In the changing political, social, ethnic, economic and religious scenario of Pakistan where many other things were caught in the whirlwind and were turned upside down, the identity of our leader and the maker of the country, Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, should have been spared and made an exception to the rule. However, the unscrupulous players of the power game and the naive stooges to their masters made no exception and have made controversial even the very personality of the Leader.

A popular misconception about him being played out in the media is that he was a truly believing Muslim meaning thereby that he was a fundamentalist, and wanted to establish a theocratic Islamic State. On the other hand, the official media is painting him as a secular, freethinking sage striving to improve the lot of millions of poor trapped in South East Asia regardless of their belief and religion.

It is nothing but a delusion and is the broth, to no taste, cooked by both  obscurantists and the so-called secular elements of leading intelligentsia of country’s power hungry bunch of opportunists. How did it fare inPakistan? Let us go in detail.

About thirty years ago, to be exact, we lived in a Pakistan that was quite different from the Pakistan of today. Children used to play outside their houses without causing any kind of dread or anxiety to their parents. They lurked around in their neighbourhood with absolute freedom. During summer people used to sleep in the streets just outside their houses. People were open and frank and were prone to discuss anything unreservedly with respect and deference to their interlocutors.

There was simplicity, love, peace and stability in the society although there were less luxury and opulence. People were generally pleased with themselves and were contented, quite happy in their own sorts. People remembered the words of their Quaid, “”But make no mistake, Pakistan is not a theocracy or anything like it.

Islam demands from us the tolerance of other creeds and we welcome in closest association with us all those who of whatever creed are themselves willing and ready to play their part as true and loyal citizens of Pakistan.” (February 19, 1948). Then slowly things began to change: to the better and to the worse. Affluence, prosperity and material comforts came and there followed a sense of competition, struggle and rivalry. If the competition is healthy and rules of game are followed then it is a healthy sign of growth.

However, the majority of the business class compromised on ethics of
economics and resultantly the serving class developed a sort of antagonism for the moneyed class. Some politicians exploited the sentiments of the masses to grab power on the expense of country’s stability and solidarity. One set of corrupt and inept politicians followed the other and the morass of our political life deepened further and further to such an extent that there came into power General Mohammad Ziaul Haq and his cronies.

He made promises with the nation and broke them all very conveniently on political expediency. He worked on one agenda only, survival to his rule to strengthen his so-called Islamic dispensation. Everything else was subservient to this cause, even the integrity, solidarity and survival of the very country. He cruised along Pakistan political scene long enough to affect the social, ethnic, religious as well as political mores irreparably so that heroin and Klashnikov culture and politico-religious intolerance should hang around us forever.

In the name of Islam Zia, promoted something that was quite alien to Islam: bigotry, intolerance, narrow-mindedness and prejudice. He was an exact antithesis of the great leader and creator to Pakistan, Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah who addressing his Assembly Members had said, “You are free, free to go to your temples; you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of 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 state.” In April 1985 abetted and supported by Gen Zia a religious party was formed in the name of Companions of Holy Prophet PBUH that started a nasty cycle of blood-letting in Pakistan that continues until today.

The situation reached to such an extent that people who used to sleep in streets in the open fearlessly did not feel safe behind closed doors and barbed windows of their houses. A new class of semi-literate Mullahs emerged who spread hate, intolerance, disgust and revulsion for the people belonging to the other sect.

A war of annihilation was waged in the name of Islam against others who did not accede to killers’ brand of Islam. Guns and bullets replaced words and arguments whereas God Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an, “Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner; surely your Lord best knows those who go astray from His path, and He knows best those who follow the right way.” 16:125.

Islam, whose regard for human life touches the summits of compassion and empathy and who has declared that, “whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men...” 5: 32 was relegated by these fanatic Mullah to such an extent that the West i.e. the Christian world, began to equate Islam with intolerance, fanaticism, bloodletting, violence, aggression and terrorism. The followers of Islam, which itself denotes peace, could not offer their ritual prayers in their mosques, the houses of God, peacefully.

Who is to be blamed for this fanaticism? Can we blame Islam? Of course, no body can blame Islam for the failures of its followers. The blame is squarely put on the fanatic Mullah who preached violence, intolerance, hate and bigotry. The pristine message of Islam is lost upon these heretics. They have their own narrow ends to meet.

They do not realize that one day they will meet their Lord and then they will have to face the consequences of their devilish acts.  The tirade of a small fanatic minority in Pakistan against the peaceful majority of the country belonging to all Islamic sects, however, in the West, earned bad name for all Muslims. The emotional and depraved elements of society also joined in the acts of bloodletting and revenge and the situation degenerated to such an extent that religion itself became a disgrace among the intelligentsia of the country and the so-called intellectuals began discounting Islam itself in the name of peace, harmony and serenity.

The economy was shattered and due to frequent outages, strikes, violence, political instability and intolerance, corruption and tension at borders no foreign investment could be encouraged. Pakistan was further alienated in the international community when it started meddling with Afghanistan and encouraged Madrassa culture at home.

The Mullah, the product of our Madrassas, with a myopic vision,  distorted intellect and limited common sense, gaining encouragement from events taking place in Afghanistan and monetary bloodshot from petro-Dinar, took over the streets of Pakistan and started making a mark on social, ethnic, political and economic scene of already dilapidated society.

If someone had envisioned Pakistan as a failed society it was due to such elements; it was in such a situation when an acute minority had taken hostage a large peace-loving majority who preferred a regular life divorced from any hassle, bother and aggravation. The vocal secular opposition to this scenario, while criticizing the Mullah also took Islam to its pale and saw a solution of all evils in abandoning the religion altogether or at least leaving it to individual’s personal choices.

We cannot change the historical facts by simply wishing them so.
Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah was a Muslim; he was a man with vision and futuristic outlook; he had a refreshing mind and a considerate soul like millions of other Muslims who are intellectuals, kind, loving and forthcoming people. Only Quaid-i-Azam surpassed them all in India only in his leadership qualities and his belief in the destiny of his nation.

  

Information

A popular misconception about him being played out in the media is that he was a truly believing Muslim meaning thereby that he was a fundamentalist, and wanted to establish a theocratic Islamic State. On the other hand, the official media is painting him as a secular, freethinking sage striving to improve the lot of millions of poor trapped in South East Asia regardless of their belief and religion.

First appeared in Pakistan Observer on January 30, 2005