Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Gollum

Jinnah, Iqbal and blasphemy

Recommended Posts

A few Indians think Jinnah was liberal, secular, what not (based on his dietary preferences :facepalm:) and that Iqbal too was a humanist/poet/philosopher first and then only a Muslim. Have to clear up some facts. That Jinnah disowned his own daughter who married a Parsi (inspite of Jinnah himself marrying and converting a Parsi) or his role in Direct Action Day riots can be left for another day. Similarly Iqbal's role in the Pakistan movement or the overtly belligerent tone in some of his poems. Now both enjoy lots of adulation in India, more than some of our freedom fighters who laid down their lives.

 

So here's an incident I would like to share way back from the 20s, something our libtards/academics go to great extents to hide. However if articles are to be believed there is a compulsory textbook chapter in Pak state school books about Ilm Deen to inspire the Pakistani minds of tomorrow. Articles presented below, you decide. 

 

Salmaan Taseer murder case harks back to 1929 killing of Hindu publisher

Quote

Mudassir Khan visits the tomb of Ghazi Shaheed Ilm-Deen every day to add to the heap of flower petals on top of his grave and sing a tearful prayer to the illiterate carpenter’s apprentice who killed to protect the honour of his faith.

Like hundreds of others who come daily to the gaudily decorated enclosure in the middle of Lahore’s main graveyard, the restaurant owner reveres the 20-year-old executed for his crime more than 85 years ago.

“In the other shrines you have to pray for half an hour,” Khan said. “But here God answers our prayers in minutes.”

In a country bursting with shrines of saints honoured for their wisdom or righteousness, Ilm-Deen’s tomb is perhaps the only one where a framed copy of a murder charge takes pride of place next to the tomb.

It relates to events that happened before Pakistan came into existence but still resonate with many people who see parallels with the contemporary case of Mumtaz Qadri, the former police bodyguard who murdered one of Pakistan’s best-known politicians in the name of blasphemy in 2011.

The charge sheet details how on 6 April 1929, Ilm-Deen “brutally attacked” with a knife the Lahore-based publisher of Rangeela Rasool, a book that had enraged many Muslims with its allegedly scurrilous commentary on the life of the prophet Muhammad.

The “first investigation report” on the wall of the shrine says Mahashay Rajpal, the Hindu victim, had tried to defend himself by throwing piles of books at Ilm-Deen, who was soon arrested, still holding the murder weapon.

The killing turned the young man into a hero, earning him the honorifics Ghazi and Shaheed and ensuring he remained famous almost a century later, in part thanks to a popular film celebrating the incident.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the lawyer who would found the new state of Pakistan 18 years later, travelled from Mumbai, then known as Bombay, to Lahore to defend Ilm-Deen in his appeal hearing but was unable to save him from being hanged by the colonial government.

His funeral was attended by tens of thousands, including Muhammad Iqbal, Pakistan’s national poet, who gave a graveside eulogy.

The saga has particular resonance today among hardline Barelvis, Pakistan’s largest grouping of Sunni Muslims, not just because devotion to the prophet is central to their faith, but because they argue Qadri should also be regarded as a national hero.

This week Qadri took a step closer to becoming a modern day Ilm-Deen when Islamabad’s high court upheld his conviction for murder, a decision that predictably outraged the hundreds of demonstrators who have gathered outside the courthouse for each appeal hearing.

“In 1929 we could not stop the execution of the lover of the prophet because the British were in power and Muslims were a minority,” said Khadim Hussain Rizvi, a mullah who made the journey from Lahore just to protest. “Now there is a Muslim government in Pakistan and we will not obey our leaders if they execute Qadri.”

Qadri enjoys widespread support for his murder of Salmaan Taseer, the governor of Punjab province, because of the outrage Taseer sparked by his campaign to win a pardon for Asia Bibi, a poor Christian woman sentenced to death under Pakistan’s notorious blasphemy laws.

Although at least one popular mosque has been named after Qadri, he has a long way to go to match Ilm-Deen, whose name has been given to parks, roads, hospitals and even a government guesthouse in Islamabad.

Both the Ilm-Deen and Qadri cases touch on Pakistan’s perennial, and increasingly bitter, debate about the role of Islam in national affairs.

Abdul Majeed, a retired soldier turned mullah who runs a mosque near Ilm-Deen’s shrine, claimed the saga was one of the inspirations for the “two nation theory” later used to justify the partition of the subcontinent in 1947.

