Let me start by saying – as a disclaimer- that opposing Jinnah, the Muslim League or Pakistan is not an unpardonable crime. Support for Pakistan’s creation is not sine qua non for its citizenship. However an exception must be made in the case of Jamaat-e-Islami given its latter day claims about being the guardians of Pakistan’s ideology. Maulana Maududi claimed and his “Jamaat-e-Islami” still claims to be the guardian of Pakistan’s ideological frontiers as it were. They have been at the forefront of religious bigotry against all minority groups of Pakistan. They abuse those who stand for a peaceful settlement of Kashmir dispute and they hurl abuses at groups like Agha Khanis and Ahmadis- the two of the most actively pro-Pakistan groups during partition- and accuse them of being the enemies of Pakistan.
What a turn around. Maududi was the most vociferous opponent of Mr. Jinnah and the Pakistan Movement. I reproduce here some of his referenced works here from his “Muslims and the Present Political Turmoil” (Vol.III) First Edition published from Delhi. Jamaat-e-Islami claims that the whole Two Nation Theory project was derived from Maududi’s writings which is completely untrue. Maududi described the idea of Muslim Nationalism as unlikely as a “chaste prostitute”. Here he wrote:
” Who are the Muslims you are claiming to be a separate nation? Here, the crowd called Muslims is full of all sorts of rabble. There are as many types of characters in this as in any (other) heathen people”. (Vol. III, P.166)
“If you survey this so-called Muslim society, you will come across multifarious types of Muslims, of countless categories. This is a zoo with a collection of crows, kites, vultures, partridges and thousands of other types of birds. Every one of them is a ‘sparrow’. (Ibid. P.31)
One of Jamaat-e-Islami’s latter day claims has been that Mr. Jinnah wanted an Islamic state. Ironically this is what Jamaat-e-Islami’s philosopher in chief Maulana Maududi was writing back then:
“Pity! From League’s Quaid-e-Azam down to the lower cadres, there is not a single person who has an Islamic outlook and thinking and whose perspective on matters is Islamic“. (Ibid. P.37)
“To pronounce these people fit for leading Muslims for the simple reason that they are experts of Western type politics and masters of Western organizational arts, and are deeply in love with their people, is a manifestation of an unislamic viewpoint and reflects ignorance of Islam”. (Ibid. P.70)
“Even with a microscopic study of their practical life, and their thinking, ideology, political behaviour and style of leadership, one can find not a trace of Islamic character.”
Jamaat-e-Islami now claims claims that the Muslim League won the elections because it promised Pakistan as an Islamic state. Here is what Maulana Maududi said then:
“In no Muslim League resolution, or in a speech by a responsible leader of the League it has it been made clear that their final goal is of establishing an Islamic system of government. Those who believe that by freeing Muslim majority areas rule of Hindu majority, an Islamic government will be established here in a democratic set up, are wrong. In fact what will be achieved will be a heretical government by Muslims, indeed worse than that.” (Ibid. P.130-32)
One of the main arguments in favor of separate federations in India put up by Muslim League was that parliamentary democracy would not work in United India given the permanent minority that Muslims were with their own majority zones. Thus Pakistan – as a separate federation- had to be a democratic state. Jinnah’s vision, as Gandhi concluded after his abortive meetings with Jinnah in 1944, was of a perfect democracy in Pakistan. This vision was rejected by Maulana Maududi and his party. The fact that Jinnah used electoral methods and strengths of numbers for his politics also upset Maulana Maududi quite a bit. He wrote:
“For these reasons, the great numbers (of Muslims) that we find. (listed) in the census records has become worthless for purposes of Islam. Anything done on the strength of these numbers will result in acute frustration.” (Ibid. P.56)
Had these great numbers supported Maududi he would have gladly accepted their strength. In 1947, he moved to Pakistan and brought here with him his cancerous Jamaat-e-Islami too. He remained however a committed opponent of the Pakistani national causes including the Kashmir struggle calling it unIslamic. Today the Jamaat-e-Islami castigates anyone and everyone who wants a peaceful settlement in Kashmir. I suppose Maududi could not call the Kashmir struggle a Jihad because then Ahmadis were involved in fighting there under their Al-Furqan brigade.
A few years later Maududi in cahoots with the old anti-Muslim League and anti-Pakistan group Majlis-e-Ahrar started the anti-Ahmaddiya movement in Pakistan with the main objective of getting Zafrulla dismissed from his post as the foreign minister. This is the same Zafrulla who was the author of the Lahore Resolution and had been appointed by the Quaid to plead Pakistan’s case before the boundary commission and the United Nations. The movement led to a death sentence being handed down to Maulana Maududi which was not carried out.
At the Munir Report hearings the Jamaat e Islami described Jinnah’s vision of the state as expressed on 11 August 1947 as kufr and evil. Today Jamaat e Islami claims that 11th August speech was actually according to Islamic Law. Ofcourse they would never agree to its implementation in letter and spirit but perhaps we could consider this an improvement. Some Jamaat-e-Islami wallahs point to Maududi’s half hearted support to Fatima Jinnah’s bid for presidency as proof of his patriotism and love for democracy. The truth is that Jamaat-e-Islami had nothing against dictatorship and indeed military coup seems to be Jamaat’s preferred method of change of government. What alienated Maududi from Ayub was the latter’s insistence on taking lead in Islam-related matters from Allama Parwez and the modernist Harvard scholar Fazlurrahman instead of him.
The Jamaat-e-Islami expected to sweep into power in 1970 through elections (wait isn’t this a contradiction?). Maududi’s son even visited Ahmaddiya headquarters and told them to vote for Jamaat-e-Islami for “safe passage out of Pakistan”. However the election results didn’t quite turn out the way Maududi wanted it to. So he went about it another way forming Al Badr a militant organization which is distinguished in its role in East Pakistan. Those who accuse Bhutto of being power hungry by collaborating with army should also consider the fact that had Bhutto not played footsie with the dictator, it would have been an abject surrender of both East and West Pakistan, in the East to India and in the West to Maududi.
