The Jinnah we don’t want to know

Published: September 13, 2011
SHARES
Email
The writer is a human resource consultant currently based in New York aziz.akhmad@tribune.com.pk

The writer is a human resource consultant currently based in New York [email protected]

I have a large framed photograph of M A Jinnah, our Quaid-i-Azam, on a wall of my home office here in New York. It is an old photograph in sepia tones, showing the man dressed immaculately, as always, in a dark suit, striped tie, white straight-collared shirt with double cuffs that protrude a little from underneath his coat sleeves, revealing a cufflink and wearing two-tone shoes.

Jinnah is squatting on the lawn of what appears to be an elegant red-brick house lined with shrubs and greenery. He has a cigarette between his lips, while both his hands are occupied holding a small, white, long-haired dog, a West Highland terrier, or Westie, as the breed is called. Sitting next to the Westie is a big, black Doberman, wearing a studded leather collar, his ears pricked warily. All three — the man and the dogs — are looking straight into the camera.

Jinnah has an amused expression on his face, which, it seems, would break into a grin were it not for the cigarette between his lips. He looks about 60 and dashingly handsome with fine features, a full head of hair with generous splashes of gray carefully combed back.

It’s a shame that the official Pakistan does not display pictures of Jinnah like this one more often — and there are numerous such charming pictures of him in the archives: Jinnah in a chair with his young and beautiful daughter, Dina, standing by, both with a big smile; Jinnah laughing with Gandhi; Jinnah sitting on the arm of a park bench, posing with his sister and other friends; and many more. These pictures reveal the human side of Jinnah, almost a flamboyant side.

Ironically, most Pakistanis have grown up seeing their Quaid-i-Azam, in textbooks, on the covers of their notebooks and currency notes, as an unsmiling, humourless and a somber man, clad in a sherwani and a boat-shaped karakul cap that came to be called the Jinnah cap.

True, Jinnah did start wearing a sherwani and chooridar pyjama or shalwar and a karakul cap — in the last 10 or 12 years of his life — in public gatherings. But he never gave up wearing western clothes. Nor did he give up his love for dogs, nor, unfortunately, his addiction to cigarettes.

Jinnah was a modern man, a westernised man. Whatever his personal beliefs, he never wore religion on his sleeves. No photographer has ever been able to capture him clad in an ahram performing umrah or Hajj, or at an iftar party, or visiting and praying at shrines.

Not only have we ‘doctored’ an official image of Jinnah, we even insist on misspelling his name. Jinnah would spell his first name as Mohamed, as evident in his passport, issued in November 1946. The picture in the passport shows Jinnah wearing a western jacket, a tie and a Jinnah cap. I suspect this is the same picture that appears on our currency notes, but with the tie and jacket replaced with a sherwani collar. Obviously, we have been trying to clad Jinnah in an identity we wish to assume for ourselves — an overt religious identity.

We even rearranged the famous phrase “Unity, faith and discipline” from one of his speeches to “Faith, unity and discipline” and translated faith to mean religion, which, in the context of the speech, meant confidence or conviction.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 14th,  2011.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (113)

  • Sep 13, 2011 - 9:38PM

    Our Jinnah is a myth far from reality, with different groups claiming him as their own. These same individuals now place religion at the pinnacle, and have becomes gods on this earth, decrying who is, and what is a good Muslim. These same people, be it generals, bureaucrats or politicians, perform Hajj’s and Umrahs on the taxpayers expense, as if they have somehow strengthened the country through their fake piousness. The Pakistani state has dehumanizied Mohamed and turned him into a puppet that they can manipulate.

    Recommend

  • Owais
    Sep 13, 2011 - 9:45PM

    He may not be a “religiously dressed” man, yet he claimed that Pakistan would be an Islamic State.. could the author deny that?

    There are a number of his statements where he clearly stated that Pakistan will have a system of government that will be based on Islam (not like a typical theocracy). He did not gave a single statement in the favor of secularism, is it just a coincidence?

    I will be waiting for the response of the author in this regard.

    Recommend

  • Ali Quaid
    Sep 13, 2011 - 9:48PM

    Great piece of information.

    Recommend

  • Dr Mishra
    Sep 13, 2011 - 9:49PM

    Life is complex. Jinnah’s daughter married a non muslim and their progeny stays in India. Ness Wadia the owner of Bombay Dyeing and Punjab cricket IPL team, is his great grandson.
    If he had lived, almost certainly Jinnah would have moved freely between his houses in Mumbai and Pakistan, as he envisaged a Canada – USA type relationship.

    He was also negotiating the purchase of a holiday home in Himachal mountains aroubd the time he died. Methinks he died too soon.

    Pakistanis should be mature enough to digest and handle the truth. It would help them in these tortured times.

    Best wishes, DR MISHRA, India and UK

    Recommend

  • Neda Mushtaq
    Sep 13, 2011 - 10:01PM

    You’re right. We have improvised his image to suit our religious ideals. Afterall, he was just a man like many others at that time, with his heart to finding a solution regardless his persona.

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 13, 2011 - 10:06PM

    Mr Akhmad:

    The Pictures and photographs that I use to see while watching the story of Pakistan unfold in the first decade was always different. In fact one of the picture’s came back with the article that M A H Dossa wrote, published in Dawn in the early nineties after interviewing Dina his daughter in Mumbai it was the young Jinnah that hadn’t appeared in the Pakistani press for a few decades. Jinnah has been transformed into something different in the last four or five decades to suit the impression the rulers want to portray reflecting their current affliction with the possiblity of exploiting religiosity for their own purposes. Thsoe that remmembered him from seeing him in person always descibed him as someone with a great sense of humor, with a love for the good things in life. And you are right has been completely effaced in the religious makeover that has been intentionally given to him.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 13, 2011 - 10:38PM

    @ Dr Mishra
    Life is complex it does coplete things mr jinnah was agha khani muslim the most seculer
    and libral sect of islam but very rich and i know some agha khanis they still snych in india
    & pakistan for them its like canada U.s.a.

    Recommend

  • Sep 13, 2011 - 10:56PM

    Mr Jinnah was one of the greatest leader of united India.His earlier politics was unity of the entire sub-continent.Later on in 20ies,some new leadership of likes of Mr Nehru rubbed him wrong as Mr gandhi had soft corner for nehru,everything went down hill.His personnel relationship with some of his contempories colored his thinking which morphised into dislike for entire hindu community,his thesis these 2 community can not live side by side has partly proved right,alha slow radicalization of minority as Mr Chidhabram today acked..It has been a fact for a while,but rulers in India for reason best known to them ignored at their own peril.They can no longer do this.I predict the terrorism is going to be so routine and massive,GOI will no longer able to handle the anger of Indian people.You will see more riots due to sheer frusteration in India.I see radicalization only accelerate than deminish as India is too big in population and police and other law enforcement shoddy ,weak and corrupt.This is unfortunate,but as Pakistani people are helpless victim,Pakistani people will have compony,and we can all weep togather.Why,we are so desperate to prove Jinnah right,that we cann’t live side by side.No one in past,present or in future will have answer,the answer is simple”LIVE AND LET LIVE”.I’m afraid ,it easily said than followed ,or done.Have a nice day.

    Recommend

  • Was A Pakistani
    Sep 13, 2011 - 11:34PM

    So it is safe to say he duped us into a venture he didnt have faith either. Azad was not so wrong about him then.

