Pervez Hoodbhoy says Jinnah was wrong and 1947 partition was a tragedy

[Apprentice]

Its quite obvious liberals like Pervez Hoodbhoy would not have supported the creation of Pakistan in 1947. While its true that religious scholars differed on creating Pakistan, but each of their views were based on what they thought would have been the most beneficial for the Muslims of the subcontinent , for example many pro-Pakistan ulema abandoned supporting Pakistan after 1947 and similarly many anti-Pakistan ulema who had opposed Quaid e Azam previously supported creation of Pakistan after 1947. These changes of opinions were each scholars personal assessment of whether Pakistan was more advantageous or more disadvantageous to Muslims.

However liberals by definition can never support or be loyal to the concept of Pakistan and therefore they can be expected to utter trash like Hoodbhoy. We also must remember that Hoodbhoy has been a staunch supporter of the secularisation of Pakistan, but even he has to admit Pakistan's religious basis and ideology.

Sabrang Alternative News Network

4. Was Jinnah in favour of dividing the sub-continent on religious grounds?

His Two-Nation theory was exactly that. He said that Hindus and Muslim could not live together as one nation. I personally think he was wrong.

Pak was born in a state of confusion: Hoodbhoy - Times of India

HYDERABAD: Pakistan is a nation that was born in confusion, is still in confusion but will move out of it in the future - hoped eminent nuclear physicist and author Pervez Hoodbhoy who has, for long, been a champion of the "secular state" notion. "Though I know that it is not welcome in my country and people who deviate from the notion that it is an Islamic state, are looked upon disapprovingly, I strongly feel that's what we need to head towards," Hoodbhoy reiterated.

He was speaking at a session on 'Reimagining Pakistan', organised as part of the ongoing Hyderabad Literary Festival. The Pakistani scholar was joined by Venkat Dhulipala, a US-based professor, historian and writer, on the dais.

The conversation about a secular Pakistan, took both the authors back in history - to the time of partition and Jinnah's fight for a separate "Muslim" nation. While Hoodbhoy spoke of Muhammad Ali Jinnah as a "confused" man whose idea of separating a Hindu nation from a Muslim one fell flat when "east Pakistan broke away in 1971" to form Bangladesh, Dhulipala, quoting from popular theories, painted the founder of Pakistan as a "secular person". "It has been a broadly accepted axiomatic truth that Jinnah wanted it (Pakistan) to be a European style nation state based on secular democracy. And if only he had stuck around longer, he would have been able to nurture that dream. Pakistan would have then emerged as a mirror image of India," the author of 'Creating a New Medina' stated.

Hoodbhoy politely disagreed. Elaborating on his views of Jinnah, the author said how "he didn't have a clue" about what he said or wanted. "On the one hand he spoke of all citizens - irrespective of religion - being equals and on the other he wanted Pakistan to be an Islamic State. Sadly, neither he nor anybody till date knows what an Islamic State is," the 66-year-old scholar said, pointing out to his co-panelist how his country, at one point, was indeed a mirror image of India.

"When I grew up in Karachi (he was born three years after partition) our neighbourhood comprised Parsis, Christians and Hindus. We all shared perfect goodwill - as was true of many other neighbourhoods. There were wine stores all over the city. It was actually just like Bombay (Mumbai)," Hoodbhoy reminisced, ruing how his country then "was very different from the country that it has become today".

Harping on the 1947 incident being an "unspeakable tragedy" that "separated people who at one time could live together in peace", the Pakistani writer sincerely prayed that Pakistan, one day, grows into a country where "every citizen has exactly the same right and privileges as of any other, irrespective of their religion, language, class or race".

Quote:

On the one hand he spoke of all citizens - irrespective of religion - being equals and on the other he wanted Pakistan to be an Islamic State. Sadly, neither he nor anybody till date knows what an Islamic State is

 

[Sipahi]

That is why I hate these cheap intellectuals

 

[Kakaspai]

He should move to India and join Hindus in their movement of akhand Bharat

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

This guy is turning into a total azzhole... He should stick with teaching nuclear physics insteads of becoming a historian or a social scientist... Dumbass goes over board..

 

[Ghazwa e Hind]

Anyone remember the penalty of even questioning HOLOCAUST in west??? just do same with him! He is a supporter of westernization. Just give him some taste of that.

 

[Fracker]

1947 was a tragedy, But Jinnah wasn't wrong. 1947 Tragedy only happen since Jinnah was right. Things could be much peaceful if Hindus and Sikh didn't started genocide of Muslims and Accepted the reality (Which they and Hoodbhoy kind of secular are still not accepting). Pakistan was reality as Muslim Nation back then, so do they are now.

Akhad Bharat Lovers can go to hell..

 

[Bornubus]

Partition was the best thing happened in Indian subcontinent and equally stupid is the idea of Akhand Bharat both politically and Culturally,if it wasn't for 1947 we would've revolted for a partition in future anyway.

Thanks Jinnah and congress.

 

[I.R.A]

Pervaiz Boobjoy is an A hole I never doubted that ....................... but I do believe now that Jinnah departed too early and his successors and Pakistan as a society never deserved to govern a separate country of their own, forget baniya they never had the chance to rule themselves, we can see what happens when a slave is given power. I think it would have been lot better if British had kept India under their rule for another century or so.

 

[Mav3rick]

I am not sure what the fuss is all about, a man has posted his opinion and so let it be!

Besides, I also think that the division should not have taken place and that the British should have returned rule of the whole of India to Muslims......as they had taken powers from Muslim rules. A whole India under Muslim rule would have been the best solution.

 

[Apprentice]

I am not sure what the fuss is all about, a man has posted his opinion and so let it be!

Besides, I also think that the division should not have taken place and that the British should have returned rule of the whole of India to Muslims......as they had taken powers from Muslim rules. A whole India under Muslim rule would have been the best solution.

It would have been. True.

But circumstances were such that Hindu were not wielding an edge for our rule.

So it was best to at least take out all the Muslim majority provinces and Muslim majority princely states out of Hindu India.

Pakistan is the successor state of the Mughal Empire in the Muslim areas of the subcontinent.

But Pervez Hoodbhoy is a secularist who opposes the two nation theory-which is the basic idea of Pakistan.

 

[Mav3rick]

It would have been. True.

But circumstances were such that Hindu were not wielding an edge for our rule.

So it was best to at least take out all the Muslim majority provinces and Muslim majority princely states out of Hindu India.

Pakistan is the successor state of the Mughal Empire in the Muslim areas of the subcontinent.

But Pervez Hoodbhoy is a secularist who opposes the two nation theory-which is the basic idea of Pakistan.

My friend, we left more Muslims behind then we brought here........and then we accepted partition with half of Pakistan on this side and half on that side of a very vengeful India.

The result was not very good in 1971.

 

[naveen mishra]

Partition was the best thing happened in Indian subcontinent and equally stupid is the idea of Akhand Bharat both politically and Culturally,if it wasn't for 1947 we would've revolted for a partition in future anyway.

Thanks Jinnah and congress.

agree with you ,

thanks jinnah

 

[Bornubus]

I am not sure what the fuss is all about, a man has posted his opinion and so let it be!

Besides, I also think that the division should not have taken place and that the British should have returned rule of the whole of India to Muslims......as they had taken powers from Muslim rules. A whole India under Muslim rule would have been the best solution.

Not at all,mughals were just a pawn in the hands of Marathas when British took control of India.

Few regional Muslim powers were Nijam and Nawab of Bengal were also contained.Sikhs were the rulers in North west,Dogra and other pahari Raja in Hills states while Maratha overrun entire North,central and Deccan.

Rajasthan rajputs continued their domination in Rajputana.

This is what a British said they they took control from Marathas,Rajputs,Sikhs and other Hindus/Sikhs.

 

[somebozo]

Its time for this Pervez Dhokabhai to go...the reason why Islamist have gripped power in our society is because the two other factions Socialist and Liberals have always been anti State...leaving Islamist to be the sole power concentration which could pick a fight..its a natural balance of power...

 

[Pakistani till death]

Why are we allowing such people to question the two nation theory?! There should be a law which declares anyone guilty of questioning it as a traitor! I am a liberal and a secular but before all of that I am a Pakistani and do not tolerate anyone questioning our motherlands existence!