Given this history and Jamaat-e-Islami’s role in aid of General Zia, all their claims of democracy seem hollow. Had it not been for Aitzaz Ahsan’s sagacious leadership, they would have hijacked the Lawyers’ Movement. We must be on the look out for any meetings between Jamaat-e-Islami’s current chief and the Pakistan Army and the patriots of Pakistan must remember that Jamaat-e-Islami will always persecute those who actually stand for Pakistan. A few years ago they even started a campaign to have Aga Khanis declared Non-muslims. Ofcourse the fact that Aga Khan was the first president of the Muslim League and Jinnah himself was an Agha Khani by birth is too inconvenient for them.
It is therefore in this context that the slander, abuse and lies posted by a third rate newspaper “Daily Ummat” against PakTeaHouse and myself must be read. It is because we speak up for Pakistan, it is because we expose the Fitna-e-Maududiat, it is because we speak for Jinnah’s Pakistan and because we speak for the minorities of Pakistan and because we feel Pakistan deserves a shot. The Fitna-e-Maududiat will never attack those who abuse Pakistan day in day out because that group doesn’t challenge their lies or their claim to speak for Pakistan. We do.
63 responses to “Maulana Maududi’s Role Against Jinnah’s Pakistan”
Here is how much Maududi thought Pakistan was an Islamic state;
“Why should we foolishly waste our time in expediting the so-called Muslim-nation state and fritter away our energies in setting it up, when we know that it will not only be useless for our purposes, but will rather prove an obstacle in our path.”
[The Process of Islamic Revolution, 2nd edition, Lahore 1955, p-37 ]
This allegation of Pakistan being an Islamic state was raised AFETR the independence when Maududi et el realised that they can fool people of Pakistan in the name of Islam to share the halwa that they had given no hand in making.
Pakistan – a journey from a secular state to an religious extremist state (episode 1)
Maududi…what a waste of human flesh
Even before 1947, USA had established a JI desk in CIA. Thus came these organizations in India, Malaysia and Indonesia.The desks operate even today.
ohh my God This guy Yasser will not let any chance in proving himself a “shit” in the Pakistan’s blogspare. Zaleel honay Kaa isa shauq kisi kaa Nahn dakha
What the f**k you ignorant ignorant man???
Khuda kaleay kuch sharan karo… It’s there in writing.. Why don’t try to respond to what is written infront of you…
Either say that what is written are all lies and mardoodi never said or wrote this bull shit or tru to defend it…
You people are the enemies of this country..and the enemies of reason and are ideological whores to bought by whoever gets you dominance and a sliver of power…
Whatever br the case with the author of this post..it is a FACT that that the Pakistani peole have rejected you every chance they got…’ zaalo qaazi JAA raga hai’ ring any bells???
Bloody commode flies won’t leave the rest of us alone…
@talkhaaba: You have no argument to present; yet another instance to prove that you Mullah types are all bigots feeding people on conspiracy theories but never can stand any real argument.
What Maududi’s son says about him;
As a keen follower of the debate I felt some rebuttal of YLH’s arguments is required to justify your bad mouthing him.
Just so that we are clear Talkhaba type comments are what I made the mistake of editing out on the other board which caused controversey.
for far too many years, if one was naive enough to have this kind of a debate on (almost) any pak university campus, he could very easily end up with broken bones, cigarette burns and worse. it is still so at places like the Punjab Uni. however, all the IJT-types can do in cyberspace is bark, foaming at the mouth.
in 2007, imran khan experienced the bullying first hand. in the aftermath, we saw the IJT having to go on the back foot. thousands of PU students uniting against the IJT, for the first time in almost 30 years (“mar gayee kutee lae jaao maiyyat; haye jamiat haye jamiat”). but the freedom lasted only a few days. and imran khan was out of jail and back in to qazi’s and JI’s lap.
imran khan is only one example of people who can never learn. JI’s bangladeshi supporters are another.
They don’t have rebuttals. The best they can do is lie or attach meanings to things that are not there.
Here is my August gift to Kashifiat. People please read his blog. It makes interesting reading. On one point he accuses me of not revering Jinnah enough – why? Because I call him Jinnah and not Quaid e Azam…even though I made it quite clear that Jinnah is more than the Quaid e Azam to me – he is Quaid e Azeem tareen. However I call him Jinnah because he himself preferred to be called Mr. Jinnah.
How ironic that those who called him kafir e azam in his lifetime abuse me for calling him Mr. Jinnah. This liar Kashif Hafeez Siddiqui who was taught to lie has been lying like this for 5 years now. For someone he considers worthless I wonder why he stalks me on the internet?
It is all true ofcourse. Other than the fact that I have turned this into an Ahmadi website. Honestly I have no high regard for Ahmadi doctrines. However it is Mr. Jinnah whose ideals I have faithfuly expounded. Since he was the Quaid e Azam I suppose I am a Quaidiani – a follower of Quaid e Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah. That is it.
It is quite easy for one person to lie about PTH (reality check claimed that I was promoting Ahmaddiyat day and night and when I asked him to produce empirical evidence he ran away) and then another dishonest crook to quote him as “an old visitor of PTH who has busted ylh’s game”.
The Fitna-e-maududiat is based on trickery and control freakery. When Adil Najam posted articles on Pakistani heroes Abdus Salam and Sir Zafrulla, this same band of jamaat e islami crooks started calling him Qadiani and forcing him into submission.