“It was one of the reasons for the Hindu-Muslim divide,” said Majeed, who has written a short history of Ilm-Deen called The Flower Who Sent a Blasphemer to Hell. “It made us realise we are separate nations.”

Liberal lawyer and historian Yasser Latif Hamdani said Jinnah only acted on the “cab-rank rule” to take a case for which, as one of India’s top barristers, he was paid a handsome fee.

But Hamdani conceded the involvement of educated members of the Muslim elite, such as Jinnah and Iqbal, was “a major failing”.

“It has allowed basically half-educated lawyers to get up and say Jinnah appeared in this case and now we’re doing this,” he said. “Pakistan has to divorce itself from this history because a society that makes heroes out of Ilm-Deen is likely to end up with murderers like Qadri.”

In an extraordinary twist the two killings span the generations of one family: Salmaan Taseer’s father, the celebrated Urdu poet Muhammad Din Taseer, was among Ilm-Deen’s supporters, helping raise funds for his defence and donating the shroud in which the carpenter was buried.

Almost a century later, his grandson, the artist Shaan Taseer, has emerged as a leading voice against religious extremism and formally petitioned the Islamabad high court to uphold the death sentence for his father’s killer.

He argues that the historical context of Qadri’s case is different from that of Ilm-Deen, who Taseer said was a rallying point for Muslim pride and Muslim interests in the late colonial period.

“Defending the interests of the Muslim community of India is not the same as fighting for Islam,” he said.

LINK 1

 

 Ilam Din 

 

Quote

Towards the end of Margalla Road in Islamabad lies the Foreign Service Hostel. It is a drab, concrete modernist structure. And, it is named after Ghazi Ilm Din Shaheed, an early ‘hero’ of South Asian Muslim consciousness. Ilam Din is both a Ghazi (a surviving warrior) and a Shaheed (martyr) in our cultural memory that has been reinforced and officially sanctioned by the state. For the Foreign Ministry to name its officers’ residence after Ilam Din is a reminder of how heroes have been adopted and to some extent mythologized by the state of Pakistan.

On the 6th of April 1929, Ilam Din, a young carpenter from Lahore, murdered a blasphemer Rajpal – a Hindu by faith – for publishing an allegedly offensive pamphlet against the Prophet (PBUH). Rajpal published the ostensibly distasteful material in 1924, five years before his murder. He was booked under the Indian Penal Code but was acquitted by the Lahore High Court in May 1927.

When the High Court could not punish him, the colonial administration added Section 295-A (the legal parent of the current blasphemy provisions in Pakistani statute) to the Indian Penal Code to quell the protests by the Muslim community. In 1927, two attempts were made on the life on Rajpal, both of which remained unsuccessful. Yet, this was not a burning issue until of course Ilam Din Shaheed demonstrated his “bravery” and a trial ensued.

This trial took place in the context of communal tensions that had been brewing under British rule. Ilam Din was sentenced and for his appeal, Mr Mohamed Ali Jinnah (later to become the founder of Pakistan) appeared in the High Court as a defence lawyer. The appeal was rejected. Another appeal to the Privy Council was also rejected and finally Ilam Din was hanged in 1929. The mythmaking began thereafter and in the years to come Ilam Din was portrayed as a grand hero of Muslim community: a true one, because he was successful in meting out the ‘punishment’ that the earlier ones could not achieve. In fact, Ilam Din remained unaware of theprinted book for years and only through fiery speeches in Lahore did he find out about its ‘insulting’ content.

The funeral of Ilam Din was also a spectacle. Noted Muslim celebrities of the age participated. Allama Iqbal, our national poet was present and reportedly said that a carpenter’s son was superior to others for having defended the faith. Similarly, another poet-intellectual of that era, MD Taseer was sympathetic to Ilam Din. Nothing can be more ironic as decades later, Taseer’s only son was killed for a false accusation of blasphemy.

In our textbooks, the character of Ilam Din is celebrated. As an ideological state the imperative to highlight such cases is understandable. Ilam Din is also a symbolic warrior-hero pitted against a Hindu offender. Rajpal in cultural memory therefore becomes a representative of what Pakistan liberated itself from.

 

In popular cinema, a 1978 film Ghazi Ilam Din Shaheed also played upon the myth of the hero who burns with the desire for martyrdom. The film also showed Mr Jinnah as somewhat sympathetic to the cause and if I recall correctly refuses to accept fees for the case. The finale suggests that the Hindus and Muslims could not have lived together. Whatever was written earlier about Ilam Din in Urdu suggested that not just the religious dimension but popular cinema also reinforced the pre-partition politics and the communal tension, which culminated in the partition of India in 1947.

