Why Was the Islamic Republic of Pakistan formed?

Why Was the Islamic Republic of Pakistan formed? This question keeps on nagging me. Also, why was it decided to name it ‘Islamic’ Republic of Pakistan?

Let’s go down the memory lane of the history of Pakistan and search for answers. Flashback. Whoa, where am I? The place seems to be set up for some conference. It says on the banner that it is the Muslim League’s Annual Conference in Allahabad. History tells me that it must be the conference that was held on 29th and 30th of December 1930. Dear me, is that Allama Muhammad Iqbal (B. A. (Arabic and Philosophy) – Government College, Lahore. Awarded Jamaluddin Gold Medal for securing highest marks in Arabic, and another Gold Medal in English;M.A. (Philosophy) – Government College, Lahore. Secured first rank in Punjab state and awarded Gold Medal.Reader in Arabic, Oriental College, Lahore;Ph.D., Munich University, Germany (Thesis: Development of Metaphysics in Persia)). Shush, apparently he is about to give a speech. Let’s hear what he has got to say…

“It cannot be denied that Islam, regarded as an ethical ideal plus a certain kind of polity – by which expression I mean a social structure regulated by a legal system and animated by a specific ethical ideal – has been the chief formative factor in the life-history of the Muslims of India. It has furnished those basic emotions and loyalties which gradually unify scattered individuals and groups, and finally transform them into a well-defined people, possessing a moral consciousness of their own. Indeed it is not an exaggeration to say that India is perhaps the only country in the world where Islam, as a people-building force, has worked at its best. In India, as elsewhere, the structure of Islam as a society is almost entirely due to the working of Islam as a culture inspired by a specific ethical ideal. What I mean to say is that Muslim society, with its remarkable homogeneity and inner unity, has grown to be what it is, under the pressure of the laws and institutions associated with the culture of Islam.

“The ideas set free by European political thinking, however, are now rapidly changing the outlook of the present generation of Muslims both in India and outside India. Our younger men, inspired by these ideas, are anxious to see them as living forces in their own countries, without any critical appreciation of the facts which have determined their evolution in Europe. In Europe Christianity was understood to be a purely monastic order which gradually developed into a vast church organisation. The protest of Luther was directed against this church organization, not against any system of polity of a secular nature, for the obvious reason that there was no such polity associated with Christianity. And Luther was perfectly justified in rising in revolt against this organization; though, I think, he did not realize that in the peculiar conditions which obtained in Europe, his revolt would eventually mean the complete displacement of [the] universal ethics of Jesus by the growth of a plurality of national and hence narrower systems of ethics.

“Thus the upshot of the intellectual movement initiated by such men as Rousseau and Luther was the break-up of the one into [the] mutually ill-adjusted many, the transformation of a human into a national outlook, requiring a more realistic foundation, such as the notion of country, and finding expression through varying systems of polity evolved on national lines, i.e. on lines which recognize territory as the only principle of political solidarity. If you begin with the conception of religion as complete other-worldliness, then what has happened to Christianity in Europe is perfectly natural. The universal ethics of Jesus is displaced by national systems of ethics and polity. The conclusion to which Europe is consequently driven is that religion is a private affair of the individual and has nothing to do with what is called man’s temporal life.

“Islam does not bifurcate the unity of man into an irreconcilable duality of spirit and matter. In Islam God and the universe, spirit and matter, Church and State, are organic to each other. Man is not the citizen of a profane world to be renounced in the interest of a world of spirit situated elsewhere. To Islam, matter is spirit realizing itself in space and time. Europe uncritically accepted the duality of spirit and matter, probably from Manichean thought. Her best thinkers are realizing this initial mistake today, but her statesmen are indirectly forcing the world to accept it as an unquestionable dogma. It is, then, this mistaken separation of spiritual and temporal which has largely influenced European religious and political thought and has resulted practically in the total exclusion of Christianity from the life of European States. The result is a set of mutually ill-adjusted States dominated by interests not human but national. And these mutually ill-adjusted States, after trampling over the moral and religious convictions of Christianity, are today feeling the need of a federated Europe, i.e. the need of a unity which the Christian church organisation originally gave them, but which, instead of reconstructing it in the light of Christ’s vision of human brotherhood, they considered fit to destroy under the inspiration of Luther… I hope you will pardon me for this apparently academic discussion. To address this session of the All-India Muslim League you have selected a man who is [=has] not despaired of Islam as a living force for freeing the outlook of man from its geographical limitations, who believes that religion is a power of the utmost importance in the life of individuals as well as States, and finally who believes that Islam is itself Destiny and will not suffer a destiny….

“What, then, is the problem and its implications? Is religion a private affair? Would you like to see Islam as a moral and political ideal, meeting the same fate in the world of Islam as Christianity has already met in Europe? Is it possible to retain Islam as an ethical ideal and to reject it as a polity, in favor of national polities in which [the] religious attitude is not permitted to play any part? This question becomes of special importance in India, where the Muslims happen to be a minority. The proposition that religion is a private individual experience is not surprising on the lips of a European. In Europe the conception of Christianity as a monastic order, renouncing the world of matter and fixing its gaze entirely on the world of spirit, led, by a logical process of thought, to the view embodied in this proposition. The nature of the Prophet’s religious experience, as disclosed in the Quran, however, is wholly different. It is not mere experience in the sense of a purely biological event, happening inside the experiment and necessitating no reactions on its social environment. It is individual experience creative of a social order. Its immediate outcome is the fundamentals of a polity with implicit legal concepts whose civic significance cannot be belittled merely because their origin is revelational.

