tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post3514646267584720598..comments2024-03-27T15:36:44.737-07:00Comments on Haq's Musings: Quaid-e-Azam M.A. Jinnah's Vision for PakistanRiaz Haqhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-22720135144467437902017-10-27T12:09:34.878-07:002017-10-27T12:09:34.878-07:00Thank you for sharing essay for great leader of Pa...Thank you for sharing essay for great leader of Pakistan. Keep it up.Rabnawazhttp://essaywish.com/quaid-e-azam-essay/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-60283570732416599382013-12-26T07:40:17.781-08:002013-12-26T07:40:17.781-08:00The first Islamic state constitution was Meesaq e ... The first Islamic state constitution was Meesaq e Madina which was a very pluralistic framework acknowledging non-Muslim residents of Madina as part of single "Ummah" with equal rights. Quaid-e-Azam wanted separation of religion from state which he said in the following words: "You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State." Quaid-e-Azam M.A. Jinnah in address to first constituent assembly, Aug 11, 1947Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-85834736817610800092012-12-17T06:43:58.587-08:002012-12-17T06:43:58.587-08:00sir iwant to talk you about quaids motive for paki...sir iwant to talk you about quaids motive for pakistan and current scenario of pakistan <br />do they meet the demands of quaide azam <br /><br /><br /><br />hashir<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07017362321771669676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-10537543685535792412012-08-12T02:26:20.359-07:002012-08-12T02:26:20.359-07:00But you have twisted Iqbal's sher Sir. He neve...But you have twisted Iqbal's sher Sir. He never said ay Pakistan walo. It did not exist then. For him it was just the Muslims of the sub-continent. Please correct that part. Sorry I cannot accept the twist.Syed Shahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-39249983055150983392011-03-28T16:41:26.591-07:002011-03-28T16:41:26.591-07:00Here are some excerpts from a NY Times review of &...Here are some excerpts from a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/27/books/review/book-review-great-soul-mahatma-gandhi-and-his-struggle-with-india-by-joseph-lelyveld.html?_r=3&ref=books" rel="nofollow">NY Times review</a> of "GREAT SOUL: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India" by Joseph Lelyveld:<br /><br /><i>Some years ago, the British writer Patrick French visited the Sabarmati ashram on the outskirts of Ahmedabad in the Indian state of Gujarat, the site from which Mahatma Gandhi led his salt march to the sea in 1930. French was so appalled by the noisome state of the latrines that he asked the ashram secretary whose job it was to clean them.<br /><br />A sweeper woman stopped by for an hour a day, the functionary explained, but afterward things inevitably became filthy again.<br /><br />But wasn’t it a central tenet of the Mahatma’s teachings that his followers clean up after themselves?<br /><br />“We all clean the toilets together, on Gandhiji’s birthday,” the secretary answered, “as a symbol to show that we understand his message.”<br /><br />Gandhi had many messages, some ignored, some misunderstood, some as relevant today as when first enunciated. Most Americans — many middle-class Indians, for that matter — know what they know about the Mahatma from Ben Kingsley’s Academy Award-winning screen portrayal. His was a mesmerizing performance, but the script barely hinted at the bewildering complexity of the real man, who was at the same time an earnest pilgrim and a wily politician, an advocate of celibacy and the architect of satyagraha (truth force), a revivalist, a revolutionary and a social reformer.<br />--------<br />As Lelyveld shows, the outcomes of Gandhi’s campaigns in South Africa were neither clear-cut nor long-lasting: after one, his own supporters beat him bloody because they thought he’d settled too quickly for a compromise with the government. But they taught him how to move the masses — not only middle-class Hindu and Muslim immigrants but the poorest of the poor as well. He had, as he himself said, found his “vocation in life.”<br /><br />Soon after returning to India in 1915, Gandhi set forth what he called the “four pillars on which the structure of swaraj” — self-rule — “would ever rest”: an unshakable alliance between Hindus and Muslims; universal acceptance of the doctrine of nonviolence, as tenet, not tactic; the transformation of India’s approximately 650,000 villages by spinning and other self-sustaining handicrafts; and an end to the evil concept of untouchability. Lelyveld shrewdly examines Gandhi’s noble but doomed battles to achieve them all.<br /><br />He made a host of enemies along the way — orthodox Hindus who believed him overly sympathetic to Muslims, Muslims who saw his calls for religious unity as part of a Hindu plot, Britons who thought him a charlatan, radical revolutionaries who believed him a reactionary. But no antagonist was more implacable than Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, the brilliant, quick-tempered untouchable leader — still largely unknown in the West — who saw the Mahatma’s nonviolent efforts to eradicate untouchability as a sideshow at best. He even objected to the word Gandhi coined for his people — “Harijans” or “children of God” — as patronizing; he preferred “Dalits,” from the Sanskrit for “crushed,” “broken.”