Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 25th, 2016, 02:10 PM   #11

mnsr's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2014
From: Asia
Posts: 844

Jinnah might be a moderate Muslim and he had dissociated himself from this 2-Nation Theory. But the idea of Two-Nation Theory is still the "core" of Islamism in South Asia.

For Pakistanis, Kashmiris and Bangladeshis the meaning of 'two-nations' has changed after 1947. It is no more 'Hindu-Muslim' but 'India-Pakistan'. The ultimate goal is to liberate Kashmir from India, as it doesn't belong to Indian-Nation and then unification of Kashmir and Bangladesh with Pakistan, as they all are One-Nation.

Among Indian Muslims (excluding Kashmiris), the two nations are still 'Hindu-Muslim'. And the ultimate goal is the peaceful co-existence with Hindus. Also, bears faith and allegiance to the Consititution of India as it allows Indian Muslims to follow Sharia in their personal lives.
mnsr is online now  
Remove Ads
Old December 25th, 2016, 02:24 PM   #12

Bullit's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: Indus Basin, Pakistan
Posts: 306

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnsr View Post
For Pakistanis, Kashmiris and Bangladeshis the meaning of 'two-nations' has changed after 1947. It is no more 'Hindu-Muslim' but 'India-Pakistan'. The ultimate goal is to liberate Kashmir from India, as it doesn't belong to Indian-Nation and then unification of Kashmir and Bangladesh with Pakistan, as they all are One-Nation.
Disagree. Amongst the Islamists 2NT has morphed into something bigger - Pan Islamism and the concept of Unmmah to be realized through a Caliphate ruling all the Muslim world is the draw nowdays.

In fact lot of the trouble inside Pakistan emanates from trying to pursue the interests of a nation state (Pakistan) and the percieved interests of the wider Muslim world (pressed by those who believe in the caliphate) and the tension between these two conflicting ideals is ongoing.
Bullit is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 04:15 PM   #13
Lecturer
 
Joined: Sep 2015
From: Pakistan
Posts: 305

Quote:
Originally Posted by Devdas View Post
Jinnah was himself a confused person first he said Hindus and Muslims are different nations and then after getting Pakistan he wanted to separate religion from state based on secular principles. Even during the Pakistan movement days, he was known for giving conflicting speech between moderate Muslims and religious groups.
Jinnah was looking to protect minority north indian muslims of UP/Bihar/Gujarat (he's Gujarati remember)/Harayana. He was ready to accept the deal if Nehru didn't back out. I'm glad Nehru backed out because muslim punjabis formed secular party unionts with sikhs to protect rights of landholding biraderis in punjab. While secular bacha khan from KPK wanted to remain part of India.

Current day Pak native sons of soils were living in their own buble away from dangers of hindutvas butchers. But what really changed and made unionts members join Jinnah muslim league was probably Kolkotta hindu-muslim riots sponsored by Gandhi/Nehru. Apart from that only native who I can think of who warned our ancestors back then was Chaudhry Rehmat Ali, god bless his soul. ameen Some say even Iqbal at most wanted autonomy with in India.
janjumanju123 is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 04:19 PM   #14
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: USA
Posts: 1,030

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullit View Post
Disagree. Amongst the Islamists 2NT has morphed into something bigger - Pan Islamism and the concept of Unmmah to be realized through a Caliphate ruling all the Muslim world is the draw nowdays.

In fact lot of the trouble inside Pakistan emanates from trying to pursue the interests of a nation state (Pakistan) and the percieved interests of the wider Muslim world (pressed by those who believe in the caliphate) and the tension between these two conflicting ideals is ongoing.
Jinnah wanted to create a Muslim nation where Indian Muslims would rule with supremacy, but he wanted it to be secular than Islamic. Little that he knew, once Islam is given precedency it will take its own natural course to religious violence, intolerance, and sucked into its goal of global totalitarianism. He had a sort of na´ve and shallow understanding of his own religion. He thought Islam was something like Christianity. I don't blame Jinnah for this. Most westernized Muslims have similar delusional notions about Islam.

Jinnah is a good example of an old quote: "When leaders have no vision people perish".
kandal is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 04:26 PM   #15
Lecturer
 
Joined: Sep 2015
From: Pakistan
Posts: 305

Quote:
Originally Posted by kandal View Post
Jinnah wanted to create a Muslim nation where Indian Muslims would rule with supremacy, but he wanted it to be secular than Islamic. Little that he knew, once Islam is given precedency it will take its own natural course to religious violence, intolerance, and sucked into its goal of global totalitarianism. He had a sort of na´ve and shallow understanding of his own religion. He thought Islam was something like Christianity. I don't blame Jinnah for this. Most westernized Muslims have similar delusional notions about Islam.

Jinnah is a good example of an old quote: "When leaders have no vision people perish".
History proves Jinnah just wanted basic rights for minority muslims in majority hindu states, some times even at expense of current day native Pakistanis. But its ok we don't hold any grudge against Jinnah because alternatives like Unionts and Bacha Khan were even worst.
janjumanju123 is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 06:51 PM   #16

mnsr's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2014
From: Asia
Posts: 844

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullit
Disagree. Amongst the Islamists 2NT has morphed into something bigger - Pan Islamism and the concept of Unmmah to be realized through a Caliphate ruling all the Muslim world is the draw nowdays.

In fact lot of the trouble inside Pakistan emanates from trying to pursue the interests of a nation state (Pakistan) and the percieved interests of the wider Muslim world (pressed by those who believe in the caliphate) and the tension between these two conflicting ideals is ongoing.
Pan-Islamism was never a threat for Pakistan. It became threat very recently when organisations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS started following violent methods to achieve this.

