Prophecy and the Mullah: Hotel Mohenjodaro

looks like Mr Iqbal was a big-thinker, very respected and studied in pakistan. in india we know little about him or his philosophy. all we know is that he wrote sare jahan se achha.

it seems fashionable to read everything from ayn rand, castaneda , garcia marquez to art of war, j. krishamurthy or japanese zen ( or iravati karve as some have recently discovered). but iqbal is very much MIA. is his writings less universal (communal) or is it standard bigotary?

but then even galib, rumi and khayyam are kinda pop.

Escapist...

I agree with the spirit of most of what you are saying especially the last part of your statement ...

However there is some information that you have put up there that is wrong... for example the issue of Sharia... while you have very adequately described and summed up Iqbal`s position on things... indeed the point of difference between the Republican Turkey of Ataturk he admired and the blue print of the Muslim state he envisaged was the importance of sharia... both you will admit were Modernist projects... but while Republican Turkey ignored Sharia, Iqbal was in favor of Ijtehad and thus modernization of Sharia... in this liberal Islamic thought he was joined by Allama Parwez for example...


Jinnah`s position was quite different. As a anglicized lawyer belonging to a minority sect (Khoja Ismaili) within a Minority sect (Shiite) within a minority community (Muslim), he couldn`t afford or allow the question of sharia for the obvious reasons... when asked about `Sharia` Jinnah replied `Sharia, What Sharia, whose sharia, I don`t have the time for this`... secularism was the practical way ... had it been anyone else other than Jinnah, an anglicized secular minded lawyer... say a more Islamic oriented person... do you think he would have been able to unite the Muslims this way?? Furthermore as is clear from recent research Jinnah`s eventual aim was an all India center... that also negates the possibility of a theocracy. In any event in my opinion Jinnah`s pronouncement is very clear on the matter.


However let us hypothetically speaking say that Jinnah`s 40 odd pronouncements on the matter were not inspired by a secular principle but by this undefined idea of `Non-theocratic Islamic Democratic Welfare state` ... do you think we in Pakistan qualify as even that today?


Clearly then the issue becomes of the word `secular`... so let us say that I will not use this word again... will you be willing to work towards this `Non-theocratic Islamic Democratic welfare state` that is impartial to the faith of the individual citizen, where there is no discrimination between a Muslim and a Non-Muslim and where every citizen is a Pakistani regardless of religion caste or creed?


-Yasser Latif Hamdani

Escapist...

I agree with the spirit of most of what you are saying especially the last part of your statement ...

However there is some information that you have put up there that is wrong... for example the issue of Sharia... while you have very adequately described and summed up Iqbal`s position on things... indeed the point of difference between the Republican Turkey of Ataturk he admired and the blue print of the Muslim state he envisaged was the importance of sharia... both you will admit were Modernist projects... but while Republican Turkey ignored Sharia, Iqbal was in favor of Ijtehad and thus modernization of Sharia... in this liberal Islamic thought he was joined by Allama Parwez for example...


Jinnah`s position was quite different. As a anglicized lawyer belonging to a minority sect (Khoja Ismaili) within a Minority sect (Shiite) within a minority community (Muslim), he couldn`t afford or allow the question of sharia for the obvious reasons... when asked about `Sharia` Jinnah replied `Sharia, What Sharia, whose sharia, I don`t have the time for this`... secularism was the practical way ... had it been anyone else other than Jinnah, an anglicized secular minded lawyer... say a more Islamic oriented person... do you think he would have been able to unite the Muslims this way?? Furthermore as is clear from recent research Jinnah`s eventual aim was an all India center... that also negates the possibility of a theocracy. In any event in my opinion Jinnah`s pronouncement is very clear on the matter.


However let us hypothetically speaking say that Jinnah`s 40 odd pronouncements on the matter were not inspired by a secular principle but by this undefined idea of `Non-theocratic Islamic Democratic Welfare state` ... do you think we in Pakistan qualify as even that today?