“The religious ideal of Islam, therefore, is organically related to the social order which it has created. The rejection of the one will eventually involve the rejection of the other. Therefore the construction of a polity on national lines, if it means a displacement of the Islamic principle of solidarity, is simply unthinkable to a Muslim

“…Personally, I would go farther than the demands embodied in it. I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sindh 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

One lesson I have learnt from the history of Muslims. At critical moments in their history it is Islam that has saved Muslims and not vice versa.

Hmm… from what I know about Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, he is not an illiterate. But he has also ended up being on the list of illiterates of this country as he perfectly fits the bill of that category that some elders of Pakistan have formed.

So diagnosis:

Allama Muhammad Iqbal is clearly involving religion in political and social matters and that is supposed to be on of the major symptoms of illiteracy. Therefore, he was an illiterate.

It is very disappointing to know that the gentleman, who envisioned Pakistan turned out to be an illiterate. He even talked of unity!!! That is a criminal offense. The ‘literate’ elders of the country believe in poking fun and demeaning citizens belonging to different provinces. Unity is not supposed to exist, eh?

Well, let’s hope the founder of Pakistan was ‘literate’ and didn’t make such statements—Hark! He is giving a speech. It’s in January of 1948:

“The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam. Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1,300 years ago.”

My mind just can’t accept that the founder of Pakistan, Baba-e-Qaum, had such ‘stone age’ thoughts. Or is history lying to us about their beliefs? Seemingly all the educated and prudent personalities in the world are turning out to be illiterates? My intellect simply cannot accept that.

We wanted independence. Why? Because we wanted an independent country where we could practice Islam. But now we consider Islamic beliefs the beliefs of illiterates.

I have been born 40+ years after Independence, but I believe that those principles still hold true in this age. Reason: Islam applies to all times. I am not accountable for other people’s deeds, but as a Muslim I will always stand, or in someone’s words “guard”, my Religion-the Religion that Allah (SWT) has commanded all to follow, the Religion that Rasoolullah (s.a.w.w.) taught us. I S L A M. The only way of life.

Allama Iqbal’s Point of View of Muslims:

نہ تو زمین کے لیے ہے نہ آسماں کے لیے

جہاں ہے تیرے لیے تو نہیں جہاں کے لیے

Momin-A Great Power:

کوئ اندازہ کر سکتا ہے اس کے زور بازو کا

نگاہ مرد مؤمن سے بدل جاتی ہیں تقدیریں


73 thoughts on “Why Was the Islamic Republic of Pakistan formed?”

  1. @ Imran: there is some confusion re. “rajm”. There are Hadith according to which no one was stoned after the revelation of Surah Noor (which only prescribes flogging). It’s like the procedure for divorce, which is clearly prescribed in the Quran, but our mullahs prefer the pre-Islamic method of saying “I divorce you” three times (which is also known as “Talaq-bidah”).

    Reply
  2. @Shakir
    Before i answer you question,can you please tell me “where is Quran the procedure/method of offering of prayers in described”?The answer is NO WHERE,so what to do now??
    Now if we do not find an answer in Quran then we are supposed to refer to Sunnah.
    In the same way the rajm punishment is not prescribed in Quran but you will find out that the same punishment was being prescribed by Holy Prophet(SAW) for married man/woman.
    For further details you can read any of the six famous books of Ahadith(Saha Sitta).I hope i have answered your querry.
    Regards

    Reply
  3. @Shakir, No the said punishment is not prescribed any where in Quran. So what to do now?Ok my question to you is, where in Quran the procedure of offering prayer is described?
    The answer is No where.So what to do now?
    In order to find a solution to a problem if we do not find answer in Quran then we refer to Sunnah. In the same way we can find that Holy Prophet(SAW) did prescribed this punishment for married man/woman. I hope i have answered your question,for further details you can read any of the famous six books of Ahadith (SAHHA SITTA).
    Regards

    Reply
  4. @ Imran: “The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them with a hundred stripes”. What about “rajm” (stoning to death)? Is that prescribed in the Holy Quran anywhere?

    Reply
  5. James, it seems the Shariat Court did not say that a Muslim who drinks should not be flogged, only that he should be flogged with a stick made of date palms, so it won’t be painful and will not render the drinker impotent (which I’ve heard can happen if flogging is done with the kind of whip used here). But the Court also said that drinking is a bailable offence, so all Muslim alcoholics will no longer have to spend months in jails before they are brought to trial. By the way, non-Muslims in Pakitstan are permitted to drink, provided of course they don’t get drunk and cause harm to others.