On the other hand, Kashmir is an agenda for Pakistan since 1947. And the reason they want Kashmir to integrate with Pakistan lies in the idea of Two Nation Theory, that Kashmir as a Muslim majority region doesnt fit in India. And any party whether liberal or islamist now comes to power has to carry this, as this idea lies in the foundation of Pakistan.

The idea is also core to the political parties fighting for Kashmiri separatism like Hurriyat Conference. They said the reason they are fighting against India is not economical but emotional. And the emotions are that Indians and Kashmiris are two separate nations.
mnsr is online now  
Old December 25th, 2016, 07:24 PM   #17

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 861

Quote:
Originally Posted by kandal View Post
Hinduism is also pretty similar to Islam in this aspect, especially the Vedic Hinduism. So Jinnah is correct in that too. (Btw, Hinduism has been successful in weeding out many of its temporal laws).
Care to elaborate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by janjumanju123 View Post
But what really changed and made unionts members join Jinnah muslim league was probably Kolkotta hindu-muslim riots sponsored by Gandhi/Nehru.
Wah, excellent information. Is that what is taught in Pakistan?

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 25th, 2016 at 07:44 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 07:31 PM   #18

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 861

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullit View Post
Click the image to open in full size.
Mister Jinnah, I think, keeping dogs as pets is prohibited in Islam. But then, did you ever care for it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnsr View Post
Also, bears faith and allegiance to the Consititution of India as it allows Indian Muslims to follow Sharia in their personal lives.
The situation may change very soon. But except for the clerics, not many will oppose it.

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 25th, 2016 at 07:40 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 07:34 PM   #19

Bullit's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: Indus Basin, Pakistan
Posts: 306

Quote:
Originally Posted by kandal View Post
Jinnah wanted to create a Muslim nation where Indian Muslims would rule with supremacy, but he wanted it to be secular than Islamic. Little that he knew, once Islam is given precedency it will take its own natural course to religious violence, intolerance, and sucked into its goal of global totalitarianism. He had a sort of na´ve and shallow understanding of his own religion. He thought Islam was something like Christianity. I don't blame Jinnah for this. Most westernized Muslims have similar delusional notions about Islam.

Jinnah is a good example of an old quote: "When leaders have no vision people perish".
I agree with you that Jinnah was full of contradictions. Having read about him widely I get a feeling he himself was often not sure of what he wanted. There was malaise and confusion in his thinking. In Pakistan one camp quotes Jinnah that he wanted secularism and another camp quotes he wanted a religious state. Both sides can find quotes to back up their argument because he indeed did paddle in both contradictory direction.

It is almost a sin to say this in Pakistan but Jinnah did not make Pakistan. It came about by accident. To get the credit of making Pakistan would suggest that his vision was Pakistan. It never was. Jinnah was actually representing a group that was minority in Hindu regions and wanted some form of constitutional protection of their interests. Jinnah sought parity, not Pakistan. Although he used the latter as a stick to get his parity.

This can be seen in how month before partition Jinnah accepted the June Cabinet Mission Plan. Acceptance of this plan only two months before Pakistan came into being tells us Jinnah was not entirely 'locked' on Pakistan but sought parity.

Para., 6 The Cabinet Mission in India (14 Facts)

Only Allama Iqbal back in 1930 in his address or Rehmat Ali had a 'vision' of Pakistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allahabad_Address 1930

"India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages, and professing different religions [...] Personally, 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."

And Rehmat Ali in 1933

"At this solemn hour in the history of India, when British and Indian statesmen are laying the foundations of a Federal Constitution for that land, we address this appeal to you, in the name of our common heritage, on behalf of our thirty million Muslim brethren who live in PAKSTAN – by which we mean the five Northern units of India, Viz: Punjab, North-West Frontier Province (Afghan Province), Kashmir, Sindh and Baluchistan."

Now or Never, by Chaudhary Rahmat Ali, 1933

It would therefore appear that Pakistan came about through unintended consequences. That explains the confusion at 1947 and even afterwards.This points to Jinnah being almost reckless given that he knew he was ill and did not have much time left. Had he really been aiming for Pakistan he would have better planned and crafted the country then he did.

And the Pan Islamism was there all along going back to the Khilafat of movement of 1920s but it really got it's legs in 1970s and learn't to jog in 1980s. By 1990s it had learnt to sprint. By late 2000s it was somersaulting.

Hopefully by 2020s it will trip and fall flat on it's face !

Last edited by Bullit; December 25th, 2016 at 07:39 PM.
Bullit is offline  
Old December 25th, 2016, 07:51 PM   #20

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 861

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnsr View Post
They said the reason they are fighting against India is not economical but emotional. And the emotions are that Indians and Kashmiris are two separate nations.
I know their emotions. They want maximum benefits/grants from India, freedom to siphon that money, no income tax/sales tax (if teams visit shops, they are beaten away), Jammu and Kahmir Bank to hide their misdeeds, money for Hurriyat from Pakistan, freedom to own cars stolen from North India, money from mostly Hindu tourists, reservations in education and jobs all over India. They are happy here. Pakistan would put them right in less than a week. They are smartest of all Indians.

If a few foolish people die in disturbances, they must. They are not Salahuddin or Gilani's children who have plush jobs elsewhere or Andarabi's son who is studying in Malaysia.

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 25th, 2016 at 09:11 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
hindus, muslims, nations



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ghurids were not Hindus Azad67 Asian History 51 December 22nd, 2016 05:04 AM
Why Kashmiri Hindus look distinctly different from Kashmiri muslims? Azad67 Asian History 24 May 6th, 2016 05:02 PM
Is the United Nations just as big of a fail as the League of Nations Was? PinkPanter456 General History 49 April 10th, 2013 05:42 AM
Hindus Fought in Karbala! Jhangora War and Military History 4 December 8th, 2012 09:49 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.