<br />---------<br />Gandhi is still routinely called “the father of the nation” in India, but it is hard to see what remains of him beyond what Lelyveld calls his “nimbus.” His notions about sex and spinning and simple living have long since been abandoned. Hindu-Muslim tension still smolders just beneath the uneasy surface. Untouchability survives, too, and standard-issue polychrome statues of Ambedkar in red tie and double-breasted electric-blue suit now outnumber those of the sparsely clothed Mahatma wherever Dalits are still crowded together.....</i>Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-10113467469722140752011-03-26T19:20:19.260-07:002011-03-26T19:20:19.260-07:00Here are some excerpts from a Wall Street Journal ...Here are some excerpts from a <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703529004576160371482469358.html" rel="nofollow">Wall Street Journal</a> review of a recent book "Great Soul" on Mohandas Gandhi's life by Joseph Lelyveld:<br /><br /><i>Joseph Lelyveld has written a generally admiring book about Mohandas Gandhi, the man credited with leading India to independence from Britain in 1947. Yet "Great Soul" also obligingly gives readers more than enough information to discern that he was a sexual weirdo, a political incompetent and a fanatical faddist—one who was often downright cruel to those around him. Gandhi was therefore the archetypal 20th-century progressive intellectual, professing his love for mankind as a concept while actually despising people as individuals.<br /><br />For all his lifelong campaign for Swaraj ("self-rule"), India could have achieved it many years earlier if Gandhi had not continually abandoned his civil-disobedience campaigns just as they were beginning to be successful. With 300 million Indians ruled over by 0.1% of that number of Britons, the subcontinent could have ended the Raj with barely a shrug if it had been politically united. Yet Gandhi's uncanny ability to irritate and frustrate the leader of India's 90 million Muslims, Muhammad Ali Jinnah (whom he called "a maniac"), wrecked any hope of early independence. He equally alienated B.R. Ambedkar, who spoke for the country's 55 million Untouchables (the lowest caste of Hindus, whose very touch was thought to defile the four higher classes). Ambedkar pronounced Gandhi "devious and untrustworthy." Between 1900 and 1922, Gandhi suspended his efforts no fewer than three times, leaving in the lurch more than 15,000 supporters who had gone to jail for the cause.<br /><br />A ceaseless self-promoter, Gandhi bought up the entire first edition of his first, hagiographical biography to send to people and ensure a reprint. Yet we cannot be certain that he really made all the pronouncements attributed to him, since, according to Mr. Lelyveld, Gandhi insisted that journalists file "not the words that had actually come from his mouth but a version he authorized after his sometimes heavy editing of the transcripts."<br /><br />Although Gandhi's nonviolence made him an icon to the American civil-rights movement, Mr. Lelyveld shows how implacably racist he was toward the blacks of South Africa. "We were then marched off to a prison intended for Kaffirs," Gandhi complained during one of his campaigns for the rights of Indians settled there. "We could understand not being classed with whites, but to be placed on the same level as the Natives seemed too much to put up with. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized—the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live like animals."</i>Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-37279594787927546432011-01-20T23:11:59.661-08:002011-01-20T23:11:59.661-08:00Here's an interesting excerpt from an Adrian H...Here's an interesting excerpt from an Adrian Hamilton commentary on Taseer assasination published by <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/adrian-hamilton/adrian-hamilton-pakistan-is-not-beyond-hope-ndash-or-our-help-2176966.html" rel="nofollow">The Independent</a>:<br /><br />Assassination is an abominable act but also an effective means of challenging power structures and frightening people into passivity. Religion may make it more difficult for ordinary citizens openly to oppose the men of violence, but it's not necessarily the cause in itself. <br /><br />The real issue is the almost universal assault on pluralism within countries. At a time when the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, openly dismisses multiculturalis m as a mistake, when senior members of the Israeli government call for new laws to enforce ethnic purity in the country, and minorities are being persecuted and driven out of most countries of Asia, to talk of the Muslim issue as if it were a unique phenomenon misses the wider context. The violence in Pakistan has been perpetrated far more by Sunnis on Shia, Ahmadi and Sufi co-religionists than on Christians.<br /><br />The revival of Islamic belief is certainly a real and in some ways threatening reality of our time. In country after country Muslims seem to be turning back to religion as a means of defining and asserting their identity. That poses a problem – although much exaggerated – in Europe and other regions where they are a minority. But it poses much more far-reaching problems for Muslim states, such as those in North Africa and Central Asia, where secularism is associated with corrupt and authoritarian regimes.Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-53672259012610052472011-01-09T09:08:17.933-08:002011-01-09T09:08:17.933-08:00Here's an excerpt from a piece by Taseer's...Here's an excerpt from a piece by Taseer's daughter Shahbano published in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/opinion/09taseer.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=pakistan&st=cse" rel="nofollow">NY Times today</a>:<br /><br />"TWENTY-SEVEN. That’s the number of bullets a police guard fired into my father before surrendering himself with a sinister smile to the policemen around him. Salmaan Taseer, governor of Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous province, was assassinated on Tuesday — my brother Shehryar’s 25th birthday — outside a market near our family home in Islamabad. <br /><br />The guard accused of the killing, Mumtaz Qadri, was assigned that morning to protect my father while he was in the federal capital. According to officials, around 4:15 p.m., as my father was about to step into his car after lunch, Mr. Qadri opened fire. <br /><br />Mr. Qadri and his supporters may have felled a great oak that day, but they are sadly mistaken if they think they have succeeded in silencing my father’s voice or the voices of millions like him who believe in the secular vision of Pakistan’s founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah."<br /><br />http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/opinion/09taseer.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=pakistan&st=cseRiaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-63216715553823154212010-12-14T17:50:21.594-08:002010-12-14T17:50:21.594-08:00Here are excerpts from a piece by Beena Sarwar on ...Here are excerpts from a <a href="http://jang.com.pk/thenews/nov2010-weekly/nos-28-11-2010/dia.htm#1" rel="nofollow">piece by Beena Sarwar</a> on secularism debate in Pakistan:<br /><br /><i>First of all, the very fact that this discussion is taking place in a mainstream newspaper -- even though it is in English, which limits its outreach -- is something to appreciate.<br /><br />Secondly, the discussion is taking place at a time when Pakistan, indeed the world, finds itself polarised as never before. Never before have we seen such extremes jostling for ascendency at the same time. In Pakistan, the extremes are most visible in the attire people, particularly women, wear out on the streets (from jeans to burqas), the gatherings and functions they attend (from religious gatherings to musical evenings, fashion shows and wild underground parties), what they are reading (religious literature to Communist readings that would have landed them in jail in the Zia years), the television and films they are watching (religious shows to uncensored films on DVD, and Indian films at mainstream cinemas), and how they express their views (through writings, art, music, seminars and peaceful candlelight demonstrations to violent protests and suicide bombings).<br /><br />The entire gamut is there, from the extreme left to the extreme right, from wild permissiveness to ultra-conservatism -- the latter apparently on the rise not just in Pakistan but around the world. In fact, this ascendency of the Right is so strong that the demons of religion-based militancy unleashed during the Zia years can take down even those who adhere to the late General's world views: a Zaid Hamid can lose even as Gen Zia wins, as the UK-based researcher Anas Abbas interestingly posited it. The charismatic right-wing cult leader, who had sucked into his fold youth icons like the fashion designer Maria B and rock singer Ali Azmat, had to go into hiding not because progressive Pakistanis prevailed against his virulent pan-Islamist, anti-India world view, but because he offended his own.<br /><br />This is a time when the 'blasphemy laws' as they are applied in Pakistan are causing a worldwide uproar because of the injustice they perpetuate; ......<br /><br />We're talking about secularism at a time when supposedly educated people, including parliamentarians and politicians are 'warning' the government not to tamper with these blasphemy laws, or else face the 'consequences'. It is ironic that such a warning was issued recently by Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, President of the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q)....<br />We can now have this debate in the pages of this English-language newspaper, 20 years after Gen. Zia's departure, because those who hold these violent beliefs consider us to be irrelevant. So is the situation hopeless for people like us? No, because these discussions are not taking place in a vacuum. There is a lot of questioning going on in Pakistan at various levels about religion and its role in the state. These discussions are taking place in many languages and at many fora. Thousands if not millions of activists, political workers and ordinary citizens in Pakistan share the belief that religion should be a private matter, which should not be imposed violently.