    Reply
  6. Allah Almighty says in the Quran:

    “The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allaah, if you believe in Allaah and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment” [al-Noor 24:2]

    “And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses – lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient, ” [An-Noor 24:4]
    We the Muslims don’t have time to read and understand Quran and sunnah we are totally dependent of Mullah’s sermons,we need to do our own research on the subject and find out for our own self that what the Quran and Sunnah says about that subject.Its not superstition, but lack of knowledge,if drinking of alcohol is prohibited in Islam so its prohibited.If Federal Shariat Court has passed a verdict that any one who drinks wine should not be flogged so they are right as Allah Almighty has not prescribed this punishment for drinkers.
    In Quran Allah Almighty invites us to reflect/ponder.But how many of us do that. Moreover, we just cant blame that only Muslims believe in superstitions, Christian, Hindus,Jews,etc almost people belonging to different religions believe in superstitions.We need to understand Islam as a deen, not only as a religion which means a way of of life.The problem with us is that if i want to take interest on my bank deposits i will try to find out some “FATWA” which will suite my requirements.
    Regards

    Reply
  7. Hi, Shakir: I’m starting to see that you vary as individuals in the application of critical thinking vs. dogma. No, I don’t blame superstition on Islam; the world’s full of superstitions, large and small, and as far as I’m concerned they’re 99% nonsense shortcuts to solutions for problems, or maybe just “filler” for the private moments in our lives, amusement.

    Yeah, you can bet Mr. Armstrong had some pretty profound feelings when he stepped onto the Moon. If he say he’s a Christian, that’s his call. If you say you’re a Muslim, that is yours. I don’t know Mr. Armstrong, but I think that you are a fine, intelligent gent, and I’m happy to correspond with you.

    My grandfather used to quote in Latin things like “De gustibus non disputandem est,” which means “In matters of taste, there can be no disputing.” And there are plenty of things to eat other than pork. Some (Former) cannibals call human flesh “long pig.” (No, thanks! I, too, have limits.) Some smart-alecks have debated whether long pig is better with white wine or red, as if they knew.

    Alcohol is a fat solvent, and a little bit helps clear the veins and arteries of cholesterol buildups, so a small drink or two a day is good for you. But the third drink or more is crossing the line into impairment of the senses and judgment and can lead into real danger. (Ha-ha! I had a friend who had two big dogs and a little one. The little one was an alcoholic. My friend would give the little dog a beer every day, and the little dog would get drunk, bully the big dogs for a while, then pass out. An amusing little daily ritual for all. I think alcohol abuse is more a problem of bad habit than real addiction, because it’s easy enough to quit.) It depends on your body weight and liver function, emotional situation and some other factors how well you handle alcohol. Hat’s off to the Federal Shariat Court, sounds like progress to me.

    Reply
  8. Hi, Imran: No, I don’t want four wives; one woman is complicated enough. Problems between the genders are extremely difficult to solve so that everyone is happy. Please bear in mind, when I make comments here, I am as much soliciting your opinions– straight from real Muslim persons such as yourselves, not from hearsay or western news sources,– as I am expressing my own. This chowrangi is truly a two-way street.
    I did not intend to fly in your face on the issue of pork–I know pigs are disgusting creatures and are by their nature problematical, and if you don’t like them, that’s very easy to understand. We find them useful (although, disgusting.)
    A lot of people are concerned about any country that is created in the name of anything that excludes them, and appears likely to be unkind. People form groups out of fear, and, when their group becomes strong, create fear in outsiders, causing THEM to form groups. It’s a vicious cycle, based on misunderstanding. We’d probably all be better off to loosen up rather than tighten up. “We have nothing to fear, but Fear itself.” Does that make sense to you?

    Reply
  9. James, Islam means different things to different people (usually a Muslim beleives what he has been taught by his religious teacher as a child). Most Muslims are terribly superstitious (like some on this blog), but you can’t blame Islam for it. When I was in college, the clerics strongly believed that it’s the sun which goes around the earth, and some even claimed that the earth is flat. When the first man landed on the moon, the mullahs said it wasn’t be true. Most Pakistanis (and probably a few on this blog as well) believe that Neil Armstrong (the first man on the moon) converted to Islam after he heard the “Azaan”, the Islamic call to prayer, although he says he’s a Christian. Re. pork, the very thought of it makes me want to throw up, and I know Muslims who commit every sin there is, but do not eat pork. By the way, I heard today that the Federal Shariat Court has ruled that that people who drink alcohol should not be flogged. We’ll find out more in tomorrow’s newspapers.

    Reply
  10. @Spratt.You appears to be so much interested in four marriages why don’t you go for it.By the way, whats your modern science says about it?I think in your opinion the solution of all the problems of Pakistan lies in banning four marriages? Moreover, thanks a lot for enlightening us on the issue of pork.For us our Holy Book is sufficient to guide us,we do not need your modern science for finding reasons to eat pork.
    If Israel can be created in the name of Judaism and no one is worried about that so why are you so much concerned that, was Pakistan created in the name of Islam?Yes it was and we also accept that we deviated from our path that’s why we find yourself in trouble today.Our salvation lies in making Pakistan a true Islamic State.

    Reply

Leave a Reply