    Recommend

  • faraz
    Sep 13, 2011 - 11:53PM

    @Ovais

    Can you explain these contradictions:
    1. Jinnah’s address to first session of the first constitutional assembly of Pakistan on 11 August, 1947: “You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State.” And separation of religion and state is called secularism.
    2. Jinnah’s personal habits were not Islamic and for that he was viciously attacked by Jamaat Islami, Jamiat ulema Hind and Majlis Ahrar.
    3. Ulema oppose Pakistan and gave fatwas against the leadership of Muslim league.
    4. Jinnah belonged to the minority sect; you know what majority sect thinks about that minority sect.
    5. He never quoted any verse from Quran or Hadees. He only talked of constitutional rights of Muslims.
    6. Jinnah accepted Cabinet Mission Plan which called for autonomy inside United India.
    7. If he wanted to impose religious laws, then why did he appoint a Hindu as the country’s first law minister? Why did he appoint a qadyani as Foreign minister?

    Recommend

  • mk
    Sep 13, 2011 - 11:57PM

    Zinda hay Jinnah Zinda hay her sucha pakistani dil may!!
    What a great role model for Pakistanis. Lucky to have him as the founder of our great land. Thank you Sir for your relentless efforts to give us a homeland. Inshallah – we will make your vision of Pakistan come true…Recommend

  • let there be peace
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:15AM

    Sometimes I think Jinnah was a closet patriotic Indian — he divided Indian Muslims in three parts, united the heterogeneous non Muslim Indians in a single nation, created buffer between India and Afghanistan and then wanted to spend his last days peacefully in his house in Mumbai.

    But then I remember he was just an ambitious and successful lawyer.

    Recommend

  • Meekal Ahmed
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:38AM

    AA,

    Perhaps you forget that Zia had all his paintings re-worked to show him in a sherwani.

    Jinnah with his dogs? You must be kidding.

    Universally acclaimed as “man’s best friend” that poor creature is shunned and disliked by many Pakistani’s — even so-called educated one’s.

    The dog saved my cousin’s life when he collapsed suddenly in his basement office at home and alerted his wife on the third floor by constantly barking to draw her attention.Recommend

  • MK
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:46AM

    @Was A Pakistani:

    He took us over to a venture in which he had COMPLETE faith. You are excused for your confusion and inability to understand purpose and content of this article.

    Recommend

  • Sajjad Ashraf
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:56AM

    Dr. Mishra you are right. He sold his Simla and Delhi houses before partition and retained the Bombay house – why? He left for Karachi the house as he was living there. Nothing was taken away-not even an ash tray. I believe, he protested to Mr.Nehru when the house was declared evacuee property. Well… Pakistanis still do not understand the man and his vision.

    Recommend

  • vickram
    Sep 14, 2011 - 1:05AM

    I am an Indian and I have no hesitation in saying that Jinnah is far far more greater than Gandhi. And Jinnah has done a lot for India than Gandhi and Nehru combined did.

    Indians of this generation have now realized the greatness and vision of Jinnah. BJP leaders have already started praising him. Only Congress leaders don’t like him. I just wanted to tell these facts to my pakistani friends. Because, these things will never come out in any mainstream media.

    Long Live the Memories of Jinnah !!!

    Recommend

  • Zulfikar
    Sep 14, 2011 - 1:08AM

    I have seen this picture hanging for 02 years in the office of Director General Health Pakistan from 2009-2010. Professor Dr. Rashid Jooma was DG Health during this time.Recommend

  • Aziz Akhmad
    Sep 14, 2011 - 1:36AM

    @Owais:

    Unfortunately, Jinnah never wrote a book, a paper or even an op-Ed outlining the kind of Pakistan he wanted. The only place he spelled out his vision of Pakistan, in some detail, was in his speech to the Constituent Assembly of Paksitan, on Agust 11, 1947, a proper place and time to deliver a speech of such significance. The speech has been repeated and discussed, ad nauseam, in the media. Read it, if you haven’t. It’s only a page or two.

    Recommend

  • Proud Pakistani
    Sep 14, 2011 - 2:32AM

    What a great man. Respect. For me Jinnah is my perfect role model along with our Holy Prophet. And yes i am a liberal

    Recommend

  • Sara
    Sep 14, 2011 - 2:40AM

    Nonsense. No one *hides* these pictures…! I’ve seen all the pictures mentioned in this article and I’m an ordinary BA student.Recommend

  • Ghazala Kazi
    Sep 14, 2011 - 3:36AM

    For those who say that Jinnah did not want secular state. He is alluding to secular England where Roman Catholic and Protestants did not persecute each other based on religion.

    “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England, conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation.

    Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”

    Recommend

  • Let there be love
    Sep 14, 2011 - 4:50AM

    @vickram:

    I respect the fact that people like you even exist, Sir.

    Recommend

  • Owais
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:57AM

    @Aziz Akhmad:
    I have gathered all his relevant statements from his speeches from quaid.gov.pk, which presents his speech of 11 August on its title page… but what he really said is given in my earlier detailed post (the one in response to faraz).. Please do check that and respond to it.

    Muslims of Pakistan voted for separation based on his these announced statements, and not on his dress or his personal life style. It may be the case that he did not like Sherwani,or shalwar qamees.. but what he demanded for all Muslims is quite clear from his speeches…

    Recommend

  • Arindom
    Sep 14, 2011 - 7:59AM

    Why does Pakistanis constant look to the past. This only results in obfuscation and doctoring the past to suit the agendas. Why can’t it just look to the future? To move ahead?
    In India too we had this disease for some time – but now it is gone and truly buried. As an Indian, I couldnot care less what the dressing habits of the freedom fighters were – I am ready to contribute to a cause which will make our country on par with the West.

    Recommend

  • Karachiwala
    Sep 14, 2011 - 8:08AM

    @MK:
    Mr. Jinnah was not a prophet… He was not divinely guided as we have portrayed him. He was fallable. Mr. Jinnah’s Pakistan ended in 1971 and we now live in Army’s carved Pakistan.

    Criticizing Mr. Jinnah is not acceptable in Pakistan? Why? We should do a rational study of what we lost and what we didn’t. His views were defeatist as he preferred to escape rather than stay and fight for rights. Didn’t he believe in Muslim potential? Or was it his ego that consumed him.

    Recommend

  • Harsh
    Sep 14, 2011 - 8:39AM

    Not a single Muslim League leader ever went to jail during freedom struggle. During ’42 Quit India movement when all the Congress leadership was put into jail for many years.. Jinnah sahab collaborated with britishers instead of taking leadership of freedom struggle.

    Jinnah sahab could have been far greater than Gandhi-ji had he fought for freedom and also for constitutional guarantees for muslims [b]simultaneously[/b]. But he chose to fight against Congress and not britishers. That’s my sole grudge against Jinnah sahab.

    Recommend

  • Feroz
    Sep 14, 2011 - 9:51AM

    Jinnah has done his job and the results of his commitment and determination is for all to see. Pakistani’s are happy they got a country, Indians are happy that those who did not share their vision left. So, it was good for all but that did not preclude the two countries from mismanaging their affairs. Whether he liked sherwani or suits or dogs or cats is quite irrelevant.Recommend

  • Maryam
    Sep 14, 2011 - 10:03AM

    i want to see all the pictures mentioned above..can anyone post a link to these.
    plus i agree about changing Jinnah’s words to “Faith, Unity and Discipline” and even pointed that out to my younger sister that what we knew at our time was ” Unity , Faith and Discipline”

    i guess since there is no unity in the nation, political parties etc so they just rearranged it!

    Recommend

  • Maryam
    Sep 14, 2011 - 10:04AM

    i want to see all the pictures mentioned above..can anyone post a link to these.
    plus i agree about changing Jinnah’s words to “Faith, Unity and Discipline” and even pointed that out to my younger sister that what we knew at our time was ” Unity , Faith and Discipline”

    i guess since there is no unity in the nation, political parties etc so they just rearranged it!Recommend

  • Rock
    Sep 14, 2011 - 10:45AM

    @Arindom: No dear, I want better than west. Yes new generation is ready to contribute. that’s the big change happening post Anna haxare fast.