Now Ilam Din’s grave is a shrine, a sacred space that commemorates his sacrifice as well as evokes the nationalist narrative of an insensitive British justice system and the acts of anti-Muslim Hindus that led to the Partition.

 

LINK 2

 

 

 

Edited by Gollum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of articles available, picked a couple posted in OP.

 

The sequence of events:

  • Muslims published a pamphlet depicting Maa Sita as a prostitute
  • A Muslim Ali Qasim wrote a derogatory book about Hindus titled 'Unneesvi Sadi ka Maharishi' in 1923
  • An Arya Samaji based in Punjab (Lahore) wrote a book in retaliation titled 'Rangeela Rasul' about the marriages of the Islamic Prophet drawing material from hadiths, year was 1924
  • Mahashe Rajpal was the publisher, he didn't reveal the name of the author to protect him
  • Muslims triggered, Rajpal arrested but acquitted in 1927
  • Maulana Mohammed Ali (later Muslim League stalwart), a leading figure of the Khilafat Movement and who was once hailed as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity by Gandhi addressed a gathering in Jama Masjid, Delhi where he declared that 'the kafir Rajpal will not go free'
  • Maulana Mohammed Ali exhorted Indian Muslims to wage jihad on infidels of India in the name of the Prophet
  • Number of unsuccessful attempts to kill Rajpal, many Arya Samajis in Punjab and United Provinces were killed by Muslims
  • In 1929 a young Muslim carpenter named Ilm-ud-din/Ilam Deen stabbed Rajpal to death, made no attempt to escape and admitted his crime
  • Jinnah was his lawyer, lost the case...the only one he lost in his career
  • Ilam Deen was sentenced and then hanged to death
  • The largest funeral of that time, Iqbal was one of the pall-bearers and hailed him with laudatory poems, praising him for his love for the prophet and murder of the blasphemer
  • Ilam Deen earned the title of Ghazi and Shaheed, one of the greatest icons for Pakistanis even today

 

@MechEng if you want you can check this out and see whether it changes your mind. 

Edited by Gollum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. Let me make a statement:

Jinnah was like Imran Khan:

Both of them claim to be liberals. 
Both of them used religion for their own interests. 

They kept their own interests above all things. 

That is why they gave an inconvenient marriage of religion of Islam and liberalism, which are actually opposite to each other. 

 

Sometimes Mullahs without beards prove to be much more fatal than Mullahs with apparent long beards. 

 

 

IQBAL: The ROOT cause of Islamic Fasaad

You know Pakistani Boys in UK do every kind of Discos and Larki-Baazi till they are young. But when they become themselves father and old, then they become deeply religious and bring most of their time in the mosques and start doing Tableegh in the Tableeghi Jammat. 

 

Same happened with Iqbal. 

Till the time he was young, he indulged in alcohol drinking, and also going after the women. At that time he was also liberal and wrote some good words for Ram and other Hindu gods too. 

But at some time later (as he got older) his inner Muslim got awake. 

And then we saw Iqbal with poetry about "Revolutionary Islam". 

I could not stress more how dangerous his revolutionary islamic poetry is, and how much destruction it brought to the minds of the Muslim youth both in India and Pakistan. 

 

Forget about Pakistan, Iqbal revolutionise the religious Iranians through his poetry. Do you know that his persian poetry is more than his Urdu poetry?

Or do you know that Persians claim Iqbal to be their poet and not the Pakistani poet, and they consider that Iqbal's revolutionary poetry played big role in Islamic revolution in Iran. 

 

Or do you know that Iranian Supreme Religious leader KHAMINEI has a PHD degree upon Iqbal's poetry? 

 

Iqbal has 1000 of times more role in spread of revolutionary Islam as compared to Jinnah. Actually Jinnah is nothing as compared to Iqbal. Pakistan would have came into being even without Jinnah and someone else would have led the Muslims to this, but perhaps there would have been no Pakistan without Iqbal. 

 

Iqbal's poetry got the MAGIC. 

 

Edited by Alam_dar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gollum said:

Plenty of articles available, picked a couple posted in OP.

