RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT

AND ITS OPPOSITION TO EMERGENCE OF PAKISTAN

Two Islams and the Contending Forces

A true picture of the contending forces in the Pakistan Movement and the points of controversy then raging has not emerged because, unfortunately, neither an authentic account of the Pakistan Movement, nor a biography of any standard of the Quaid-e-Azam

Has been compiled as yet. The force opposing Allama Iqbal and the Quaid-e-Azam were not only Hindus but also the religious establishment. The point of controversy with the latter was a concept of Islam put forward by it which is different from that presented by Allama Iqbal and the Quaid-e-Azam. The former model was fashioned under auspices of despotic kings and sultans, and the latter model is based on the Book of Allah.

Concept of Nationhood

The pronouncement by Allama Iqbal, that nationhood based on country was against Islamic principles was understood neither by Sheikhul Hadith of Deoband, late Hussain Ahmad Madani, nor by other luminaries including Maulana Azad, Mufti Kifayatullah, Maulana Ahmad Saeed, Ulema of the Majlis-I-Ahrar and the renowned late Maulana Maudoodi. However, it was well understood by Hindus.

Specimens of Excommunication

Excommunication, or exclusion from Islam has been a favourite and freely used and abused weapon of the religious hierarchy against those who oppose it or criticize it. The Ulema do not hesitate to deploy it in fights amongst themselves-one faction against the other. This hierarchy declared even an Islamic luminary like Allama Iqbal a non-believer. They labeled the Quaid-e-Azam too an arch heretic. A prominent leader of the Ahrar, (Maulana) Mazhar Ali Azhar, in a libelous manner said (in verse): -

He forsook Islam for love of a nonbeliever woman,

Is this a Great Leader or an arch heretic!

Maulana Madani left Muslim League to join Indian National Congress because the latter did not pay him fifty thousand rupees. According to his edict: -

"Joining Muslim League is forbidden for Muslims and the Quaid-e-Azam is an arch heretic."(Tahreek-e-Pakistan aur Nationalist Ulama)

Lastly an exclusionist edict of the Brelvi Sect: -

"According to the Sharia, Mr. Jinnah, because of his palpably heretical beliefs, is an apostate and out of the pale of Islam. Any person who, after being aware of the fact of his heresy, deems him to be a Muslim or does not deem him to be an apostate, or has doubts about the fact of his being an apostate and a heretic, or hesitates to pronounce him an apostate, is also a non-believer, an apostate and a malefactor; and an accursed one if he (or she) dies unrepentant!" (Minjanib Ahl-e-Sunnah min Ahlulfitnah (a Brelwi sect publication, p.22)

According to the Qura'n, too, there are only two nations in the world, one that lives according to divine revelations preserved in the Qur'an, and the other that does not accept this way of life. According to the Qur'an: -

God is who created you; then some of you turned unbelievers and some accepted the faith".

At the time that the topic of a united India had become a matter of controversy, Lala Lajpat Rai, a very militant Hindu, wrote a letter to Mr. C.R. Das: -

"I have spent most of my time in last six months in studying Islamic history and Islamic laws and I have arrived at the conclusion that this matter (unity between Hindus and Muslims) is unworkable and impracticable. From the core of my heart I am for Hindu-Muslim unity and for this purpose I am prepared to trust Muslim leaders, but what shall we do with injunctions of Quran and Hadith. Muslim leaders cannot abrogate them" (The Marhatta, February 2, 1940)

He was wrong. "Why can we not? That is just what we have been doing for the last thousand years! We shall do that again! " chivalrously protested the religious establishment. And they did. Whenever the enemies of Islam conspired to harm Muslims, they found people from amongst Muslims to serve as their tools. The Two Nation theory was one of the basic principles of Islam and the Hindus were opposing it for political reasons. But they found people from amongst Muslims who outdid them in opposing this idea. Religious leaders, the "Nationalist" Ulama were leading them. Hindus were pleased that Muslim religious leaders were opposing the very idea that Allama Iqbal and the Quaid-e-Azam were putting forward in name of the religion. The climax of this opposition came when in the beginning of year 1938 Maulana Hussein Ahmad Madani, speaking in a public meeting in Delhi said, "Nations are based on countries, not religion".

It is remarkable that this slogan was raised by the "Sheikhul Hadeeth" (Principal Theologian) of the top most religious institute of learning, the Darul Aloom of Deoband. Allama Iqbal was on his deathbed at the time. His reaction to this Unislamic response came in the form of his Persian couplet: -

Non-Arabs do not yet know mysteries of the Faith,

What mockery, that Hussain Ahmad from Deoband,

Sang from the pulpit that nations are based on territory,

0How ignorant is he of the grandeur of Muhammad of Arabia!

Allama Iqbal asserted that there is only one nation opposed to the Muslim Umma, and that is the nation of non-Muslims! In other words, the world is divided into two camps, the Muslims and Non-muslims. By way of illustration he said in a verse: -

If Nations were based on countries,

Muhammad would not call Bu Lahb to the Faith.

Alliance by Religious Parties

How deadly is politics in cloak of religion, can only be judged by people who have studied the history of religion and politics. When politics are played in the guise of religion, there is no safety for anyone's life, wealth, honour, or beliefs. Even more in danger is truth itself. There is no survival, either for knowledge or for vision. Humanity is then at the mercy of iron claws of the religious hierarchy.

Islam of the Maulvi

In British India, standpoint of Ulema was that if Muslims were given freedom for observing their personal law such as Nikah, Divorce etc., Islam could co-exist even with a secular system of government. Late Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madani, who was the main exponent amongst the Ulema, was saying that all Indians should make a united effort for achieving a joint democratic government of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians. Such a joint independence, in his view, was in absolute harmony with Islamic principles. (Zamzam, July 7, 1938) According to him Hindus were guaranteeing safety for Islam and "Proposals keep coming to the (Indian National) Congress and being approved, for safeguarding Islam's honour and status." (The pamphlet by Maulana

Madani, P.71 that he published as a rejoinder to Allama Iqbal). Hearing this view of Maulana Madni, Allama Iqbal said: -

"(Just) because the Mullah has the liberty in India to prostrate himself,

The dupe thinks that Islam is free."

One should remember that a “religion” can make compromises with any concept, any system and any institution, but a “faith” is inherently independent.