Why is our full history not taught to us in Pakistan Studies?

[AlKardai]

@Neelo @Menace2Society

Would you mind summarising your opinions on what the ideology of Pakistan should be, and what role religion should play?
The main argument is that the state unifying factor should be Islam, but you both Disagree.

And whilst Menace2Society states that Turkiye had little to no problem with religious extremists, due to its own secular disposition, it is likely that the Afghans would become even more of a problem if the Islamic elements of Pakistan are removed from the face of the state on the world stage. It would also cause problems within pakistan where the highly religious populace begins giving attention to Molvis who call for a fully sharia state.

 

[Neelo]

Islam is first.
Ethnicity is second.
Pakistan only exists as long as it’s Islamic.
Without Islam Pakistan does not exist and will not exist.
Uber eats drivers are smarter than you and probably better off than a miserable secularist like you. And nothing wrong with any job that allows you to earn halal.
I’m not even from Brampton and you shouldn’t go for personal attacks. If I was to expose my self you’d learn your aukat real quick. I say Alhamdulillah always for what Allah blessed me with.
In Sha Allah an Islamic revolution will come to Pakistan and all secularists, munafiqs, murtads in disguise will be exterminated.
If your somehow manage to escape, your end will be like Tarek Fatehs. Miserable in this world, treated like a slave, nothing more than a tissue for your lgbtq daddies.

What Allah has blessed you with? You’re far from Allah you hypocrite. You literally live in a secular country and lecturing US about how bad secularism is? Go move to Saudi Arabia….othay bund maarwa apni.

You haven’t provided a single shred of evidence to suggest or prove that the Muslim League or Jinnah wanted an Islamic country.

Insult me all you want pedophile mullah.

Without Islam, Pakistan doesn’t vanish into thin air…the literal word PAKISTAN stems from the acronym PAKSTAN. This land has existed long before your religion showed up and will last long ager your religion disappears.

Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

Religious demographics of the Indus Valley & Pakistan
(Years of influence)

Indus Harappan religion (pre-3500 BCE to 1300 BCE)
+2200 years

Vedic religion (1500 BCE to 500 BCE)
1000 years

Buddhism (500 BCE to 700 AD)
1200 years

Hinduism (400 AD to 1000 AD)
600 years

Islam (700 AD to present)
1319 years

https://www.facebook.com/AncientPakistan.pk/posts/pfbid0cYhZUQpARSax757ioaGBaJAS2XwVF25AgG4GWYAHEuuqARqgbzW5AEJuE63yxwD1l

Open a book and educate yourself

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1648765385020170268

 

[Neelo]

@Neelo @Menace2Society

Would you mind summarising your opinions on what the ideology of Pakistan should be, and what role religion should play?
The main argument is that the state unifying factor should be Islam, but you both Disagree.

And whilst Menace2Society states that Turkiye had little to no problem with religious extremists, due to its own secular disposition, it is likely that the Afghans would become even more of a problem if the Islamic elements of Pakistan are removed from the face of the state on the world stage. It would also cause problems within pakistan where the highly religious populace begins giving attention to Molvis who call for a fully sharia state.

The summary can be found here…

Muslim Pakistan vs Islamic Pakistan

https://www.facebook.com/AncientPakistan.pk/posts/pfbid0Bzi75ppoQiJwwRMBYAZcE4yENhD4nrcVqVQgjT9mG73JBHfBk1NiEsjpAxuJjYU1l

 

[Ssan]

Lol, again ppl will judge who is dodging facts and just spouting rhetoric.

You know nothing about me, mate... I am neither a secularist nor a liberal

And there are no "2 sides" when it comes to Pakistan's history

There is Pakistan's history, and then there is Pakistan Studies (and lies peddled by right-wingers like yourself). I won't blame you though as it's the decades of state-sponsored religious-chauvinistic indoctrination via distortion that has created a whole generation of clueless Islamists and patriots

You won't be able to get away with your lies and propaganda here on PDF, go to FB or some other forum

lol, you don’t claim to be a secularist liberal. Great- I don’t claim to be a right-winger either. If I don’t know you, you don’t know me. I never studied Pakistani history in a Pakistani school. So your argument is just straw man.

Again, spot the lie in the timeline below:-

Here is timeline with references:-



1947:- independence and the first constituent assembly meets (CAP). Tasked with drafting constitution, etc.



Jan 1948:- CAP appoints Usmani elected shaykh Al Islam, head mufti. He will be the main interlocutor on the drafting committee with the ulema and the real author of the objectives resolution.



https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/4235/2/DX087128_2.pdf



Early 1948:- Zafarullah Khan is appointed to head the committee- this caused tension with the more conservative ulema, him being Ahmadi and all.



http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/history/PDF-FILES/17_56_1_19.pdf



Mid 1948:- The JUP draft principles that must be accepted in the constitution. Jinnah accepted the draft of proposal about the Islamic nature of the state that the JUP had drafted and said it would be incorporated into the constitution.



Ahmad, Jam‘iyyat ‘Ulama-i-Pakistan 1948-79, 5.