 

The sequence of events:

  • Muslims published a pamphlet depicting Maa Sita as a prostitute
  • A Muslim Ali Qasim wrote a derogatory book about Hindus titled 'Unneesvi Sadi ka Maharishi' in 1923
  • An Arya Samaji based in Punjab (Lahore) wrote a book in retaliation titled 'Rangeela Rasul' about the marriages of the Islamic Prophet drawing material from hadiths, year was 1924
  • Mahashe Rajpal was the publisher, he didn't reveal the name of the author to protect him
  • Muslims triggered, Rajpal arrested but acquitted in 1927
  • Maulana Mohammed Ali (later Muslim League stalwart), a leading figure of the Khilafat Movement and who was once hailed as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity by Gandhi addressed a gathering in Jama Masjid, Delhi where he declared that 'the kafir Rajpal will not go free'
  • Maulana Mohammed Ali exhorted Indian Muslims to wage jihad on infidels of India in the name of the Prophet
  • Number of unsuccessful attempts to kill Rajpal, many Arya Samajis in Punjab and United Provinces were killed by Muslims
  • In 1929 a young Muslim carpenter named Ilm-ud-din/Ilam Deen stabbed Rajpal to death, made no attempt to escape and admitted his crime
  • Jinnah was his lawyer, lost the case...the only one he lost in his career
  • Ilam Deen was sentenced and then hanged to death
  • The largest funeral of that time, Iqbal was one of the pall-bearers and hailed him with laudatory poems, praising him for his love for the prophet and murder of the blasphemer
  • Ilam Deen earned the title of Ghazi and Shaheed, one of the greatest icons for Pakistanis even today

 

@MechEng if you want you can check this out and see whether it changes your mind. 

I'm appalled at our spinelessness. Let's not talk about Hindus here for a while, let's just assume no religion is involved here, how did we even allow to get ourselves bullied like this? This is meekness even by objective standards.

 

If we were assertive enough nobody would have the guts to mess with us, violence is not needed at all. Maybe because of long rule under muslims we gradually lost our voice, it's all subconscious.

Edited by MechEng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Jinnah envisioned a liberal, tolerant Pakistan is the biggest BS I have ever heard....favorite words of his Indian followers in Lutyens' Delhi and AMU/Osmania/JNU/Jadavpur/Jamia Millia type institutes. Did he sacrifice anything for the freedom struggle? Even Nehru spent a lot of time in prison. All Jinnah did was exploit the weak character of Gandhi, rabble rouse, blackmail and instigate genocide. Probably the greatest freeloader in history? Heck Savarkar gets so much flak in India for being a coward and he spent more days in jail than all the Muslim Leaguers combined. 

 

George Washington sacrificed, Gandhi sacrificed, Bangabandhu sacrificed, Mao sacrificed, Ibn Saud sacrificed, Ho Chi Minh sacrificed, hell even Kim-Il-Sung went through suffering.....OTOH the likes of Ataturk and Lee Kuan Yew played big roles in the positive development of their countries. Not judging the character flaws and other demerits, purely looking at it from the pov of sacrifice.

 

Jinnah must the only 'Father of the Nation' who never spent a single day in jail, never was denied personal comfort, never faced major obstacles, never led a battle unit in his life, neither paid with his life for his ideology. And he died so soon after independence that he couldn't make a positive contribution to his young country, not that he had any particular talent, mindset or guts for it. Every thing handed to him on a platter and yet he is beyond reproach for Pakistanis. Disgrace !!!

Edited by Gollum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

secularists all across  India should watch all these closely and should learn a lot from these....   'behead those who insult prophet' was the earlier slogan.... now it has become 'behead those who insult islam'.  For morons like these, a stage would arise where 'even being a non muslim' would be like insulting islam. So Hindus need  to be a lot serious w.r.t these two legged animals.

Edited by rtmohanlal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not adding a caveat just for the sake of it but in villages or even in cities, the Muslims minding/running their own business are some of the nicest people you will meet as long as religion is not involved.

 

Here is the problem though, these masses are super easy to bhadkao and start riots and chaos in the name of religion.

 

Now the argument is that they need education and people need take steps to uplift their socio economic conditions, however the educated and the rich ones are a bigger problem.

 

The partition and it's aftermath or even most problems in the world today stemming from Islam are fanned by the so called elite and  educated.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Stradlater said:

@Gollum Even though Jinnah was a harami, Congress under Nehru were bigger madarchods imo. Those b@stards came up with the CR plan as early as 1943 thus giving a tacit recognition to a demand of a separate Pakistan when in fact even Jinnah wasn't so optimistic considering the logistics and how Muslim league was far from being a pan Indian Muslim party at the time. 