Now they are trying to intimidate Raza Rumi. But let me make it very clear. Raza Rumi is made of sterner stuff…with all due respect to Dr. Najam who I admire and respect greatly.
We will keep our war against Fitna e Maududiat on right here.
Laanat bur maududiat tukham-e-sag.
Applause and Ditto to Yasir for speaking against the puritans Imam
To counter ‘Communism Propagation/ influence’, USA through CIA considered taking help of Islam and Islamic Movements. They found the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM) as most intellectual and rational. USA offered LAM they will support her Islamic missionary activities etc and even plan was offered that under UN auspicies LAM does its mission of Islamic propagation. In this regard an office was to be provided to LAM in UN building in NY.
LAM also prepared one of their scholar. But finally LAM leaders decided not go with offer, as LAM wanted to stay away from Politics.
So, then CIA started financing Jamaat Islami and Maudidi etc.
I wish LAM had not turned down the offer. This way they could have propagated PEACEFUL, TOLERANT, RATIONAL, INSPIRING, LOVING, INTERNATIONAL, and NON-SECTARIAN message of islam to world. And we could have avoided today’s mess and propaganda against Islam.
Thanks. Have you had the opportunity of reading Kashif’s blog yet. I hope you do and pass it on to Sherry mian as well.
Excellent Yaser. Perhaps you can also include in this the poem written in the Ahrar (the newspaper) calling Quaid-i-Azam ‘Kafir-i-Azam’ for having married a Parsi.
(I am sorry I do not have a reference at hand).
The authorship of the following couplet is attributed to Maulana Mazhar Ali Azhar, a leading personality of the Ahrar:
Ik Kafira Ke Waste Islam ko Chhora, Yeh Quaid-i-Azam hai Ke hai Kafir-i-Azam.
(He abandoned Islam for the sake of a non-believer woman; he is a great leader or a great non-believer)
[Afzal Iqbal, Islamization of Pakistan, p-54 ]
Have read Kashif’s blog, and felt terrible after the defilement. It was singularly unpleasant. This is one of the less savoury aspects of the Internet: that such dangerous sites can exist.
More power to your elbow.
“The truth is, such men, who are these days a dime a dozen on the mainstream electronic media for entirely cynical economic reasons on the part of the channels who hire them in their mad race for ratings, have been of no service at all to the religion and the country that they claim they are there to save from supposed ‘anti-Islam/Pakistan forces.’
Not even once have these elusive forces convincingly been exposed — at least never through any academically and journalistically sound proofs and sources, but instead rhetorical hate speeches or a messy jumbling up of bits and pieces taken from populist conspiracy theories found in anarchic pulp literature, unsubstantiated cyber rants, and low-budget B-movie ‘documentaries’ are used to build fiery narratives that claim to offer ‘facts’ and ‘expose’ the workings of the forces that are creating sectarian, religious and political turmoil in Pakistan.”
Pity! From League’s Quaid-e-Azam down to the lower cadres, there is not a single person who has an Islamic outlook and thinking and whose perspective on matters is Islamic“. (Ibid. P.37)
so its looks true jub “kuch loog” qaid k state hv no matter with religion ki missal daity hia:))
You have put a stake right into the heart of the godfather of Islamofascism. You have done what Edward Said said “speaking truth to the power”. God bless! See even Ali Arqam has commended you. Join hands with such people against the Maudoodi worshippers.
Fitana e Madoodiat still exists very much and with full force trying to destroy Pakistan. Few days back ‘Ameer ul Azeem’ of JI declared Baitullah Mehsud a ‘Shaeed’ on a live TV show.
The worst enemy of Pakistan, an American asset who killed hundreds of innocent is a Shaheed for JI. Murtad Maudoodi is not dead as his fitna is alive!
Dear Ali Dashti,
If Aliarqam wants to join forces we can set aside our disagreements on other issues for this is a common foe. But I am still reeling from the unkind rumors whoever spread them.
Thanks for the kind words of support. I am glad that people are being galvanized in Pakistan now against this threat,
Btw on the other board I read about JS’s book. I am trying to get a hold of it. I think this is a very important contribution.
I was stunned by Jaswant Singh’s opus.
Perhaps, if you cannot find it readily, I can ship a copy to D_a_n in his desert haunts, for onward transmission to you.
If there was anybody in the ranks of the BJP I could swallow hard and accept, it would be this man, an officer and a gentleman. Let us see what the book actually says.
He calls himself a liberal democrat, and truth to tell, he behaves like one much more than he behaves like a Jan Sanghi.
‘Few days back ‘Ameer ul Azeem’ of JI declared Baitullah Mehsud a ‘Shaeed’ on a live TV show’
This is quite unbelievable considering the present climate…yet on another higher level….very beliveable…
do you know which show this was on and when?
I asked you to send me your email. I can try to bring people like together. The rumors about you were not spread by Ali Arqam but by the Jamiat e Wuqla people. You know who they are.
Jamiat e wuqla? Never heard of them.
I’ll write to you later tonight on the email address you have indicating under your name.
Jamat e islami ameer Munawwar hassan called baithullah mehsud SHAHEED the killer and murderer of Pakistani Men Women and children and Pakistan Soldiers, who took money from india and Israel and beheaded muslims.
Jamaat e islami is a curse and a fitna working against Muslims and Pakistanis.
May Allah destroy each and every Munafiq of Jamat e Islami.
“Pity! From League’s Quaid-e-Azam down to the lower cadres, there is not a single person who has an Islamic outlook and thinking and whose perspective on matters is Islamic”. (Ibid. P.37)
Moudoudi was sharp enough to realize that Muslim League’s ideology was Muslim Nationalism and had nothing to do with theocratic model that Moudoudi hoped for. The above quote by Moudoudi is in itself the validation of Hamza Alvi’s Indian Muslim Bourgeois middle class (that he called Salariat) explanation of the Muslim Nationalism phenomenon that resulted in the creation of Pakistan.