Clearly then the issue becomes of the word `secular`... so let us say that I will not use this word again... will you be willing to work towards this `Non-theocratic Islamic Democratic welfare state` that is impartial to the faith of the individual citizen, where there is no discrimination between a Muslim and a Non-Muslim and where every citizen is a Pakistani regardless of religion caste or creed?


-Yasser Latif Hamdani

Malik99...

Your post was unfair to me and absolutely wrong. Should I repeat `little knowledge is dangerous`?

Those who have followed my writings know that I have never quoted one speech of Jinnah`s... I have quoted atleast 20 or 30 to prove my point.... and I have quoted directly from the Jinnah Papers and not some book of interpretation or some random website.

It is very sad that people like you choose to lie about me... furthermore I have never picked and chosen from Jinnah`s speeches... I have always relied on the entire life and struggle of the man. Please visit my I-log to see it for yourself. I am reposting an earlier post that I have posted for someone else...


As for Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian... I could care less... He died in 1908 and is immaterial to the cause of Pakistan... besides the same is said by the Mullahs and many Hindu writers about Sir Syed Ahmed Khan as well.


-YLH

PS: Some how I missed those numerous references against Turkey that you are attributing to Iqbal... like I said... read for yourself... stop firing missiles off of escapist`s shoulders... his quotes and sources are seldom accurate. He parrots half truths that are now pervasive amongst the so called writerss in Pakistan.

It is safe to say that more numerous are the references taken from his books, his ideas, his odes to Kemal Ataturk, and to the fact that even on his death bed Iqbal considered Ataturk a great hero who had brought about the renaissance of Islam in his opinion.

Iqbal did have a disagreement with the idea of importing the swiss code... but these were details.... he never shied away from admiring the modernizing spirit of Ataturk.

Pages 199-200 of Allama Iqbal`s son... Dr. Javed Iqbal`s book `Apna Gareban Chak` attest to the point that Iqbal remained an admirer of the Turkish Republic till the very last breath.

Perhaps it was irresponsible of Iqbal`s own son to quote that letter to refute the argument tha Iqbal had become disillusioned with Kemal Ataturk and the Turkish Republic. He quotes the same letter in the same spirit on page 200.

YLH.

This statement is also based on a number of misconceptions. First being the fact that those expounders in the West have formulated their own meaning of ‘fundamentalist’, that he is non-progressive, overlooks the contemporary requirements or is stuck up to an interpretation of Islam, which makes it unable to face the current challenges. In fact, this is extremely erroneous, one-sided, malafide and exaggerated propaganda. Of course, the earlier orientalists in the West did use the term ‘fundamentalists’ for those Muslims who wished to implement Islam in its real sense as it is and understood by the Muslims. They were really the fundamentalists.

The West suggests, that may it be called ‘Islam’ like the term Christianity is there for the name sake, but the authority of decision should not rest with the Book of Allah, the revealed Guidance and the Sunnah of the last Prophet (p.b.u.h.). Rather the human being should follow the Western yard-stick and decide matters in the light of his or her personal liking and changing necessities and objectives. Also, blindly be followed what the West likes and sanctions. If a Muslim adapts to this criterion, then he is , what they call, ‘progressive’, ‘rationalist’ and ‘moderate’. But, if based on the Qur’an and Sunnah, the Muslims follow their own principles, ideology, traditions, history and civilization, it is then ‘fundamentalism’. This is apparent in all the writings of the Western scholars. Professor Montgomery Watt is a well-known orientalist. Only recently he has openly said, ``In fact, the people who forward the traditional concept of Islam as given by the Qur’an and the holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.), are the fundamentalists. And those who are ready to mould and change Islam according to the Western criteria, are liberal and our real friends.``

Now it can be seen what position in this respect was held by Allama Mohammad Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Study Allama Iqbal, who benefited from both the modern and old sources of knowledge and declared with full conviction that Islam is true (haq) and the foundation characterised by secularism, nationalism, rationalism and science, on which the West rests, is vain and defective.