What was CR plan. Never heard of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Singh bling said:

What was CR plan. Never heard of it

Basically at the later stages of the second world war when it was imminent that Brits would be leaving India soon, the Congress tried to meet Muslim demands through top level political negotiations. 

In April 1944, C. Rajagopalachari proposed a solution: a post war commission would be formed to demarcate the contiguous districts where the Muslims were in absolute majority, and there a plebiscite of the adult population would decide whether they would prefer Pakistan. In case of a partition there would be a mutual agreement to run certain essential services like defense and communication. The border districts could choose to join either of the two sovereign nations. 

This plan was supported by Gandhi. 

 

Now it must be noted here that by this time the hold of Muslim league in the Punjab was tenuous at best and the Unionist Party with Khizr Hyat Khan at the helm was calling actual shots. Khizr didn't prefer partition in case it threatened their tribal territorial possessions (Unionist party basically comprised of big landlords of Punjab with majority of Muslim Rajputs of Jhelum and Chenab region and Jatts of Manjha and a few Hindu Jat zamidars of modern day Haryana). 

 

By giving CR formula an official recognition, the Congress not only gave a tacit recognition to the demand of a sovereign independent Pakistan but also indirectly increased Jinnah's prestige as a sole representative of the Muslims of the subcontinent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gollum said:

Again not a Pakistan specific problem. Blasphemy, apostasy, inter-religion marriage, LGBT rights...common thread. 

Image

Gold Buscuit percentage(99.999) want Sharia. Not wanting Sharia is akin to not following religion.

Impurity 0.001% will be stoned publicly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gollum said:

Yup. PEW must expand the horizon next time. 

This has got to be a joke. PEW thinks, it is not safe for them to ask religious questions in India. Load of BS.

 

https://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2013/05/12/pew-research-ignored-muslims-in-india-says-indian-muslims-are-dangerous/

Quote

Pew’s answer to why it excluded India from the survey – which encompassed a total of 39 countries comprising 67 percent of the world’s Muslim population – doesn’t make sense.

According to a report on their website, Pew explains India, China and Saudi Arabia were excluded because they “could not safely and reliably conduct face-to-face interviews on religion.”

Pew says countries were excluded “primarily due to cultural and political sensitivities associated with the topics of religious identity and belief. In such environments, the quality of data may be undermined if respondents do not feel free to express their true opinions. In addition, the safety of interviewers may be at risk if the survey meets objections from local residents or authorities.

If India, the most secular country in the world, a progressive democracy and developing economic powerhouse, is considered a problem for a Pew questioner from favorably viewed ally America, who, if they had indeed surveyed India, would have used most likely a local surveyor, who would most likely be a Muslim himself or herself, then how come they determined that the likes of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Syria is less dangerous for their employees to conduct face-to-face survey questions on religion, politics and society?

Whether it is the Indian government which stopped Pew from conducting a survey, or Pew’s own lack of resources or inability to handle a complicated country like India, the fact remains that to call such a survey ‘The World’s Muslims’ is a fallacy, a study that deserves to be ignored

Pew considers India less safer than Syria or Afghanistan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

This has got to be a joke. PEW thinks, it is not safe for them to ask religious questions in India. Load of BS.

 

https://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2013/05/12/pew-research-ignored-muslims-in-india-says-indian-muslims-are-dangerous/

Pew considers India less safer than Syria or Afghanistan. 

Wow, didn't know that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mishra said:

Oh man, Just read first page of Rangeelaa Rasool where he tears apart in one para whole chutiyaap of people making comparisons with other religions. TBH, never ever thought that way. Someone had some balls to write and publish it. :phehe:

 

@Gollum :hatsoff:

Will read it later and give my review. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Sometimes I feel we should be thankful to Sir Syed, Iqbal, Jinnah for their two-nation theory to take away most of the filth. Who can deal with such monstrosity? @zen

Man vs Infidel Environment 

Sad to see that. 

 

As for partition, I have no problems with it. World borders keep changing every 60-70 years or so. What is surprising is that despite the region being home to religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and so on, some people feel/felt the need to adapt to foreign religions. That India has not been able to be a Mecca/Vatican for these religions for people who practise them all over the globe is another set back. Sadly, many people do not even realize the opportunity lost to be a philosophical/religious leader. Over the years, India has also misused secularism - it does not necessarily mean shying away from your religion but being allowed to practise your own religion including promoting it if it matters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...