Date Inferred- Mid 1948:- Zafarullah headed committee to draft the resolution and that it had input from ulema.



https://www.dawn.com/news/1530114



September 1948:- Jinnah dies.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali_Jinnah



March 1949:- Liaquat Ali presents the objectives resolution.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectives_Resolution#:~:text=The resolution proclaimed that the,under Article 2(A).



March 1949:- Zafarullah defends the objectives resolution when it is presented



https://tribune.com.pk/story/1306912/road-not-taken?amp=1

Btw, what is available in public on the internet is heavily biased side of history. And it is confused. They can’t agree who actually drafted the resolution whether it was Liaquat Ali, Usmani or Zafarullah.

The salient thing is that Jinnah chose an Ahmadi to lead the committee and he also had the ulema advise on it. This was intentional on his part because he wanted to get an Islamic republic that protected minorities.

 

[Ssan]

The summary can be found here…

Muslim Pakistan vs Islamic Pakistan

https://www.facebook.com/AncientPakistan.pk/posts/pfbid0Bzi75ppoQiJwwRMBYAZcE4yENhD4nrcVqVQgjT9mG73JBHfBk1NiEsjpAxuJjYU1l

The summary is all narrative with very little fact. The claims are dubious- that Jinnah never said he wanted an Islamic state?

But in the Jinnah reader we have him saying that he envisions Pakistan as a democratic republic with Islamic principles.

Then we have other tidbits of history- him appointing a Shaykh Al Islam. Him tasking said Usmani to advise in the committee to draft the objectives. Him getting feedback from other ulema after meeting with them. Him having Usmani as an interlocutor to other ulema to get their input as well. All in 1948. All before he died.

Prior to Pakistan, post Lahore resolution, his ML in UP tasking ulema under Nadvi Sahab to come up with what an islami riyasat would look like.

What I have written in the above three paras is not narrative. It is simply objective facts. Nothing subjective about it unlike the narrative that you have posted.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Then we have other tidbits of history- him appointing a Shaykh Al Islam. Him tasking said Usmani to advise in the committee to draft the objectives. Him getting feedback from other ulema after meeting with them. Him having Usmani as an interlocutor to other ulema to get their input as well. All in 1948. All before he died.

Stop lying, and stop embarrassing yourself, mate ...

Jinnah never tasked Usmani (or any other Mullah for that matter) to draft Objectives Resolution.

Again, spot the lie in the timeline below:-

Already did in the previous post

Read again, carefully

Googling stuff and then posting it here without even bothering to read it first is not a good idea .. You just keep embarrassing yourself.... give it a rest, mate ... Feel pity for you.... How old are you anyway?

 

[Maula Jatt]

both of yall are stupid - those who say without Islam we are nothing as a "people"
you are just disrespecting our heritage and ancestors, if your love for your people only comes from their religious practices than you were never from us to begin with

those who say Pakistan and religion should be separate are also wrong - we are a conservative Muslim country and Islam is what keeps our society from disintegration A- along ethnic lines but even within that tribal, and clan lines

Islam has united our society (not just our country) like never in history, when we were Muslim but not as "Muslim" as we are rn, we were regularly fighting each other along clan lines like morons which kept us back as people took advantage of that fault lines, as our society Islamized those issues became irrelevant

Islam is a core part of Pakistani identity as our region has been Muslim for centuries now, it unites our society, gives it some sorta moral compass

I believe in the balance of both - it does not define us but its a very important part of us, Pakistan should reflect its society

so islam has a role to guide our laws and lawmaking, but it shouldn't play an active role in the decision-making, or statecraft of our country - IE how Malays or Indonesia works

hell even our own constitution if followed properly is a good blend of anglo-saxon laws with that of Islamic jurisprudence in modern world with more reforms over time itll become even better

issues is not more secularization or more Islamization - focus on the democratization of our government, politics and society
we'll become a great country, we dont ned to become 2000s Saudi Arabia or Shahs Iran to be a great country, our society is okay as is, it just needs democracy to fulfill its potential

 

[M. Sarmad]

both of yall are stupid - those who say without Islam we are nothing as a "people"
you are just disrespecting our heritage and ancestors, if your love for your people only comes from their religious practices than you were never from us to begin with

those who say Pakistan and religion should be separate are also wrong - we are a conservative Muslim country and Islam is what keeps our society from disintegration A- along ethnic lines but even within that tribal, and clan lines

Islam has united our society (not just our country) like never in history, when we were Muslim but not as "Muslim" as we are rn, we were regularly fighting each other along clan lines like morons which kept us back as people took advantage of that fault lines, as our society Islamized those issues became irrelevant

Islam is a core part of Pakistani identity as our region has been Muslim for centuries now, it unites our society, gives it some sorta moral compass

I believe in the balance of both - it does not define us but its a very important part of us

1) Jinnah wanted a state where every one would be "equal citizen of the state" irrespective of one's religion, caste etc.. where religion would be a "personal matter" and not the "business of the state" ... Jinnah strongly disapproved of the idea of having a theocratic or "Islamic" state .. (which we are today ,.. unfortunately..)