    Recommend

  • Abbas
    Sep 14, 2011 - 10:58AM

    what have we achieved with ‘islamic’ pakistan? i think all of us know the answer…

    Our ulema cannot even agree on one version of islam, if secularism is the solution then so be it…

    Recommend

  • Muhammad Ahsan Khan
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:02AM

    “Why does Pakistanis constant look to the past.”?

    Simply, because the present is SHAMEFUL and the future is DOUBTFUL!

    Recommend

  • Muhammad Ahsan Khan
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:26PM

    Dear Aziz,

    Your comment only shows that he was not a practicing Muslim. But it does not prove that he was out of Islam. He did not perform the Islamic rituals but he did behave as a Muslim on many occasions.

    In aprevious comment:

    http://tribune.com.pk/story/39079/jinnahs-pakistan/

    I wrote the following:

    “Jinnah never wore his religion on his sleeves. In fact, he never wore it anywhere. It is known that he did not offer his daily prayers, did not fast, did not perform Umra or Hajj, and never started his speech with the ritualistic “bismillah”

    All this proves that he was not a practicing Muslim. He was not a religious man. But it does not prove that he had no religion. He could be a good serious Sufi??

    Any religion is regarded by the common people as TRUE (1), by the wise as FALSE (2) and by the rulers as USEFUL (3)”

    He belonged to the third category. He used the religion to divide India. The “Objectives Resolution” was to establish an Islamic state. Liaqat did not have the courage to take any personal initiative. He was a “Yes Sir” man of great Jinnah!

    In his personal life he had a deep root of his religion. He married his only Parsi wife when she converted to Islam. He wanted her daughter to marry a Muslim husband and not a Parsi boy. It is certainly a conservative religious attitude.

    In any case the religion and secularism can exist as parallel components without meeting or crossing each other which Mr. Jinnah failed to realise in the State of Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • N
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:44PM

    It depends what criteria you apply to measure a leader. MAJ realized the will of a select group of Muslims who did not believe in one man – one vote parliamentary democracy that would give Hindus a majority. To achieve his goals he embraced Islamic symbols and speech. He went so far as to outline why Hindus and Muslims were separate people and ought to live so. In the end, he resorted to Direct Action to achieve the goal of Pakistan. This was a direct call to shed life. This is the man that gave us Pakistan. Even his much quoted speech exhorting Pakistanis to follow any religion was against the backdrop of rising communal violence. His vision of secularism for all citizens was always within the Islamic framework. So the sherwani ,perhaps, best captures the essence of the man.

    And the world is a very discriminating judge of character. We seem, in our competition to be ‘not – India”, to be foisting MAJ’s “greatness” on the world. And it is not impressed. Gandhi stood by his ideals – united India, non-violence to the extent that he went on fast in Muslims neighborhoods to stop the killings, ensured Pakistan got its fair share from the treasury and even exhorted Nehru to let MAJ be the first PM. For his ideals, Gandhi spent time in jail and earned the wrath of right wing Hindus. How and what we achieve are both important. Gandhi did not realize his will; MAJ did. Yet, the mantle of greatness is accorded to one and not the other. Similarly it is Martin Luther King Jr. not Malcom X, it is Mandela not Butlezi.

    Contradictions inherent in any leader must be accepted. That is what makes them interesting. The important issue is do we keep dwelling on his sherwani or do we evolve as a nation and accept modernity and liberalism without wrapping it in “Islam”.

    Recommend

  • Azam Khan
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:55PM

    Glad to know that Mr. Jinnah was the owner of a “Westie”: it is the most lovable dog you can imagine.

    Recommend

  • ARG
    Sep 14, 2011 - 12:59PM

    @Ghazala Kazi:

    The same Quaid-e-Azam called Pakistan the Premier Islamic State a year later. And give me even one speech where the Quaid used the third-class word “secular”?

    @Harsh:

    Most of Gandhi’s fasts were all to achieve hindu dominance over Muslims. The renegement of Congress of the 1916 Lucknow Pact, denial of Muslim rights in the Nehru Report and later on in the Round Table Conferences are all historical evidences of it. Even the Congress tyranny served as the last straw, which exposed the true face of hindu rule in india.

    @Abbas:

    Wow, secularism is the solution? Get over it, there’s only one Islam, the one preached by Our Holy Prophet pbuh 1400 years ago, and followed by his companions. In the broader spectrum, all Islamist parties are one on this issue

    Recommend

  • pravin
    Sep 14, 2011 - 1:02PM

    @muhamad ahasan khan
    Àgreed sir, but the solution lies in defining the future and working for that in the present.

    Recommend

  • Yassar Khattak
    Sep 14, 2011 - 1:49PM

    Do we? I never envisaged Jinnah as a Mullah even if the author thinks everyone does. Im sure we associate Jinnah with a western education who nevertheless understood the need of Muslims to have an Islamic state. A Jinnah cap and his sherwani give him a Pakistani identity, not an orthodox clergical one.

    Recommend

  • Owais
    Sep 14, 2011 - 1:58PM

    @Aziz Akhmad:

    I sent all the excerpts from the speeches of Quaid, but due to some reason it could not appear in the comments…
    Kindly see the article below and comment.
    https://www.facebook.com/notes/m-owais-mahmudi/jinnahs-vision-of-pakistan-secular-or-islamic/239528939415678

    Recommend

  • bk
    Sep 14, 2011 - 2:48PM

    @Vikram,

    it’s really heartening to hear from a hindu, because in general it’s very hard for a hindu to accept the greatness of Jinnah. They are very bised against Pakistanis. Even this concentration of prejudice can be found in Indian media, which is always keen in taken credit for it.

    Recommend

  • Sep 14, 2011 - 3:05PM

    @Was A Pakistani: Mr. Jinnah did not dupe anybody. We duped ourselves. Moulana Abul Kalam Azad had his own reasons for not migrating.

    Recommend

  • bk
    Sep 14, 2011 - 3:10PM

    I think it’s not about his life style whether it was pure islamic or westrenize, but what we and the entire world knows is what he promised to the people of subcontinent he did it to his best. and that was the creation of Pakistan. We in Pakistan may not realize the importance of our country but I believe it can best be known and understood from those who does not have their own like the indian muslims. He was the one who believed in unity of united india, but it was the indian leadership that compelled him for the demand of a separate homeland for the muslims of the subcontinent.

    Recommend

  • Ali Abbas
    Sep 14, 2011 - 3:50PM

    The article didn’t make any sense to me. I mean what does a shirwani or a suit has to do with Islam??
    just curious !!!

    Recommend

  • murassa sanaullah
    Sep 14, 2011 - 3:58PM

    Jinnah was was an human, he was agreat leader but he was not a religious man , i dont know why our historians change his image from apolitical leader to a muslim leader.the reason of making of pakistan wasto give the deprive muslim minority the equal oppertunity in every sector of life, he invited all other minorities to bjoinhim u can see in record he invited the sikhs also .

    Recommend

  • Mariam
    Sep 14, 2011 - 4:03PM

    @Owais:
    He didn’t establish khilafah state even though he had one year after independence
    Also he didn’t call himself khilifah but a governor general, and stressed on a constitution and political electoral system with parliament and not the Islamic form. He was a product of theoracracy .

    Recommend

  • M Umair Asghar
    Sep 14, 2011 - 4:04PM

    I agree with what you have written. Jinnah like all of us was a human being with pros and cons like any other person. he had special qualities no doubt but unfortunately the rulers ant the nation to stick with one image concealing the true picture. Jinnah would have never been ashamed if his nation knew about his life style.

    I will be thankful to you if post those pictures on tribune if possible. If not, then kindly send me them for my record and so taht i can upload and share them on facebook.

    Recommend

  • ammar
    Sep 14, 2011 - 4:55PM

    Dear Mr. Writer,
    I can show you picture of jinnah praying publically, I can bet on this, do you accept my challenge.
    Ammar

    Recommend

  • Zulfiqar
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:00PM

    @Owais: You are so so very wrong! See the quotes below from Mr M.A. Jinnah – while he certainly spoke of the principles of Islam, his references to this were in the context of equality, social justice and tolerance, not the rabid Islam that now infects Pakistan. All you people who try to wrap him in an Islamist banner should know that he had no truck with the Islamist loons like Maududi etc, which is why Mr Maududi and his goons spent all their time cursing Mr Jinnah… see below from Jinnah’s own speeches:

    ■The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam. Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1,300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fairplay 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.(Broadcast talk to the people of the United States of America on Pakistan recorded February, 1948.)

    ■ The great majority of us are Muslims. We follow the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed (may peace be upon him). We are members of the brotherhood of Islam in which all are equal in rights, dignity and self-respect. Consequently, we have a special and a very deep sense of unity. But make no mistake: Pakistan is not a theocracy or anything like it. (Broadcast talk to the people of Australia recorded on 19th February, 1948.)

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:02PM

    @ Vicram
    SMELL OF JEALOUSY STILL COMING FROM YOU SO POOR JE…….

    Recommend

  • Muhammad Ahsan Khan
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:06PM

    @pravin

    Agreed. For last 64 years we have been looking for the solution for the FUTURE. How many more years do we need?

    Recommend

  • Sep 14, 2011 - 5:16PM

    In Pakistan,there is a tendency to rewrite history as far as Jinnah,partition,and invasion of India is concerned of antiquty.Why ,we should bend facts I do not understand,may be I’m used to western or more of american view,that to write accurate history only strengthen society ,country and civilization.We in sub-continent take the opposite path,hence the distorted historical facts.This is not going to change in near future.My father was a war time correspondent of news paper called federral India ,published from Indore,he knew Gandhi,Jinnah and congress President Pattambi Seetharamiah,was his personnel friend,I remember him signing along with Mahatma a paper which we still have it framed and hang proudly in our sisters home in dohad,gujarat.I say this, as I rely more on my father’s first hand knowledge than books,which distort and bends facts in sub-continent,they do it even now.My father had high opinion of Gandhi,Jinnah,FDR,Mr Churchill and Degule,but very poor opinion of Mr Nehru and later of Indhira Gandhi,as I have grown older and have subsequently read on, my opinion has only reaffairmed my fathers unbiased reporter view,another fact,them days people took their craft more seriously.Some even today do,but rarely.Mr Jinnah,as event has proved ,was more right than Mr Gandhi,as far as partition is concerned,any fair minded person would agree that the sub-continent would be in greater tormoil than now,if India had remained united.Even BJP leadership concedes,congress can not,but they know it in their heart,but can not disown,Gandhi particularly nehru clan as that puts them in bad light and for political reason.But as far as Jinnah and Pakistan goes,they are convinced that the division of Pakistan from India was justified and for good.Most sane Indians believe also.As far as Mr Jinnah’s personnel habits and way of life goes,they are consistant a man can be totally non religious in ritualistic and dress code,yet in in core belief be a good non-praticing Muslim or Hindu or Jew or Christian.I’m myself one.There is no contradiction here.Dress or ritual do not make or unmake a man.PERIOD.

    Recommend

  • Sara
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:25PM

    “No photographer has ever been able to capture him clad in an Ahram performing Umrah or Hajj, or at an iftar party, or visiting and praying at shrines.” SERIOUSLY?
    Religion is sacred!! We do not need pictures of Jinnah during Hajj or Umrah!! We do not need such pictures to prove his FAITH or BELIEFS. Also our “Westernized” Jinnah believed in “Islamic Socialism.” Religion did play a very important role in our Independence. (:

    Recommend

  • Muhammad Ahsan Khan
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:44PM

    @Mariam

    You are right. He was not a Khalifah. A Khalifah represents the God Almighty.

    Mr Jinnah was only a learned (Western) human being. He was simply nominated a Governor General by George VI the emperor of the British Empire.

    He was a representative of the KING and not of Allaah nor that of the People of Pakistan. His job was to govern the people!!

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 14, 2011 - 5:48PM

    @ Ammar
    Please could you do this on this plateform of E.T which we are watching thank u man.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 14, 2011 - 6:26PM

    Islam does say about dress to cover your whole body but dont say what dress it is up
    to area peoples where they lived and dress with local culture this is a reason muslims
    around the world wear diffrent dreses so what is this mean if Quaid azam was wearing
    english suite its nothing to do with his thinging and by the way if we wear shalwar kamiz
    and do lot worst than those suite peoples i really dont understand the concept of article.

    Recommend

  • AA
    Sep 14, 2011 - 6:35PM

    @ Ammar:

    Yes, there is one picture of Jinnah praying one Eid, in Karachi Polo Ground, on 18 August 1947, four days after the birth of Pakistan. So?

    Recommend

  • Rock
    Sep 14, 2011 - 6:44PM

    @ARG: the word secular is third class. Do you know you are living in secular world where different religions exist? Please choose another world because this world is Secular.

    Recommend

  • MK
    Sep 14, 2011 - 6:59PM

    @Karachiwala:

    You wrote.

    ” Mr. Jinnah was not a prophet… He was not divinely guided as we have portrayed him. He was fallable. Mr. Jinnah’s Pakistan ended in 1971 and we now live in Army’s carved Pakistan.
    Criticizing Mr. Jinnah is not acceptable in Pakistan? Why? We should do a rational study of what we lost and what we didn’t. His views were defeatist as he preferred to escape rather than stay and fight for rights. Didn’t he believe in Muslim potential? Or was it his ego that consumed him. “

    Assumptions and pre judgments are a major cause of conflict, and apply in particular to people in South Asia region. Nowhere in the article as well as my previous comments it said or implied what you have mentioned in your first paragraph. Your ASSUMPTION on my and writers point of view is completely wrong.

    Criticizing Jinnah is acceptable and is happening at this forum as we read it. I disagree with your views about him (defeatist), however I respect your views and right to speak out about them.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 14, 2011 - 6:59PM

    @ Hari harmani
    Dear Hari we all knew that but west also twist the history too but you dont know we muslim know that because we regonised them as a book holder u got it i think so second
    partition was great thing we know since day one when allama Muhammad iqbal said it in early days and as a pakistani living in northren mountains we had nothing before partition
    now it is best to live in as far indian concern of pakistan is i dont agree with you india try
    many times to capture pakistan its a history now they cant do.Recommend

  • Faiz
    Sep 14, 2011 - 7:46PM

    I think the author and those who are supporting secularism are confused. Western dress in not a sign of secularism. For example, Dr. Zakir is always clad in western dress, but he is unchallengeable Muslim scholar in the world. He is an Islamist not a secular.

    And a challenge to all, can any one mention or quote the speech of Quaid-i-Azam, in which he explicitly used the word SECULARISM.

    Yes, he told to the people that everyone in this state is free to move to the mosques, temples, churches, etc. Quran and Khadis has mentioned numerous times that every religion must be respected in an Islamic state. There is no compulsion on religion

    What i have gauge for this secularism debate, that the secular wants freedom and not to create tolerance.Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 14, 2011 - 7:59PM

    @Maryam:

    There are a limited number of photographs that I have seen repeatedly in a few books. The best and very relevent that I see is in Akbar S Ahmad’s book on Jinnah. An Indian writer by the name of Dr Ajeet Jawed has a very good photograph of a very beautiful looking Ratna Bai Jinnah (Ruttie) that was not not available earlier to the Pakistani public. She (Dr Jawed) had quoted extensively from Indian sources and records.
    But maybe someone younger can compile and post every available photograph of Jinnah Sahab and his immediate family ( like the one from September 11 1948) when Dina had travelled to Pakistan to attend her father’s funeral and is photographed with Mohtarma Fatima Jinnah grieving together clad in black the traditional shia color used to demonstrate a sign of being in mourning.
    Also the movie on Jinnah has some very historic images of all the personalities who had interacted in the process of the creation of Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 14, 2011 - 8:31PM

    @Dr Mishra:

    You are probably reffering to Nusli Wadia, Dina Wadia’s son by her marraige to Neville Wadia in 1938. The marraige did not last and Neville Wadia who had converted to Christianity at the time when the marraige took place, reverted back to his Parsi beliefs. Jinnah had been reluctant to bless this marraige acknowledging his sense of identity of an Indian Musalman, though his disapproving actions may have been reinforced by his own personal experience where he had been denied the right to marry within the Ismaili Khoja community by the community leader the Aga Khan ( being a close friend of Ruttie’s father who had opposed Jinnah’s marraige to Ruttie). Jinnah’s marraige had to be consecrated and sanctified by a Shia Asnaashari Maulvi (The mainstream Shias). Ruttie is buried in a Khoja Asnaashari graveyard in Mumbai.
    Jinnah’s disapproval as South Asian parent in the first half of the twentieth century is sociologically understandable. Dina’s choice of staying on in India for the sake of her son who was raised in the Parsi tradition is also understandable. A Parsi grandson of Jinnah would have suffered rejection and scorn in what Pakistan has turned out to be.

    Recommend

  • Q
    Sep 14, 2011 - 8:32PM

    I am actually kinda surprised after reading this. I mean are you serious? People actually have a very 'Maulana' impression of Mr Jinnah? Well, quite honestly, I have seen images similar to the kind you have pointed out. Back in 2005, as a student of Fine Arts, I went with my college mates to see an exhibition at Mohatta Palace - Karachi and the entire place was covered with really large images of Jinnah showing him in western attire, enjoying a ciggerette and him being just the way he was. And it has always been pretty evident that Mr Jinnah was a very westernized man. For those who must have followed the drama serial once shown on PTV on Jinnah and also seen the movie would be able to point out that no where in the movie has the media tried giving an impression that Mr Jinnah was a maulana type man.

    I do agree that one shouldnt try portraying Jinnah as something he was not. I for one am not ashamed of him. He was a great man and he has done so much for us. All those Pakistani’s who think that Jinnah made the wrong decisions are thankless people. Jinnah did his best, after that it was and is our resposibility to see that the country progresses the way he had dreamed it would. Jinnah did not fail. We as a nation failed after his death.

    PS: Whether or not he performed the islamic rituals should seriously not concern others. By the end of the day everyone is responsible for his or herself’s results in from of the Almight so why the hell do we like deciding who is more religious then the rest?

    Recommend

  • Was A Pakistani
    Sep 14, 2011 - 9:51PM

    @MK:
    The open criticism of MAJ is not allowed in Pakistan. I have not at all prejudged him. I used to be a very pro-Jinnah person but reality is (you can disagree) it has done more damage to muslims than would have been the case. I dont have anyway of proving it so you can consider it to be my assessment which is open to criticism.
    It is happening on this forum because you have people from around the world. Do you think in a country where criticism of army is like committing blasphemy anything said about Jinnah will be tolerated who is the patron saint of Pakistan Army.
    there should be an open discussion on the creation of Pakistan. there is none. All believe it was divine but that is more thing fed to us than anything.
    If we can reconcile with the facts about our creation we will be able to fix things.

    Recommend

  • Sep 14, 2011 - 9:58PM

    I don’t know why Pakistani intellectuals are hell-bent on turning to secularism when they have such a perfect system in Islam and a country to implement it in. Have at it, and build a perfect Islamic society for the world to behold.

    Recommend

  • ARG
    Sep 14, 2011 - 10:55PM

    @Rock:
    secularism is separation of religion from the state, now, how can the world be secular as a whole?

    Recommend

  • Javed
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:26PM

    @Owais:
    You need to learn a lot before giving wrong statements with such confidence

    Recommend

  • amir jafri
    Sep 15, 2011 - 12:54AM

    Nice to see anti-Islam elements whistling in the dark…it won’t be long though.

    Pakistan’s paradox , dilemma , and conundrum:

    Those who converse in english are considered, mistakenly, as knowledgeable.
    Those who know arabic are considered, again mistakenly as pious and shareef.

    Pakistan has a glorious future and the anti-Islam forces are getting defeated and humiliated on all fronts. Once their Patron-Saint the United Satans of America becomes crumbles under its own weight, as did the USSR, , the world will be a safe place for everyone.

    Recommend

  • Sep 15, 2011 - 2:05AM

    For writer’s information, sherwani and chooridar pyjama or shalwar and a karakul cap these all are our traditional clothing rather than religious clothing and there is nothing wrong with wearing these types of clothes. wearing these doesn’t make you a devout muslim or an atheist.
    Secondly why are you so obsessed with western culture. Okay so he was a westernized man who liked wearing western clothes, so what? How does this make anything better? can’t we stay in our culture and praise it rather than adopting western culture specially in terms of clothing? what is sherwani or chooridar doing any harm to anyone. Its our culture sir, OUR TRADITIONAL DRESS. Please don’t criticize that.
    Thanks.

    Recommend

  • amir jafri
    Sep 15, 2011 - 2:28AM

    http://preserveurdu.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/قائد-اعظم-کی-زندگی-کا-روحانی-پہلو

    This is a very important write up about our beloved Quaid-i-azam…This should put to rest all the evil propaganda being unleashed relentlessly by the english-medium westoxicated seularoon and liberaloon to turn Pakistan into an image of their vile selves.

    This will never be allowed to happen by muslims

    Recommend

  • Ghazala Kazi
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:27AM

    @ARG: “Wow, secularism is the solution? Get over it, there’s only one Islam, the one preached by Our Holy Prophet pbuh 1400 years ago, and followed by his companions. In the broader spectrum, all Islamist parties are one on this issue”
    There is no visionary in any Muslim country who could do true Ijtehad/reforms in Islamic laws of 7th centuries for 21st century. Read Maudoodi’s Tafheem ul quran, he still believes that taking slaves in wars is halal and having female slaves for all purposes in ok too. If a slave tries to run, it is your right to kill him/her. He thinks that non-Muslims will be living as second class citizens in Muslims countries. Israr Ahmad says the same.
    Living head of biggest Islamic party in Pakistan does not know the difference between rape (zina baljabbar)and zina (consensual sex). He forbids women for coming forward to complain about rape. And these people have enacted Hadood ordance in Pakistan where women serve prison sentence if they bring charges of rape to court.
    All mullah think that women should have less in share of the property. Women’s witness should be 1/2 of men. In Saudi Arabia pre-teen boys have more rights than women. You can see this wherever Islamic laws are in place.
    About other punishments, if you chop a thief’s hands, he will not be able to earn anymore. Do you think that this system should be in place in 21st century? If you want this system then do not call it a just and equal system.
    And, do not call secular system, third rate system that gives you freedom to practice your religion without state’s interference. Euorope has learnt a lesson from theocracy and this is the reason they are staying away from it and thisis what Quid e Azam said in his speech of August 13, 1947, “ the people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation..”
    Pakistan is seeing the affects of hyper religiosity. Everyone thinks other is either kafir or murtad. Everyone is acting like agent of God, ready to kill a blasphemer. Minorities are being persecuted. They have to realize one day that secularism is the only system that will save them from each other. I hope it is not too late then. Regards.

    Recommend

  • Sameer Qadir
    Sep 15, 2011 - 9:07AM

    The West should realize that we are truly the pioneers of Photo Shop and the first photo transformed when our currency notes were issued.Three cheers for Quad-i-Azam Mohamed Ali Jinnah hip hip hooray.

    Recommend

  • shoaib mir
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:13AM

    Aziz Akhmad could not be more correct.

    As matter of fact the analogy cannot be restricted to “The Jinnah we don’t want to know” – it may be extended to:

    The Islam we don’t want to know;
    The Quran we don’t want to know;
    The Muhammad we don’t want to know;
    The Islamic history we don’t want to know…

    The list could be endless!Recommend

  • Marc
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:48AM

    @bk:
    Take it from me, the present generation of Hindus in India, at least 99 per cent of them, think Jinnah is a visionary and he did the right thing by asking for Pakistan.

    If you come to India, you will find everyone (except may be a handful of Punjabis) accept that Partition is a good thing and Jinnah’s solution was the best under the circumstances. Recommend

  • Bigboy
    Sep 15, 2011 - 12:21PM

    Jinnah was the Pied Piper, who led the Muslims of India to the promised land. The doors of this land were shut before all Muslims could get in. 1/3 of them were left behind, amongst a brute majority belonging to a different quam, after being shown dreams of the promised land. 25 years of living in the new promised land, convinced more then 1/2 of those who had originally followed their Pied Piper, that they were better off creating a new land for themselves.

    Recommend

  • Jayant Moghe
    Sep 15, 2011 - 12:38PM

    Jinnah married a Parsi (who of course converted to Islam) but excommunicated his only daughter when she married a Parsi and he never met his daughter after that. He may not have been a practicing Muslim but secular he was not, no matter what clothes he wore. I am glad he created Pakistan because if he handn’t by now we would have had a civil war within United India in which millions more would have died than during the partition.

    Recommend

  • baloch
    Sep 15, 2011 - 1:59PM

    @Owais: if Jinnah wanted an islamic state, he would have named it as Islamic Republic of Pakistan, whether before or after independence. He DID NOT. Enough said!

    Recommend

  • Muhammad Ahsan Khan
    Sep 15, 2011 - 2:23PM

    @shoaib mir

    “The Islam we don’t want to know;
    The Quran we don’t want to know;
    The Muhammad we don’t want to know;
    The Islamic history we don’t want to know…”

    Were the above True, we would have a SECULAR Democratic Pakistan and not the ISLAMIC Republic of Pakistan!!

    Recommend

  • Hanif
    Sep 15, 2011 - 4:23PM

    Not a good article, the writer could have gone on to shed some light on the lighter side not with the help of picture but with the help of few anecdotes. Either the caption of the article was in correct or the content not well thought.

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 4:40PM

    @amir jafri:

    In today’s Italy family surnames that provided Popes thru Catholic History have no special relavence. In the same way, if and when secularism finds place within Muslim societies, people who have special claims to Arabic heritage may not find the same relavence.
    Are you aware that there is enough evidence to suggest that Jinnah’s parents or maybe a couple of generations earlier have converted to Islam from the Hindu Lohana Bania community.
    Coincidently Gandhi is also claimed by this community as one of their own.
    The hardest to drag into the twenty first century will be those that have a special place in Muslim society in religious terms purely by virtue of their birth, much like the caste system that exists across the border.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:50PM

    @Ghazala Kazi:

    I hope ET publishes this response.

    Allah’s Judgement and decree is better than ours, so dont waste your energy about it. The fear of punishment for a thief will prevent him even thinking of stealing and will hold the other’s property even more sacred.

    The Islamic injunctions said so, but there is no slavery in the 21st century.

    Ironically the liberals issue “certificates” of humanity more than mullahs do and start judging who is human by their “standards”! :D

    The Noble Quran has itself decreed the share of women, as well as clearly stated that 2 women witnesses equal 1 man witness.

    Dont compare Islam with Christianity, all sects in Islam are same on the basic injunctions like Oneness of Allah, Finality of Prophethood etc

    secular system is a third rate system. Whats wrong if I call a spade a spade?Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:51PM

    @Muhammad Ahsan Khan:

    secularism is separation of religion from the state, where does that exist in Islam?

    liberals need serious intellectual treatment to help them come out of the mental cesspool they reside in.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 15, 2011 - 6:02PM

    @ Jayant Moghe and like others
    I think too and thank to one god for creating pakistan and you know why because of this
    country we many native peoples got many opurtunties which we never had before partition
    we firast generation went to school our towns saw electricity have road even our children
    got scholarship and went to overseas for higher education and best of all because of pakistan all central asia got freedom and we are the doorway to mid east what else we
    want more what ever happening now its not gonna stay like that forever this is my believe
    ( Hava tayz chalti hai shaheen ko ouncha odhane kay lye) we are thankfull to Jinnah
    the true Qauid azam of indian sub contienent Pakistan and Jinnah zindabad.

    Recommend

  • amir jafri
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:25PM

    @Abbas from the US:

    and that precisely is the logic..to kick out the every trace of colonialism and set the clock back to the time before the British arrived in India. Once USA collapses, which by all indications is not too far, the entire western society will be history and the dark ages of these baboons and Langoors will “dawn” (haa haa haa )…There is still time for seculars, Liberals in Pakistan, to do taubaa and reaffix their qibla.Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:30PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    My earlier response to Jafri applies to Mr Gilani or Arabiya as well.

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 8:32PM

    @amir jafri:
    and that precisely is the logic..to kick out the every trace of colonialism and set the clock back to the time before the British arrived in India. Once USA collapses, which by all indications is not too far, the entire western society will be history and the dark ages of these baboons and Langoors will “dawn” (haa haa haa )…There is still time for seculars, Liberals in Pakistan, to do taubaa and reaffix their qibla.

    while kicking out traces of colonialism from the British times, you may need to undo the entire railway system, roads that are paved, all buildings from the time, not to forget the airports that were very rudimentary that were left behind etc.

    As for the collapse of the United States you apparently have no clue of what you are talking about. If the collapse of the US was imminent, why does those countries like China keep on investing their every last cent saved in the US treasuries week after week. While demanding the right to invest in key areas where the US still restricts them from investing.

    Recommend

  • amir jafri
    Sep 15, 2011 - 9:06PM

    @Abbas from the US:

    good accounting! and the west be also reduced to their slum status that was before they plundered and looted glorious civilizations of the Muslims and the East. But again, they are doing a fine job of it themselves….China is holding them by their tail and twisting and tweaking it with fun and laughter.

    Forget this not China has already said that itwant a controlled demolition of the US..a bang would would be hurt their friends. They are in Control not the United States of America. Dump your dollars before it is too late. Again, do tauba and reaffix your qibla.Recommend

  • Ghazala Kazi
    Sep 15, 2011 - 10:03PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani: “The Islamic injunctions said so, but there is no slavery in the 21st century.” “secular system is a third rate system. Whats wrong if I call a spade a spade?”

    You cannot have slavery in 21st century because of Abraham Lincoln. Although according to you it is Quranic injunction. So why are you not following the nobel Quran on this issue and instead following a Western Christian? If you are following a Western Christian on this issue, what makes you apply 7th century’s unjust laws on women and minoriy? Why can’t you say the same what you said about slavery that there is no unequal treatment of women and minority in 21st century? Why can’t you say that Women are equally intelligent and can be equal in the eyes of laws? Isn’t it hypocritical to follow one but not follow the other?

    You think if is ok to chop hands of people because it prevents people from stealing. Tell me then why people still kill in countries where they are hanged for killing? You also don’t think it is wrong to imprison women who are raped. And you call them divine laws. But secular laws which treat every person equal in the eyes of law is a third rate system?

    I don’t think any truth, any evidence is enough to change your opinion because it is not based on rational thoughts. I am not surprised though, majority Muslim are led to believe that unjust laws of 7th centuries are the best laws. They don’t want to see the misery they have been creating for for people. They are confusing politics with faith. One of our poet said it the best.

    Gozishta ahad Guzernay main hee naheen aata
    yah hadsa bhee likho mojazoN kay khanay main
    Jo radd huway Thay jahan main ka-ee sadde pahlay
    wo log hum pay mussalatt haiN is zamanay maiN

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 10:21PM

    @amir jafri:

    If China was in control how come the Chines goverment released a statement yesterday that they cannot continue their growth strategies without the Western economies in growth mode? If the Western economies stagnate they will stagnate and the smaller lilliputian economies that survive on Western aid will be in considerably more pain than they currently are in. And for your lack of obvious informatiion even today 20% of the world economy is owned by the US with a population one fifth of China. a fouteen trillion dollar economy versus the present Chinese economy of around 10 Trillion.
    The controlled collapse of the US is the wishful thinking of that group of Pakistani people whose loyalties to Pakistan is suspect. They have in their hearts pledged allegiances to Iran and Saudi Arabia, and work only for their ideological interests.

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:04PM

    @Ghazala Kazi:

    As I said earlier to Gilani, these people have values right from the middle ages. They confuse progressive values that all major civilizations have made contributions to in terms of human progress and mental emancipation with Christianity. These are the basic minimum points which all humanity is in agreement with including the other non monotheistic civilization of China and India.
    There is without a shadow of doubt the biggest disregard for women’s rights in Muslim societies. While the rest of the world including India and China making attempts to redress the inequities that exist in their societies. Only in societies like Pakistan an attempt is made to formally conduct brutality against women under the guise of these ordanances. issued by usurpers against the constitution of Pakistan.
    Where an attempt at legal recourse by a woman can lead to being accused of crimes of adultery, and the punishment of death by stoning, right from the middle ages. It is no wonder that repeatedly UN agency reports on women’s rights rank Pakistan amongst the lowest in the world.

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:09PM

    @Ghazala Kazi:

    And the sad part is that this discussion is taking place, where Jinnah is being talked about.
    Jinnah was amongst the first to recognize the equality of women. It is amazing that a hudnred years ago when Indian Muslim women rarely ventured outside their homes leave alonge to universities, he sent his sister Fatima to a professional school of dentistry.

    Recommend

  • Doctor
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:28PM

    In Pakistan we are masters of covering up history. We believe we’re Arabs. We forget about the Indus Valley Civilization. We think our grand Armed Forces have won all 4 wars they have fought despite losing all of them.

    Recommend

  • Cynical
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:37PM

    Jinnah was neither secular nor communal, he was a lawyear who found a client in the ‘muslims’ of the sub-continent. He faught their case succesfully for himself for sure. Whether he won it for his clients with the same degree of certainty is debatable.
    But that he was consumed by his ego and was not unduly(?) burdened by moralities in his actions, is beyond any shade of doubt.

    Recommend

  • Mariam Khan
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:51PM

    Saying any thing against Jinnah is like a blasphemy but on one can deny the history..there was an other side of Jinnah ..yes from our early school days till to the level of graduation Jinnah is portrayed as a very pious and religious man….we are taught not to ask any question about Jinnah other then his famous 14 points and his famous slogan “unity, faith and discipline”…

    Recommend

  • Sep 16, 2011 - 2:03PM

    @Abbas:
    This was the same conclusion reached by Munir Report (in fact the said report was prepared by Justice MR Kayani, but it became famous under the commission’s bosses name) came to. That was in the early 50s. Every mullah/maulana would rather declare those belonging to other confessions as Wajib ul qatl .
    The question is whether the slogan of Unity, Faith and Discipline has validity any longer.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 16, 2011 - 7:09PM

    @Ghazala Kazi:

    Fact is, that in the 7th century, slavery was common, but you forget that Islamic injunctions told that slaves should be fed and clothed and it was a very good deed if you freed one. On the other hand, you also forget the inhumane treatment done by slaves in the West, and also the struggle for the rights of blacks in the US. Abraham Lincoln or not, slavery is not existent today, and so much of the Islamic injunctions regarding them have ceased to function.

    Give me an example to prove your point. Just compare the rate of murders in the USA, to a country having the death penalty e.g. Saudi Arabia( and I know you will have a jeer when you read this line).

    Dear, like it or not, Islamic injunctions are clear, your desires can not over-write the statements of the Noble Quran.

    And when did I say its correct to imprison raped women? secularists love putting words in the others mouth, like they do for the case of Quaid-e-Azam!

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 16, 2011 - 7:12PM

    @Abid Khan:

    Wasnt Justice Munir the same person who validated General Zia’s rule? :D

    Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 16, 2011 - 8:53PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    Sure Slavery may have been common in the seventh century. And if it was abolished by Britain in the 1100 AD, in 1943 it ended officially in India by the British, by the last major Western secular government under Abraham Lincoln in 1864 it took another 100 years for the last officially recognised location for slavery in the Muslim world to officially end in 1962 in Saudi Arabia and .1963 in Yemen.
    Though there are still cases of slavery identified in places in the Islamic world including in Mauritania as recently as few years ago.
    By the way cases of women being barbarically stoned to death for adultery are still being reported from Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Those that are simply incarcerated for lengthy terms are the lucky ones.

    Recommend

  • Nazir A. Khan Swati
    Sep 16, 2011 - 9:01PM

    Also try to read other 2 biographies by Quides private secretaries. Both are relied upon by most of biographers if u check bibliographies.He approved same by writing Forewards/Prefaces. He said PAKISTAN was created when first Hindu converted to Islam who was excommunicated. He advocated AKHUND Hindustan initially but met diasappiontment due to hardliner Brahmins like Motilal Nehru etc.Then he advocated separate homeland for Muslims and was able to convince the Crown. His 11th Aug1947 speach says unequivacally ;NOT IN THE RELIGIOUS SENSE. So he was firm believer in TNT..

    Recommend

  • mind control
    Sep 17, 2011 - 12:00AM

    @Ali Tanoli

    I think too and thank to one god for creating pakistan and you know why because of this
    country we many native peoples got many opurtunties which we never had before partition
    we firast generation went to school

    I was under the impression that people like the Ali brothers of AMU fame,Iqbal, Sir Badruddin Tayabbji, Suhrawardy, Khan Zafaarullah Khan and M.A. Jinnah and thousands of others. all were born before Pakistan and were also well educated. But if you are sure they never went to school ,who am I to argue with that.

    our towns saw electricity have road

    Are you sure your towns have electricity. I thought you had a severe power crisis.

    even our children got scholarship and went to overseas for higher education

    And who went to do Jihad in Afghanistan and Kashmir,whose children are they?

    what ever happening now its gonna stay like that forever this is my believe

    You mean Taseers will get pumped with bullets and Qadris will go on getting garlanded and vans carrying small children will get fired upon and the funeral procressions will get bombed? FOR EVER?
    Lord have mercy on us.

    Recommend

  • anup
    Sep 17, 2011 - 3:24AM

    I think Mr. Jinah wanted a state for indian muslims so that they could develop fully. In a democratic india muslims being a minority would have been at disadvantage by simple democratic logic. It was the easiest and simplest solution to a complex question of freedom and self rule which india sought for itself. In 1947, political fate of a united india was very bleak indeed due to so much of diversity and differences in culture, tradition and philosophy. Indeed having a country with a single philosophy would have been a safe bet for long term stable country. So though pakistan had this advantage early on but it could not capitalise it. Unfortunately for pakistan Mr. Jinnah did not live much longer after birth of pakistan. I feel what Mr. Jinnah wanted for pakistan is what India actually did for itself. I feel Mr. Jinnah a great man and visionary but unfortunately he did not live long enough to build a strong foundation for pakistan.

    Recommend

  • Muhammad Ahsan Khan
    Sep 17, 2011 - 4:54PM

    Dear Aziz,

    Congretulations. You have made your Century!!

    Ahsan

    Recommend

  • AA
    Sep 17, 2011 - 7:59PM

    @Muhammad Ahsan Khan:

    When I wrote the piece, little did I now I was kicking a hornet’s nest. All I wanted to say was we do not need to doctor Jinnah’s personality in our own image. Regardless of his personal beliefs or habits, he was Pakistan’s Quaid-e-Azam, and his achievement was unprecedented.