Moudoudi was however quick enough to realize that the distinction between Muslim Nationalism and Islamic theological state is not distinct, and is easy to manipulate. In the absence of a flourishing intelligentsia and academic discourse, Moudoudi’s party formed the loose cabal that came to define itself as guardians of “Islamic” ideology of Pakistan. In a flash, this man who opposed Pakistan tooth and nail before, moved to Pakistan and set in motion the chain of events that haunt us to this day.
One positive development is recent times that there are more and more people speaking up against the ideological hijacking of Pakistan. While before it used to be a smattering of brave individuals standing against the theological chokehold of JI and its cohorts, there are more people on the internet, print and electronic media who realize that Pakistan has been duped for too long by these ideological guardians of hers.
The emergence of Taliban is a not an aberration. When a state policy is influenced by religious zeal, we see groups like Taliban become quite normal. The discriminatory treatment meted out to Ahmedis is a warning sign that Ismailis and Shias are not far behind in getting the same treatment some time soon.
I do think one day Pakistan will undo the infamous constitutional amendment of 1974 declaring Ahmedis non Muslim. The Objectives Resolution will also find its way out of the constitution one day. This resolution has seeded the theological aspect of Pakistan, and emboldened the right wing of that day to realize that duping the newly formed nation is actually quite an easy task.
This day is still some ways away, but we’ll persevere. After all, getting out of a mess is a lot harder than getting into it.
It is now clear that the ‘Ahmadi’ appellation is brought in as a red herring repeatedly by a section of Pakistanis only because they have no argument except what they believe the ultimate abuse- Kufr.
As a young man many moons ago I remember the ultimate abuse offered- ‘petty bourgeois salaa’ served both to condemn and explain.It didn’t matter that I had no connection to the urban bourgeoisie.
Discourses have real effects as a wise man once said. They enable what can be said, how it is to be said and what cannot be said. The Maudoodi discourse has no space for anything outside of itself.
How long will my comments remain in moderation?
Let me check.
yes Maududi was against the creation of Pakistan because the cause of Muslim liberation had been hijacked by the West and was then in the hands of people like Jinnah, Liaquat, etc…the elitist, Western-educated secularists. that’s why not only maududi but most ulema opposed Jinnah. they opposed a country for muslims led by people like jinnah who loved secularism, were brain washed in English universities and for jinnah he couldn’t even speak the language of the people, urdu, properly. he had a dog named grey wolf, which was the nickname of kamal ata turk and there were many other undesirable characteristics of jinnah that led people like maududi to oppose jinnah led creation of pakistan.
if iqbal had been alive and had continued with the thinking he ended up with at the end of his life there would have been little opposition. friendship of iqbal and maududi is not hidden and it is the reason maududi moved to lahore instead of some other place.
lastly the quotes you have mentioned in your posts might get people who are agree with you riled up, but many pakistanis will see why maududi had issues with jinnah. whatever i have stated above is supported by the quotes in the post. maududi was very concerned that pakistan will be turned into a turkey like country and that’s why he objected to muslim league resoulations that were devoid of any notions of a islamic state.
true, a group of ulema including maududi decided to resist a secular country by changing its course when they saw pakistan’s creation was inevitable. and, for that we are first thankfull to Allah and then to these ulema. otherwise, we were on our way to becoming another turkey and there would have been no need for a blog like yours.
if you want to call it takeover of pakistan’s cause. then, yes, it’s a takeover. but, it’s a takeover of jinnah et el.’s view of pakistan. in fact, maududi and other ulema pushed pakistan away from jinnah’s vision to the vision of the masses to whom jinnah always preached islam but all along wanted a western styled country.
now somebody commented that there should be refutation of your arguments. if you are fair then let this comment go and don’t moderate it out or edit it.
maududi and other ulema pushed pakistan away from jinnah’s vision to the vision of the masses
Masses voted for Jinnah and Muslim League and Pakistan came into being as a result of democratic effort. Jinnah’s vision therefore has legitimacy.
Maududi or Jamaat-Islami on the other hand never had any votes then, and never any significant votes even after Pakistan’s creation despite heavy support from the establishment (funds from ISI and all that)…so your claim of Maududi’s push towards vision of the masses is nothing but a lie… masses don’t agree with your claim, compare that with how many times PPP, a declared secular party, came into power. At the same time read up on what Maududi said about the Muslim masses…he wasn’t very impressed with them, to put it mildly, and to claim that he would push towards the vision of masses is contradictory unless you are saying Maududi was a hypocrite to criticise and shun quality of masses but also push towards their vision for political gains.
Mr. Abul Hasan:
There are no curses, insults and needless taunts in your remarks. I have not seen any one posting their point of view nicely without disparaging others being edited on this blog yet.
Let’s give you credit for saying what you believe in. We see many JI sympathizers and theocratic Pakistan supporters who try to paint Jinnah as a zealous Muslim, looking for nothing less than a country for Muslims, governed by Sharia and having nothing to do with the damned secular/humanist ideals that JI/Moudoudi and Ahrar (of yesterday and today) abhorred.
You, in my view, are being honest here. You are telling us what Moudoudi and his ilk really believed all along; that Muslim League and its leaders came out of the nascent Muslim Middle Class studying in Western influenced schools, and most likely wanted a Muslim majority state based on modern Western ideals of humanism, not the Islamic Sharia compliant state that Moudoudi wanted.
Jinnah was indeed a thoroughly Westernized Indian Muslim. He admired Kamal Ataturk (a staunch secularist); Jinnah drank scotch, ate ham sandwiches, and married a woman from Parsi family ; that Jinnah managed to remain one of the most recognizable Muslim leaders for almost 30 years, eventually commanding their absolute vote, is a testament to his leadership abilities. We see Jinnah giving out statements during his struggle for the creation of Pakistan where he referred frequently to Islamic glorious past. Indeed, majority of the Indian Muslims are deeply devout Muslims and Jinnah clearly catered to this fact by including references to Islamic ideals.
However once Pakistan was accomplished, we see Jinnah’s speeches becoming a lot more pointed towards the secular ideals that he thought were paramount for a country to succeed. His speech to the new constituent assembly, and his Voice of America interview all pointed towards his vision for a secular and humanist Pakistan; a predominantly Muslim majority country that treats each of its citizens equally irrespective of their faith, caste and colour.
Having a Hindu Law Minister, an Ahmadi foreign minister, and insisting on getting the first national anthem written by a Hindu poet are quite clear signs that Jinnah wanted a diverse and inclusive Pakistan.
And now we hear that Moudoudi and his followers did not want Pakistan to be modeled a secular state. And in your own words they “decided to resist a secular country by changing its course when they saw Pakistan’s creation was inevitable”.
So here we are: a group of religious leaders, who opposed a country tooth and nail, decide to “change” the course of the newly born country, blackmailing, threatening, and agitating to get the country embarked on a course chosen by them. All that time, the religious leaders had no popular vote or mandate, yet they wanted things done their way, because in their righteous minds, they were right and the founders of Pakistan (who had incessantly toiled for the last 10 years in the political jungle to make the country happen) were wrong.
Your leaders decided to “takeover Jinnah’s view of Pakistan”. This begs the following questions and some interesting paradoxes that we have always observed about Moudoudi and his followers (hereby referred to with the term “you”):
1) Who are you to decide that Jinnah was wrong to get a Muslim majority state run on secular principles?
2) More importantly, if you think Jinnah was wrong, and a thoroughly Westernized secularist , why not publicly call him that. We see that JI condemned Jinnah before 1947, yet mysteriously grew quiet in condemning Jinnah after Pakistan’s creation. In fact, Jinnah is remembered by JI followers a bit positively for his quotes that suit JI agenda. JI rightly realized that Jinnah is idolized in Pakistan and people will probably not stand for his name being tarnished. However, JI is showing itself to be nothing but hypocrite in this regard. They detest Jinnah, he stood for everything Moudoudi loathed, yet JI now try to use Jinnah to establish an agenda that Jinnah wanted nothing to do with.
(Let me add that this is indeed and extremely repulsive aspects of the way the religious right has acted throughout Pakistan’s history)
3) How does JI and Moudoudi reconcile with democracy? JI has never won more than single digit percentage vote. Democracy does not work for them, as by casting their votes, population has repeatedly rejected the obscure version of Islam that JI has always stood for. And that’s probably why we see JI conspiring with dictators, or protesting out on the streets to get things done their way. I think the term for that in English is “blackmail”.
4) And lastly, JI’s recent support of the Jihadi cancer that grew in the Pakistani tribal area is another repudiation of the democratic Pakistan. JI saw in the uneducated and violent band of thugs a hope that the Moudoudi’s vision of an Islamic state will be fulfilled by sword. Never mind that majority of Pakistani population never wanted anything to do with these Jihadis and thoroughly detested what the Jihadis stood for.
All of these questions scream: Why, why and why is this religious organization trying to play fire with a country over the past 62 years. Pakistan was never imagined on the lines JI wanted, and has never wanted to do anything with JI’s manifesto.
I think it is easier said and done that JI should stop using backdoors to mould Pakistan their way. But seriously, is it too difficult to comprehend? Your divine convictions and their resulting actions have brought nothing but devastation to Pakistan. Leave this country and its inhabitants alone, who have seen you bring nothing but misery for them.
AZW commented quite well but frankly let you off the hook minus the scorn that your views (as honest as they were; but that is small comfort) deserved…
now a couple of observations if you would care to address them:
‘was very concerned that pakistan will be turned into a turkey like country ‘
My my…how utterly terrible that would have been! The stability…the utter monotonous dignity of everyday life….the utter insufferable-ness of a proud place amongst nations…the shame of being able to say ‘No’ to the US for opening a Northern front…how would we have lived with ourselves..
how unliveable such a Pakistan would have been right?
Oh thankyou thankyou kind sirs for saving us from a life such as we see the wretched Turks living….may I kiss thee your grace?
and basically what your entire post boils down too is that since Mardoodi and JI types could not stomach Jinnah at a personel level they would rather scuttle the whole ship with passengers on board and leave us an unsecure minority to be dominated by a huge majority…nice!
and if not the above; it then sounds like vindictiveness that if they lost the Muslims to this Jinnah chap the clergy’s power evaporates… so best to keep them back ‘here’ and no Pakistan will mean we will still have some semblence of hold on them…we will still lay claim to speak for them..
and why in the world did Mardoodi actually think we needed his moral guardianship when we didnt actually ask for it..
Jinnah didnt shove his leadership down our throats so why did Mardoodi?
Why did he think that the good people migrating from UP and Punjab will suddenly turn into the heatenistic ‘turks’? did he think that come 14th of August women will walk past Wagah and throw off the dupatta and reveal hot pants and head to the nearest boyfriends house for the night and men will be found on every street corner taking swigs of the finest liqour money can buy?
did he really think that deep down inside this is what we were really trying to do? that all these efforts were meant to create a super-vegas like state?
Why do the Ulema and the Mullahs have such a low Opinion of the then Indian and now Pakistani Muslim?
If there was another angle to it, I fail to see it ..simpleton that I am…
and furthermore when they had done all this to stop Pakistan from becoming a reality then do you see no hypocracy in actually moving to Pakistan and living with the ‘chaste prostitute’?
@ Abul Hasan
Kind Sir…can you please explain the following nugget from your post:
‘yes Maududi was against the creation of Pakistan because the cause of Muslim liberation had been hijacked by the West ‘
so that would mean that there was a full fledged movement for Pakistan actually on and in full swing when Jinnah and his henchmen appeared on the scene and Hijacked it (without anyone except Maudoodi actually noticing)….
and who exactly was ‘the west’ here? The US perhaps? or maybe Britain was the sponsor and master mind all along?
If that is the case, then please show evidence to prove this preposterous claim of yours….
You can email me at . By the way, Jamiat e Wuqla is the legal cabal of Jamaat e Islami.
manoo underscore ninety-five at yahoo dot com
“yes Maududi was against the creation of Pakistan because the cause of Muslim liberation had been hijacked by the West and was then in the hands of people like Jinnah, Liaquat, etc…the elitist, Western-educated secularists. that’s why not only maududi but most ulema opposed Jinnah. they opposed a country for muslims led by people like jinnah who loved secularism, were brain washed in English universities and for jinnah he couldn’t even speak the language of the people, urdu, properly.”
The only correct vision for Muslims is the one seen by Maududi and the Ulema? Why don’t the vast majority of Pakistanis agree with Maududi and the Ulema. Who should prevail, vox populi or vox ulema?
Would it surprise you to learn that speaking ‘proper’ Urdu eludes most Muslims except those originating in the Gangetic belt. Even the heavily accented Urdu spoken by your Punjabi elite is beyond the ability of most villagers. The Pakhtun, Kashmiris, Baluch and probably rural Sindhis cant manage either. It may surprise you to know that in rural Kashmir you cannot communicate with the ordinary peasant except in Kashmiri. South Indian rural Muslims are usually ignorant of the language as they are in rural Bengal. In short, almost everywhere in the subcontinent except its centre.
Urdu was made the official language of Pakistan as Hindi was made that of the Union Government of India, but is it a shibboleth?
@YLH – Good scholarly work buddy! I have from my own experiences in the student life seen the corrupt nature of the JI especially of their senior student cadres. They would hire gangsters to control their ‘territories’ in Universities and violence was their only tool to subjugate any opposing views.
JI has never tallied any electoral muscle despite having the street muscle mainly because they are intellectually bankrupt. Only the rule of law will bring the goons of JI under control. There is hope now with the restoration of the Judiciary but it will take more than that. It will take a massive undertaking to get the society cleansed of all the brainwashing that it has undergone all these years.
I believe the only way to fight these bullies is to fight fire with fire in the absence of government’s blind eye to these rabble rousers – something akin to what MQM did in Karachi. Pretty but i would very effective!
Yes very right. I am impressed by the article as it highlights the fact which had successfully been hiden by the Modudimania from the future generations. JI was never ever in the favour of creation of Pakistan and had issued fatwas against the people who were struggling for this country. Yes you are very right that AghaKhans and Ahmedis were the people who morally, diplomatically and financially helped the Quaid in acheiving his goal but now the Certified Opponents of Pakistan have successfully introduced a turn-around for our generation. Hats off to you who lit a torch again against these hypocrites and worst munafakis of our history.
Pingback: Ali Eteraz - American Saracen – Cyclone Singh: Right-Wing Introspection in India? - True/Slant
Thanks for this post. It’s high time we Pakistanis let go of this national myth of being an Islamic state and created a new national myth more in line with Jinnah’s original intentions and the actual character and culture of our peoples. I’m pleased to see that Pak Tea House is contributing to the creation of a new national myth or national story, even when I don’t agree with everything that gets posted here.
Keep up the fight against Fitna-e-maududiat. More power and courage to you! 🙂
“If Aliarqam wants to join forces we can set aside our disagreements on other issues for this is a common foe. But I am still reeling from the unkind rumors whoever spread them.”
Man…Do you think am involved in such nonsense of Spreading rumours abt you ???
yes i agree with the writer at most of points. For more enlightenment please read my article
Maududi, seeing how opportunists were gathering around Jinnah, correctly identified the next problem: The new state, Pakistan, will NOT become an Islamic state by thjose who could not establish Islam on thier 5 feet bodies. He said it would actually confuse people as they would be dealing with non/ un Islamic thinking leaders with Muslim names.
The opportunists got Jinnah removed !!
And documented it is, that Maududi indeed made suggestion for a separate state in writing before any other. However, this is not important. What is important is that YOU ALL should read his books. I hated him, celebrated hsi death and then had to read a book by him in 1987. Today, I would fly to moon if i find out there is a book by him available on moon!
All scholars, Hussain Madani, Zakariyya etc who are entrenched inthier own school of thoughts and hurle hate against each other, turned against him when they saw thier own schjolars going to Jamaat. Read a book “Maududi per Aiterazaat aur Un Ka Jawaab” by Mufti Yusuf who himself was a Deobandi and a student of Madani.
Pakistan was not meant to be an Islamic state – certainly not the exclusivist theocratic dystopia of Maududi’s wetdreams…though that is exactly what it has become.