Allama Muhammad Iqbal presented Islam as a revolutionary concept. In this respect, if even you overlook his poetry, which is the scale and medium of his thought, and go through the ‘New Year Message’, which he gave on January 1, 1938 - the year of his death, you find him saying, ``the coercive and despotic monarchic system sustains under the veil of democracy, nationalism, socialism, fascism and the rest. Under these veils, the freedom values and human dignity are disgraced and ridiculed the world over, that one will not find a parallel to that even in the darkest phase of the history. There is only one creditable unity and that is of the human being, which is above (the prejudices of) colour, race and language. As long as the curse of this so-called democracy, the dirty nationalism and the disgraceful monarchy, is not sweeped and till the time a person gets convinced through his (or her) acts and deeds, of the principle that ‘all creatures are the family of Allah’, and the credibility of colour, creed and the geographic nationalism is obliterated, human being will stay deprived of the welfare and felicity in this worldly life.


In ‘The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam’, Allama Muhammed Iqbal presents his view on the issue of modern legislation and the legislative assemblies. Towards the end of it he openly says and without any rancour, that, ``the West is a big obstacle in the way of human progress, and unless the humanity gets rid of the concept of life given by the West, its problems will not be solved. The moral reconstruction of the universe according to the principles ordained by Islam, the discovery of the faithful person and building the society around social justice, are the foundations on which the world (system) needs to be established``. This was Iqbal’s mission.

Similarly, there was a period in the life of Quaid-e-Azam when, undoubtedly, he was not only an active participant in the Indian National Congress, but was one of its central leaders. Then he was an exponent of Hindu-Muslim unity and a special colleague of Gandhi Jee and Madan Mohan Malwia. But after Quaid-e-Azam closely observed the ‘Brahman’ mentality, he (switched over and) re-organized All India Muslim League and between 1936 and 1940 critically analysed the Muslim Indian situation. His conclusion was that Muslims, on the basis of their religion, morals, faith, history and their culture and civilization, make a distinct nation; they are not simply minority. And, in the light of the thinking of Iqbal, there was no other solution of the problem of the Indian Muslim, except to carve out an independent Muslim state, comprising of areas where they were in majority. A state, that the Muslims may establish on the basis of Islam and according to the principles of Islam. I shall draw attention to the speeches the Quaid-e-Azam delivered during the last five years of his life. That will clarify what was his stand in this matter.

With respect to the question of ``Islamic Democratic State``, what Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam supported and held, and for which they made all out struggle, was to establish a Muslim society and a Muslim state in the light of the unmatched and eternal guidance of Qur’an and Sunnah. A society that fulfilled the imperatives of social justice and in which the Law of Islam (shariah) is acted upon; one in which the Muslims, free from the slavery and imitation of the Western powers, present Islam as a religion of guidance and a permanent culture. So this was the concept of the founders of Pakistan. Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam criticized those who were following a different path. They particularly criticized Turkey which was busy transforming itself into European mould.
Islam is not theocracy. Taking advantage of such statements (of the founders), some people try to impress that we held different opinion from them. In fact, these people forget that where Allama Iqbal discussed this subject, is the sixth speech of his ‘Khutbat’. The sense in which he expressed it in the speech is, that, ``To say, that by way of a principle the process of ‘tauhid’ (unity) is the base of freedom, equality and solidarity of the human species. Now if we see from this angle then according to Islam, the State will mean our endeavour, that these supreme and ideal principles be expressed as the space time forces, as if it is an aspiration that these principles be seen openly working in a definite human social organization. It is, therefore, in this meaning that the Islamic State is expressed as the theocracy (Hukumat-e-Ilahiya), and not in the sense that authority is conferred upon some representative (Zil) of God on earth, who under the excuse of his supposed innocence (infallibility) screens his despotic rule.`` It means that theocracy in Islam is not in the sense that there be some monopolist religious class, which alone should be the source to know the will of Allah. So this was the thinking of Allama Iqbal in the light of Islamic teachings and disposition.