    Incidentally, the last paragraph of the piece was dropped by the editor for reasons of space. It said, among other things,:

    In 2004, when Jinnah’s daughter, Dina Wadia, visited her father’s mausoleum, first time after his death, she wrote in the visitors’ book: “It has been a wonderful and sad [visit] for me. May [my father’s] dream for Pakistan come true.”

    What was her father’s dream? Some say it was spelled out in his speech on 11 August, 1947. Others don’t agree. That’s probably why the 100 comments above.

    Recommend

  • Ghazala Kazi
    Sep 17, 2011 - 9:17PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani: “Give me an example to prove your point. Just compare the rate of murders in the USA, to a country having the death penalty e.g. Saudi Arabia( and I know you will have a jeer when you read this line).”

    I do understand now where you are coming from; Saudi Arabia is your model country. It means that human rights, women rights, freedom of speech and expression, freedom to practice your religious beliefs, justice and equality for everyone including women and minority means nothing to you. Fairness and Justice is not your objective. I now understand why you did not comment on my question asking you the current Islamic law in Pakistan, Hadood Ordance in which women who are raped are imprisoned due to lack of understanding of rape and consensual sex by most religious scholars of the country.

    I am sure crime rate in Suadi Arabia is lower because poor thieves’ hands are chopped for stealing. However, if you are rich in Saudi Arabia then killing a poor does not mean you will be hanged. You can always pay blood money to set yourself free. These tribal laws of 7th century may be working for Saudi Arabia because they are still in that phase of human development (however, current unrest by women and Shia minority say that they are also fed up with injustices) If you want to live by these codes, fine but do not tell un-suspecting fellow Pakistani that these are just laws and they will bring equality in human society. This is not only a lie but it also malign Islam and gives a message to the world that Islam is not a just religion.

    Recommend

  • omg!
    Sep 17, 2011 - 11:28PM

    Gandhi died by assassination, Jinnah died because of his devotion.

    Jinnah’s death is the reason Pak-India is not together. The same i expect from Gandhi and Nehru, but unluckily hypocritical non-violence of Gandhi, which he left after 15 Aug 1947. It makes only Jinnah to me a pure leader.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 18, 2011 - 2:22AM

    @Ghazala Kazi:

    I was expecting your answer. Its amusing to see liberals assume things about others. Fact is, that implementation of any law should be corrected if its misused, but the punishment should be intact with Islam.

    You say ” It means that human rights, women rights, freedom of speech and expression, freedom to practice your religious beliefs, justice and equality for everyone including women and minority means nothing to you. Fairness and Justice is not your objective. “

    Kindly tell where I have said Islam denies human rights and all other “virtues” which liberals attach to third-rate secularism!

    Recommend

  • Sep 18, 2011 - 5:39PM

    In May 1948 the Quaid-e-Azam moved to Ziarat for rest where he remained under medical treatment of a team of doctors including Dr. Riaz Ali Shah till his death in September 1948. According to Dr. Riaz Ali Shah’s Diary (Publishing House, Bull Road publication 1950) the Quaid-e-Azam was stated to have said that i did my job and now it’s the duty of people of Pakistan to run Pakistan on the principles KHILAFAT E RASHIDA (ISLAMIC CALIPHATE SYSTEM).

    Recommend

  • Ghazala Kazi
    Sep 18, 2011 - 6:38PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:”Kindly tell where I have said Islam denies human rights and all other “virtues” which liberals attach to third-rate secularism!”

    Just look at the model Islamic state that you mentioned, Saudi Arabia and you will get the answer to your question. If you still insist on your view then it means you have not grasped the concept of human rights, women’s rights, equality and justice.
    Secularism is the best answer to this diverse and developed world. It gives equal rights to women and religious minority, no ifs or buts. These so called Islamic laws are unequal, unjust and are not part of our faith. These were laws of 7th century tribal system. Islam that I understand is just. Equal laws will not make Islam go away. Islam will remain in people’s hearts where it belongs and not in public places and on your sleeves for show-off. Someone said it right, it was made on the name of Islam and it is being destroyed in the name of Islam. Pakistani has to know this truth to save themselves from destruction.

    Recommend

  • Ghazala Kazi
    Sep 18, 2011 - 9:40PM

    @Abbas from the US:
    I agree with every word of your post below.

    As I said earlier to Gilani, these people have values right from the middle ages. They confuse progressive values that all major civilizations have made contributions to in terms of human progress and mental emancipation with Christianity. These are the basic minimum points which all humanity is in agreement with including the other non monotheistic civilization of China and India.
    There is without a shadow of doubt the biggest disregard for women’s rights in Muslim societies. While the rest of the world including India and China making attempts to redress the inequities that exist in their societies. Only in societies like Pakistan an attempt is made to formally conduct brutality against women under the guise of these ordanances. issued by usurpers against the constitution of Pakistan.
    Where an attempt at legal recourse by a woman can lead to being accused of crimes of adultery, and the punishment of death by stoning, right from the middle ages. It is no wonder that repeatedly UN agency reports on women’s rights rank Pakistan amongst the lowest in the world.

    Recommend

  • Cynical
    Sep 20, 2011 - 8:34PM

    @the Skunk

    “Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had his own reasons for not migrating”

    Please, can you throw some lights on those ‘his own reasons’.
    I guess that would be of some interest to the historians.
    My own belief is that he didn’t migrate for the sole reason that ‘he didn’t belive in the two naton theory’.

    Recommend

  • Fahad
    Sep 30, 2011 - 10:55PM

    what made Pakistan and India?..two nation theory..and that was not put forward by one man but a nation. everybody has the right to practice their religion free of judgment and criticism. Quaid-e-Azam did say that Pakistan was our land, a place to call our own, a place from where we can represent our separate identity as “Muslim” State and i emphasize on the word muslim because it represents the people who practice Islam and in this case it represents the majority population of pakistan but that did not mean that there was no place for people from other religions in pakistan. and by the way why are we judging a person for what he wore? if that were the scale on which a persons loyalty to his nation is measured then we are all supreme hypocrites. we can point fingers to place the blames on our desired scape goats but the fact remains that even if Quaid-e-azam did not setup an Islamic setup during the first years of when Pakistan was founded then neither did the people who came after that and there was no intervention from any other Islamic state on that behalf either. sadly disappointed by how judgmental people can be based on just a paragraph.

    Recommend

  • Tarun
    Oct 8, 2011 - 7:40PM

    The basic problem with Jinnah was that he looked upon India with the same black and white lens that he got in Europe. Indeed Nehru did too but changed under the influence of gandhi. To box india into 2 neatly divided components of Hindu and Muslim was the height of folly and simplistic thinking. I believe that Jinnah’s impact of creating pakistan will be far more significant now than over the last 63 years( although pak did help in dissolution of soviet union). The rise of Taliban and the complete breakdown in pakistan will be followed by a rise in a united talibanized islamic block with nuclear weapons and influence but without any economic strength. This will eventually lead to a destruction of US influence and US order in Middle East that underwrites American power and force America to allign with India giving us all the technology and benefits without the strings attached. For pakistan ironically has opened a vista of opportunity for India that could never have existed in our dreams as it is the cause of the destruction of not one but two superpowers both of which had(USSR) and will (US) give India the prize as they go down- unfettered access to technology. The islamic world and china will now face ruin as they are forced to gravitate towards a jihadized afpak and away fron usa.

    Recommend

  • let there be peace
    Oct 8, 2011 - 10:40PM

    Interesting possibilities. I read somewhere the contribution of technology of Germany was significant to US’s development. However no one can predict what course China will take in future. Also we may have bumpy road ahead in case Islamists drag the world in a major war by actually using nuclear weapons (which is not impossible scenario considering they happily blow themselves with suicide vests) in which case India and Israel will be the ones at risk of direct nuclear attack.

    Recommend

More in Opinion