims; Hindus will cease being Hindus, not religiously, but politically.”
IA Rehman urged the participants to reflect on Jinnah’s views. He said Jinnah had wanted a government that worked for the citizens’ welfare and a country where everyone had equal rights.
After the speeches, the participants asked the party to demand that the clauses added to constitution during General Zia’s rule be removed and the Objectives Resolution declaring Pakistan an Islamic state be denounced. They also demanded that the federation should retain minimal authority and give more powers to the provinces.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knowing the speech by heart is not the solution. real solution is implementation.


First off a problem which I see is that the general psychology(of Pakistanis) always tends to follow something, treat it as a "pathar ke lakir" (carved in stone).

Essentially, what Jinnah said was nothing more than a measured political speech, touching on the most (probable) successful model of his ideology. What the people of Pakistan, I think, need to understand is that they should look for what works in a way wherein you continuously raise the level of your county.. even if it means taking a different route than what Jinnah would have wanted.
 
.
Minority rights is one of the duties of the state, not the only one - agreed. (also lets ignore the persecution of bahais, the largest religious minority in Iran that will lead to other issues like why holocaust is the yardstick, or whether iran is a ''true'' theocracy etc)

However in my opinion, the 97% (not all of them, just a figure of speech) seem to have a very negative view of the 3%? This seems to be an outcome of the policies Zia implemented. So to that extent can we agree that Zia indeed DID deviate Pakistan away from Jinnah''s idea?

I agree with you fully that Jinnah was not secular. But do you think his idea of ''islamic welfare state where minority rights will be protected'' is practical or even well defined? What does that even mean if its Islamic but does not follow Islamic divine law?

Can you give me an example of one such nation that comes close to Jinnah's idea?

Some people here are working their *** off on that.

http://www.insaf.pk/docs/PTImanifesto.pdf

PTI - Constitution

Take your time to go through.

Can you give me an example of one such nation that comes close to Jinnah's idea?

Pakistan is the only state in the Muslim world which was created solely on an ideology. And there is no other state in the Muslim world that is a role model for us. One state i do aspire to and want Pakistan to look similar to one day is Sweden which obviously ideologically isn't relevant but as a welfare state model it is.

Muslims have lost their past glory , we are in damage control for last 500 years which also has ripped us off from our ideological basis , they have to be revised and redefined , this is the purpose of Pakistan as Jinnah said "Pakistan will the laboratory of Islam".
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom