[Goanet]Re: Was Jinnah Secular?
(RKN wrote: It's unfair to pick up bits and pieces out of context to paint someone a fundamentalist. The statements have to be read in the context of the social milieu and time in history to understand their true import.) While Jinnah may not have been a fundamentalist wanting to establish a 'theocratic Islamic State', he was not a liberal leader who had espoused the cause of a secular Pakistan either. Jinnah's vision was clear and unambiguous: he was in favour of a modern 'democratic Islamic state' and not a secular society divorced from religion. Jinnah's model Islamic State would seek to synthesise Islam with modernity. In such a State, all citizens would be equal before the law but governance and policies to be pursued would be based upon the 'ideologies and identities of Islam'. In other words, it essentially would be an 'Islamic democracy' which would follow a progressive and dynamic vision of Islam. Such a model could hardly have been referred to as a 'Secular democracy'. Jinnah's broadcast to the people of the United States (February 1948) makes this position of his very clear: 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 principles of Islam. Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of men, justice and fairly play to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan. In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State -- to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims -- Hindus, Christians, and Parsis -- but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.. And we will leave the discussion on whether a 'modern Islamic State' can also be a democratic one to another day. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[Goanet]Re: Was Jinnah Secular?
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050609/asp/nation/story_4845560.asp If any one who should be annoyed by Lalji?s (Advani) remark, it should be the Congress,? George Fernandes said in Guwahati. Quoting veteran politicians and historians, Fernandes said it was Jawaharlal Nehru and the Congress who were responsible for the country?s division. It was the Congress?s ?betrayal? which had forced Jinnah to demand a separate nation on the basis of religion. ?It was in 1935 that the Congress and Jinnah?s party entered into an agreement to jointly contest in the ensuing elections and to form a government together. But after the elections, Nehru backtracked from the earlier promise,? Fernandes said. This development, he added, had pushed Jinnah out of secular politics. Fernandes also called for a national debate on the issue. Regards, Carlos halur rasho [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: If Jinnah was secular, Pakisan would not exist. Or else the two-nation theory is highest form of secularism? And why two-nation theory? Was Jinnah prejudiced against Christians? If he was secular, he would have demanded a seperate country for Indian christians too On 09/06/05, sandeep heble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ., Mr. Advani reportedly described Jinnah as ``a great man'' who had espoused the cause of secular Pakistan.
Re: [Goanet]Re: Was Jinnah Secular?
Halur, If the socialist Nehru had allowed Jinnah to be the PM of India, Pakistan would not have existed. We all could have lived as a happy familly in a true secular India. Regards, Carlos halur rasho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If Jinnah was secular, Pakisan would not exist. Or else the two-nation theory is highest form of secularism? And why two-nation theory? Was Jinnah prejudiced against Christians? If he was secular, he would have demanded a seperate country for Indian christians too On 09/06/05, sandeep heble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ., Mr. Advani reportedly described Jinnah as ``a great man'' who had espoused the cause of secular Pakistan.
[Goanet]Re: Was Jinnah Secular?
If Jinnah was secular, Pakisan would not exist. Or else the two-nation theory is highest form of secularism? And why two-nation theory? Was Jinnah prejudiced against Christians? If he was secular, he would have demanded a seperate country for Indian christians too On 09/06/05, sandeep heble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ., Mr. Advani reportedly described Jinnah as ``a great man'' who had espoused the cause of secular Pakistan.
[Goanet]RE: Was Jinnah secular?
(Sandeep Heble wrote: By no standards could Jinnah have been called a secular liberal leader. Jinnah never conceived of a Pakistan which was based on the principles of secularism that completely separated the State from religion. Rather, he envisioned Pakistan as a state whose political, social and economic system would seek inspiration and guidance from Islam.) Sandeep, Jinnah was a politician and an astute one at that. Even today, a politician who does not swear by Islam and Holy Quaran at every turn has no future in Pakistan, not to speak of the surcharged times of Jinnah. Do you think the Pakistanis would have tolerated it had Jinnah exhorted them to embrace the Western model of democracy? That would have looked like sacrilege and negation of the very cause of Pakistan's creation and existence. So it's understandable that Jinnah couched his democratic impulses in Islamic verbiage. Advani has clarified that he made the remarks in the context of a speech Jinnah had delivered to the National Assembly immediately before his death. That speech was suppressed in Pakistan after his death. It's unfair to pick up bits and pieces out of context to paint someone a fundamentalist. The statements have to be read in the context of the social milieu and time in history to understand their true import. Cheers, RKN _ NRIs, FREE Money Transfers. http://creative.mediaturf.net/creatives/citibankrca/rca_msntagofline.htm Now more with the Rupee Checking Account!