2) Jinnah (and Iqbal too) believed that this kind of separation of church from state (i.e secularism) was perfectly "Islamic" ... and that Islam in its true spirit was purely "democratic" ... Both these ideas were rejected by the orthodox Muslims .. While democracy has been accepted by the majority of Muslisms today, "accepting separation of state and religion" may take another few decades ...

3) Jinnah and conservatives/Mullahs were diametrically opposed in their understanding and interpretation of Islam ... What Jinnah and Iqbal considered was the "true spirit" of Islam was declared "Kufr" and "Shirk" by the Mullahs ....

4) Today conservatives claim that Jinnah wanted an "Islamic Pakistan" and to prove their point they quote speeches/interviews of Jinnah where he has talked about Islam, but then they very conveniently replace Jinnah's definition of Islam with Mullah's definition of Islam (which is opposite to Jinnah's def.) ... The result is that one gets an impression that either Jinnah was confused and had no clear vision OR he was a hypocrite who wanted a secular constitution but talked about Islam (supposedly anti secular) .... Truth is, the only hypocrites are the Mullahs and the conservatives ... Jinnah and Iqbal had a clear vision .... A progressive and modern Pakistan based on "reinterpretation" of Islamic teachings .... Secular and Democratic .. Secularism and democracy that would not be western but Islamic ... !!!

 

[Maula Jatt]

1) Jinnah wanted a state where every one would be "equal citizen of the state" , irrespective of religion , caste etc.. where religion would be a "personal matter" and not the "business of the state" ... Jinnah strongly disapproved of the idea of having a theocratic or "Islamic" state .. (which we are today ,.. unfortunately..)

2) Jinnah (and Iqbal too) believed that this kind of separation of church from state (i.e secularism) was perfectly "Islamic" ... and that Islam in its true spirit was purely "democratic" ... Both these ideas were rejected by the orthodox Muslims originally .. Democracy has been accepted by the majority of Muslisms today while "accepting separation of state and religion" may take another few decades ...

3) Jinnah and conservatives/Mullahs were diametrically opposed in their interpretation of Islam ... What Jinnah and Iqbal considered was the "true spirit" of Islam was declared "Kufr" and "Shirk" by the Mullahs ....

4) Today conservatives claim that Jinnah wanted an "Islamic Pakistan" and to prove their point they quote speeches/interviews of Jinnah when he has talked about Islam, but then they very conveniently replace Jinnah's definition of Islam with Mullah's definition of Islam (which is opposite to Jinnah`s def.) ... The result is that one gets an impression that either Jinnah was confused and had no clear vision OR he was a hypocrite who wanted a secular constitution but talked about Islam (supposedly anti secular) .... Truth is, the only hypocrites are the Mullahs and the conservatives ... Jinnah and Iqbal had a clear vision .... A progressive and modern Pakistan based on "reinterpretation" of Islamic teachings .... Secular and Democratic .. Secularism and democracy that would not be western but Islamic ... !!!

Idc for what Jinnah says, he is not our abu
our people have been here for centuries and we should do what we feel is right for our society, we should debate on if he was saying the right things not that if was saying that, it must be right

 

[M. Sarmad]

Idc for what Jinnah says, he is not our abu
our people have been here for centuries and we should do what we feel is right for our society, we should debate on if he was saying the right things not that if was saying that, it must be right

Jinnah remains the only undisputed leader in the 75 years history of Pakistan and there is nothing wrong in discussing (or disputing) his legacy and ideals. He's a symbol of national unity

 

[nomi007]

Not full history but false history

 

[El Sidd]

A progressive and modern Pakistan based on "reinterpretation" of Islamic teachings .... Secular and Democratic .. Secularism and democracy that would not be western but Islamic ... !!!

Islamic? Why not Muslim? It seems you have placed Jinnah right beside the Ayatollahs who claim secular islamic democracy

 

[M. Sarmad]

Islamic? Why not Muslim? It seems you have placed Jinnah right beside the Ayatollahs who claim secular islamic democracy

As for separation of State and Church (i.e. Secularism), Iqbal categorically stated:

Islam as a religio-political system, no doubt, does permit such a view

Now go and issue Fatwas against Iqbal, Wahhabi troll

 

[El Sidd]

If Pakistan even becomes secular May Allah SWT make an example out of it.
May Allah SWT allow an Islamic revolution to take place in Pakistan.
May Allah SWT allow Pakistan to be ruled by Shariah.
May Allah SWT destroy all munafiq murtads who disguise them self as secular ‘Muslims’.

Ameen

There is no need to curse. You can simply renounce your ties with the country. It would be People's Republic of Pakistan just like Bangladesh.

It seems religion has run its course with the natives and with water wars around the corner, the people would have to revert back to worshipping the Indus doing ghar wapsi to their original title of Indoranis.

As for separation of State and Church (i.e. Secularism), Iqbal categorically stated:

Islam as a religio-political system, no doubt, does permit such a view

Now go and issue Fatwas against Iqbal, Wahhabi troll

That is just his opinion just like Jinnah once held the opinion of a united India.