<br /><br />The rise of the Internet -- according to one estimate, as many as 18 million Pakistanis have Internet access -- means that people have other alternatives to share information that the dominant news media sidelines. Blogs or facebook pages like SecularPakistan or SayNoToTheStateReligion may not have millions of followers but their readership is growing. Amidst the cacophony of jihadist views that regularly find space on radio and television networks are also voices that courageously question the role religion has been given in Pakistan. The trickle may not become a flood anytime soon, but neither is it about to dry up and disappear.</i>Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-48636324415200438492010-06-14T23:33:39.872-07:002010-06-14T23:33:39.872-07:00The film Gandhi was essentially a "paid polit...The film Gandhi was essentially a "paid political advertisement by the government of India", says commentator Richard Grenier in a <a href="http://history.eserver.org/ghandi-nobody-knows.txt" rel="nofollow">piece</a> titled "The Gandhi Nobody Knows". Here is an excerpt from it:<br /><br />AS IT happens, the government of India openly admits to having provided<br />one-third of the financing of 'Gandhi' out of state funds, straight out of the<br />national treasury--and after close study of the finished product I would not be<br />a bit surprised to hear that it was 100 percent. If Pandit Nehru is portrayed<br />flatteringly in the film, one must remember that Nehru himself took part in the<br />initial story conferences (he originally wanted Gandhi to be played by Alec<br />Guinness) and that his daughter Indira Gandhi is, after all, Prime Minister of<br />India (though no relation to Mohandas Gandhi). The screenplay was checked and<br />rechecked by Indian officials at every stage, often by the Prime Minister<br />herself, with close consultations on plot and even casting. If the movie<br />contains a particularly poisonous portrait of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder<br />of Pakistan, the Indian reply, I suppose, would be that if the Pakistanis want<br />an attractive portrayal of Jinnah let them pay for their own movie. A friend of<br />mine, highly sophisticated in political matters but innocent about film-making,<br />declared that 'Gandhi' should be preceded by the legend: *The following film is<br />a paid political advertisement by the government of India.*Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-53003163415267234332010-05-31T06:16:37.563-07:002010-05-31T06:16:37.563-07:00This is in response to the concept the author is t...This is in response to the concept the author is trying to project here. Please be honest in your expression and write ups.<br /><br />Be honest to write thouse hundreds of quotes of Quaid-e-Azam speaking of an Islamic state. I have done my own reserach and have found numerous coutless quotes where he catagorically states the purpose of creation of Pakistan.<br /><br />How conveniently you hide those numerous quotations. It is underatandable that you have intentionally hidden those from the public eyes using your dishonesty. Otherwise, to dig out these three quotes and quote them out of context, research is required, which you supposedly have already done.<br /><br />I am also writing an article and will reference your article and hit you hard for our "intellectual dishonesty" towards the father of the nation, Pakistan and Pakistanis. Shame on you....<br /><br /><br />Sincerely<br /><br />Dr. Imran Chaudhry<br />(Writer for Re-Volt youth magazine)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-27797049568954199372008-07-13T05:21:00.000-07:002008-07-13T05:21:00.000-07:00True!True!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-76467081235147098922008-07-12T09:21:00.000-07:002008-07-12T09:21:00.000-07:00Dear sawj,My understanding from various sources is...Dear sawj,<BR/><BR/>My understanding from various sources is that Quid-i-Azam was born as Mahomedali Jinnahbhai to parents who belonged to Ismaili Khoja branch of Shi'a Islam. He could have been a Twelver (Isna Ashri) believing in 12 imams. But he was not particularly religious or sectarian in his life. He saw himself as just "Muslim" rather than a particular kind of Muslim. He was the leader of all of the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent regardless of denomination. He often prayed with Sunnis and his funeral prayer was led by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, a Deobandi alim.<BR/><BR/>I firmly believe that if the Quaid had lived, he would have done everything possible to emasculate Pakistan's feudal class, just like Nehru did in India. He was so popular that the feudals would not have been able to stop him. I think democracy would have taken root in Pakistan if the Quaid had a few more years to live.Riaz Haqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00522781692886598586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5848640164815342479.post-30478133744887586332008-07-12T02:16:00.000-07:002008-07-12T02:16:00.000-07:00Nice post, Mr. Haq.Just one correction: Quaid-e-Az...Nice post, Mr. Haq.<BR/><BR/>Just one correction: Quaid-e-Azam was a Asna Ashari Shia. Mr. Qutbuddin Aziz, a close associate of Mohtarma Fatimah Jinnah, told ud this while giving a speech at our college campus.<BR/><BR/>A Question: What should the servants do when the democratically elected rob the country and it's people? One thing Quaid-e-Azam didn't know would happen is the entry of feudals into politics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com