And the opportunists who removed Jinnah were influenced by Maududi …especially Ch. Muhammad Ali.
truly nice piece of work….but our nation…wouldnt understand this…even if you tell them that these are the ppl who called it paleedistan…forget the past…there leaders siblings can go and study in foreign…but they are always the first to call out a strike on Friday against US.. everyone knows about Dr Abdul qadeer with all due respect but half of them know Dr Abdus Salam just because he was ahmadi. if we call us a true follower of our Holy prohet PBUH then its about time that we have to start following him. remember that lady who threw rubbish at her everyday was not a muslim but one day when she didnt PBUH asked as to what happened. no wonder if anyone says he is a muslim we and writes kalima tayyaba we would take police and put paint on our own kalima. MashaAllah we have standards. A sahabi killed someone in the war and Holy prophet asked him as to why you killed him even he said the kalima and said he would accept islam so the sahabi replied that he might be doing that so that he would escape death and our Holy Prophet PBUH wept and wept and cried and said did you see what was inside his heart. i m surprised at inellectuals who are giving the justification that maudodi did all of this becasue he doesnt want Mr Jinnah and pakistan to become a secular state..and giving examples of turkey….so is pakistan not like turkey today? is it anything less then turkey today…do i have to give examples of night clubs and binge drinkings and prostitution and child molestation in my country…so where is the jamaat now…if they have the balls and if they have the same agenda..things are far more worse now……clear all this mess now…..or shal i say all of it was just an excuse to stop the creation of our land?…no wonder the war in FATA and northern areas is all becasue we blindly follow Mullahs and dont even think for a minute as to what is write and wrong. note that since MMA came into power into NWFP they have never came out of this what is happening theri today. It is so simple and easy to provoke our people against musharraf and quaid e azam by just saying they are western allies and act liek western minds because they do it openly while if a sodomy case been reported in a madarasa we dont highlight it. Dual standards i guess.
I remember one hadith always whenever the talk comes to mullahs.
“Allah warned me that a day would come when nothing would remain of Islam but its name. Mosques would be abundant, but worshippers would be scarce. That day, the most evil creatures under the domes of the heavens would be the religious leaders. From them will fitnah arise, and in them will it abide”.
Maulana Maududi’s Two-Nation Theory
Maulana Maududi’s Two-Nation Theory And The Struggle for Pakistan
By Abdul-Majid Jaffry, Garden Grove, CA
The earlier part of the twentieth century has witnessed a turmoil in the Islamic world. The Ottoman Empire was disintegrating. Most of the Muslim countries were under colonial rule. The intellectual and political dominance of the West nearly destroyed the vitality of a Muslim mind and turned it against its own religious, cultural, and historical heritage. Many persons in the different parts of the Muslim world confronted the challenge, and fought to unshackle the Muslim body and mind from Western slavery. In the Indian Subcontinent, a few rose to revive the vitality and confidence of the Muslim people. Among them Maulana Shibli Numani, Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar, Allama Mohammad Iqbal, and Maulana Abul Ala Maududi were the most prominent. They came forward with constructive thought and vision to renew Muslim’s sense of identification with their religion, culture and historical heritage. These vanguards of Muslim India believed that the revival of Islam is the only way to save Muslims from sliding into abyss of the world of self destruction, and to that end they made contributions that left indelible impressions on the people and politics of the region. The forces, moral and intellectual, organized over a period of time by these men, by gradual process of growth, culminated into a movement—Pakistan Movement. Pakistan Movement was based on the theory that Muslims are entirely separate people from Hindus in every respect. They form an ideological community with divine guidance for every field of human life, and it is a dictate of their faith to establish a state where they can rule according to the law revealed by the Almighty. This theory is popularly known as two-nation theory. Under the leadership of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the movement, in less than a decade gave birth to Pakistan The man who is most credited as an intellectual force behind the two-nation theory and a front against united Indian nationalism is Maulana Abul Ala Maududi. In the following lines, we intend to examine his contributions, as political thinker, in the face of the opposition launched by the nationalists against the two nation theory, Maulana Maududi was one of the most vigor crusaders for the cause of Islam the Muslim world has seen in the recent history. Few men have worked as relentlessly to give the practical shape to the guidance embodied in the Quran and the Sunnah as Maulana has done. He was scholar, reformer, revolutionary leader, and an Islamic thinker. His belief that preaching, printed literature, and even Islamic education is of little avail unless Islam can be implemented practically in a full blooded Islamic state was behind the fervor with which he argued for the two-nation theory. Maulana Maududi’s greatest contribution of the time was that he made Muslims cognizant of their identity and raised in them a fervor to organize their polity on the principles of Islam. While Quaid-i-Azm Mohammad Ali Jinnah was mustering the forces to fight the Hindus and the British for a Muslim homeland, a group of nationalist Muslims were undermining his efforts by pedling the congress’ theme of one country, one nation. Unfortunately, among the nationalist Muslims, there were many ulema. A few of them had selfish reasons, but many were misled by their inability to look at the Hindu-Muslim problem in a thorough and comprehensive way. These ulema came to be known as Congressite ulema. They preached Indian nationalism in their speeches and writings as a gospel of truth. Muslim League, against the outpouring of the “learned and pious”, found itself in the corner with little argument to defend its two-nation theory. Maulana Maududi came to their rescue. Maulana, through his extremely prolific writings, built a conceptual framework for Muslims to analyze the claim of Indian nationalists, He showed that the independence of India will not be the independence of Muslims people. For Muslims, being in minority, independence would only mean a change in masters, British will be replaced by the Hindus and that would be no independence for Muslims. Maulana’s writings had aroused Muslim’s feelings that they were a nation by themselves and cannot be integrated with Hindus. Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi, a noted historian, writes: “Mawlana Abul Ala Mawdudi’s careful analysis of the policies of the Indian National Congress opened many eyes. It did not win him too many adherents and followers, but it did serve the purpose of turning sincere and intelligent Muslims away from the Congress who mostly swelled the ranks of the Muslim League as followers of Quaid-i-Azam.” (Ulema in Politics, Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi, Ma’reef limited, Karachi, 1974, p. 3391.) Here, it would not be inappropriate to briefly outline the background and psychology behind congressite ulema’s wanting in acumen and lack of insight into contemporary affairs which led them to swallow the hook, line and sinker thrown at them by Hindu Congress. They lived in ivory towers, and were oblivious to the changes that were taking place just outside of their Khanqahs secluded life of religious seminaries and an age long observed custom of taqlid (following a certain school of thought) deprived them of dynamism and turned their minds and hearts prisoners of their own doctrines. Religious knowledge and social sciences were separated which led to bifurcation of religious and profane world. As result, the graduates of religious seminaries were impoverished in the knowledge of politics, social sciences, economics, and international relations, which greatly restricted the insight into contemporary affairs. More sadly, mainly due to the shackles of age long traditional thinking, their capacity to apply the Quran and Sunnah to arrive to a solution to a modern problem (ijtihad) became stagnant. However, there were ulema, such as Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, and Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanavi among others, who were urbane, knowledgeable, and with insight in the national and international affairs, but they were few and far apart. The task of Maulana Maududi and others who were fighting the ideological war against Congress’ one-nation theory became massive and complex when the “leading lights” of religious seminaries swallowed the sugar-coated doctrine of Indian nationalism and wrote books and gave zealous speeches to convince Muslims to throw their lot with the Indian National Congress and give up their struggle for an independent Muslim state. Maulana Husain Ahmad Madni, a great religious scholar of Deoband, was the leader of the Deoband Congressite ulema. He, in support of Indian nationalism wrote a book, “Mutahhedah qoomiyat aur Islam” (united nationalism and Islam). The burden of the preaching of Maulana Madni’s book was that the Muslims living in India were part of the monolithic Indian nation. He juxtaposed Muslims and Hindus into one nation, which brought strong condemnation from Allama Iqbal. He expressed his anger in a couplet in these words: “Deoband produced Husain Ahmad, what monstrosity is this? He chanted from the pulpit that nations are created by countries. What an ignoramus regarding the position of Muhammad.” Maulana Madni indulged in “willful distortion” of Quranic verses, prophets traditions, and history to propound his theory of united nationalism. His book proved a boon for Congress to counter Muslim League’s claim to a separate nationhood. Maulana Maududi, an ardent proponent of two-nation theory, wrote a series of article to expose the fallacy of Maulana Madni’s position on “united nationalism”. He exhorted that Muslims were a distinct community and could not be submerged with Hindus without compromising the foundation of their faith. He pointed out that the united nationalism is a trap of deception which would lead to an utter destruction of the collective identity of Muslims. Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi, impressed by Maulana Maududi’s full dress rebuttal, writes: “In fact Mawlana Mawdudi’s rejoinder was so logical, authoritative, polite, and devastating that it was beyond the capacity of supporter of a united nationhood to counter. Mawlana Mawdudi’s superior scholarship, his telling arguments, his logic and his knowledge of modern concepts in political science and law made it impassible for the Jamiat group to answer his contentions. In fact Mufti Kifayat ul-llah who was a faqih (a jurist) “and, of the demand of logic and academic debate and, therefore more cognizant advised his colleagues against any attempt to continue the discussion, because he opined that Mawlana Mawdudi was in right and there was no point in attempting to defend the indefensible.” (see Ulema in Politics, page 351, 352) Muslim League had an attractive slogan of two-nation theory, but had no literature to convince the nationalist Muslims/Congressite ulema, the Hindus, and the British of the validity of its theory. Between 1937-39 Maulana Maududi wrote two remarkable books, “masla-i-quwmiyat” (The problem of nationalism), and “Musalman awr mawjudah siyasi kashmakash” (Muslims and the present political crisis). These two books provided Muslim League with the much needed intellectual ammunition to fight the nationalist movement. Study of these books were once considered a must for the leaders of Muslim League. It can be said with confidence that Maulana’s articles and books were landmarks in the path of struggle for Pakistan.
I also say this that Maulana Maududi’s role is against Jinnah’s Pakistan. Maulana’s thought was Islamic.
Whatever Islami Jamiat Talaba say are false and say lies. They dont have study of Holy Quran and Maulana’s books.
There were not two nations in India. There were six nations and two religions.
Six nations: Britain, Sikh, Hindu etc they all were infidel religions. also a major quantity of Muslims were there.
Pingback: Ahmadis in Pakistan - Page 67 - Pakistan Defence Forum
If pakistan was not meant to be an Islamic state then what does this mean
PAKISTAN KA MATLAB KYA—LA ILAHA ILLALLAH.
[what is meaning of pakistan—there is no god but Allah]
@usafzai: ‘Pakistan ka Matlab kya’ died with the creation of Bangladesh in 1971, so then, does your above rhetoric stands a chance to this (il)logic of mine. Go & learn some history, not from books crafted in GHQ but by A-rated Historians!!
It is unimportant to gloat or grumble over what Pakistan should or could have been.
Today it is sunk in a fascist religion. That is what we have to deal with. May be with an iron-fist if necessary. This is what those must realize who live in Pakistan. The time is runing out. USA, China, India, Russia, Iran, Europe – they all must realize this.
The damage caused by the watery floods is minor in comparison to what the fascist religion has caused. How many realize that?
Jinnah categorically ruled out this slogan.
“….who took money from india and Israel and beheaded muslims”
Will some pakistani muslims never get over this mentality (of accusing every evil in Pakistan on …)? Jamil criticizes the jamaat but has the same mentality as the jamaat. Pakistanis do not punish an evil-doer in Pakistan unless after accusing him of geting money from USA, Israel or India. What a perverse-hypocritical mentality you pakistanis have bred in your own children and youth.
Pingback: Desis versus Arabs: A Pathan explains. | The Modern Rumi
Jamaati Thaa !!!!!!!!
Ye Qazi Thaa !!!!!!!!
Ghafoora Thaa !!!!!!!!
Ye Mannu Thaa !!!!!!!!
Jamaati Thaa !!!!!!!!
Jamaati Thaa !!!!!!!!