Quaid-e-Azam has said, that he was against theocracy, because there was no concept of such a class in Islam that would enjoy the monopoly in religion, as it is found in Budhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism.

PS: Jang... about your first point... the relations between Iqbal and his elder brother who was a half brother were reportedly strained... the speculation is that his ferociously anti-Ahmadi views had a personal angle to it. This is the view taken by many historians. The point is that whether Iqbal thought of the Ahmadis is immaterial to this debate.

Mantolives - I began to write a response to your posting but then realized that I could no do so without getting into a debate about ahmadiyyat. Perhaps that can be done at another time. However I will say this: I am SHOCKED by your selective analysis. You have left no stone unturned in beating up on Maududi for being against the creation of Pakistan BEFORE 1947. Yet the role of Ghulam Ahmed of Qadyan in supporting AND strengthening the British imperialist thugs and looters has escaped your mind. No wonder, as is the irrefutable historic fact, that Ghulam Ahmed’s religion owes so much to British support.

Also, the Jinnah speech you keep bringing up to support your ``secular Pakistan`` argument - well, Jinnah made a lot of speeches. It is unjust on your part to pick a couple of his speeches to lay an entire thesis in support of secularism. Similarly, it is irresponsible of you to select a quote about the ``long life of ataturk`` to refute several dozen other instances when he spoke out against the events in post-1923 Turkey.

jang,

His statement was in Srinagar in 1944, when some leaguers asked him to expel the Ahmadis from the Muslim League.


Escapist...

Whatever distortion you may want to add to history... but in 1938 a few months before his death Iqbal wrote:


`Muslims should pray for the long life of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk , and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. They still have a lot to do for the Muslims`.


This was in 1938 on his death bed...


Javed Iqbal in his book `Apna Gareban Chak` writes of Iqbal`s devotion and admiration to Kemal Ataturk .... right to the end.

For YLH.


In his same lecture (khutba) Allama Iqbal says, that where ijtihad is necessary, then equally essential is to exercise full care, accord full regard to tradition and that those doing ijtihad must possess knowledge, capability, self-righteousness and fear of God. According to his interpretation, Allama Muhammad Iqbal did favour the right of the National Assembly to do ijtihad, as in the current age that institution could discharge this responsibility. Allama particularly said so in the light of experience of Turkey of Mustafa Kamal Pasha. In this respect, it should be kept in view that Iqbal’s view pertains to the period when from 1924 to 1928, Kamalism had veiled its secularist face. But when the real secular intention of Mustafa Kamal Pasha were clear and he talked of anti-religious secularism, Iqbal felt deeply hurt. He then clearly distanced himself and said:

``It is neither apparent in the deeds of Mustafa, nor in Raza Shah. The oriental soul is still in search of a body``

Then Allama Iqbal said, directly addressing Mustafa Kemal Pasha:

``What is this Secular and Latin stratagem, that entangled you? The remedy for the weak is one: None is Supreme, but Him (the Almighty)``

Seeing the intellectual degeneration and practical deviation of the leadership of Muslim ‘millat’, Allama Iqbal lamented:

``They could and were to lead their age; but those worn out minds (blindly) follow their age``

The background in which Allama Iqbal suggested that Assembly could be assigned the authority of ijtihad, and in his same very address when he emphasized the character of the legislative assemblies, he also very clearly stressed that, ``the legislative assemblies should incorporate the religious scholars (ulema) as an effective element. But the scholars on their part should also allow open discussion and free expression of views in every matter of law and only then provide guidance. Yet to eliminate the chances of wrong interpretation of Islamic shariah, the only way is that the current (outdated) system of the education of jurisprudence in the Muslim countries is reformed. The fiqh syllabus needs further expansion. It is, therefore, necessary that simultaneously the modern jurisprudence is also studied, taking of course, due care``.

Forwarding this view, Allama Iqbal said again in 1932, ``I would recommend that an assembly of the religious scholars (ulema) be constituted, in which those Muslim lawyers be included who have studied the modern principle of law, so that in the light of the current situation, the Islamic Law (shariah) is protected and further expanded. This assembly should be properly accepted, so that any Bill concerning Muslim Personal Law may not get enacted before being thoroughly screened by it.

Allama Iqbal never said that the elected assemblies be given unchecked freedom to do and decide whatever they like. He rather said that the assemblies can be authorized (to undertake ijtihad) provided such capable people were there who fully understood shariah. And that is what we also say, that in the present day circumstances, the assembly, the courts and the scholars (ulema) should all join the process of ijtihad. But it is conditional that permission is subject to adequate knowledge. In this respect, we together with Allama Iqbal, hold the same view.

Allama Iqbal does not permit (self-styled) scholars with poor vision, to exercise this right. If these half-cooked poor-thinking scholars, wish to avail the right of ijtihad making reference to Iqbal, then neither Islam and Iqbal, the defender of Islam, give them this right, nor we can permit them to do so. If this just approach is nick-named theocracy by some elements, then we happily accept the allegation. In reality, however, it is not theocracy, because the opportunities are equally available to every God-fearing scholarly person. There is no monopoly of anybody. May they come from the modern or the old fashioned educational institutions, be they garbed in gown and turban or in western suit, should they possess a degree from west or east; as long as they are educated and possess righteousness (taqwa), they have every right to express their views. You will then (be surprised to) see how the collective conscience and wisdom of the Ummah accepts what is suggested by these intellectuals and prudent authorities. Briefly, we present the same view what Iqbal said. We have written on the subject with sufficient details, and to this effect, we have thoroughly gone through his whole poetry and prose sources, to indicate how Iqbal’s concept of ijtihad gets constructed.

Allama Iqbal did not permit all out freedom in this respect, nor to blindly follow the West. He would rather satisfy the present day demands, but taking all cares which Islam determines. We also strive for and desire the same. Professor Muhammad Munawar Mirza, referring to the statements of Iqbal in respect of ijtihad, rightly points out that, ``Iqbal’s concept of ijtihad was evolutionary like the (process of) ijtihad itself. We may, in the light of ``Reconstruction`` (i.e. khutbat), therefore, keep in view the subsequent letters, statements, addresses and explanations. Iqbal’s thinking did not stop at 1929``. This was a just clarification about Iqbal and his thinking.

Just few things.

For those who want to read the lectures ``The reconstruction of Islamic Thoughts`` can go to this link.

http://www.yespakistan.com/iqbal/reconstruction/

Iqbal elder brother was Qadyaani, and in his last days, Iqbal started to dislike his interference in his life. read ``Walida-e-Aftab, the first wife of Iqbal`` where Aftab Iqbal, the son of Iqbal from his first wife accuses his taya of joinin Qadyaniyyat to get money and some political influence and deprive the first wife and her kids from the wealth Iqbal left after his death.

Maududi wrote lot of books on the stance of Jamaat-i-islami, after the creation of Pakistan and the reasons for his re evaluating his political position.

In his lectures Iqbal mentions that Khilafat is a an important part of Sunni thought.

Sabaq phir parh sadaaqat ka, adaalat ka, shuja`at ka,
Liya jayega tujh se kaam dunya ki imaamat ka


Cheeno Arab hamaara Hindostan hamaara,
Muslim hayn-ham, watan hay saara jahaan hamaara


Please do write Iqbal`s poem on ``Nationalism`` where he cosniders nationalism as kufr.

``In taaza khudaoun main ``watn`` sab say bara hai
jo pairhan iss ka hai woh mazhab ka kafan hai...``

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

sattar #141 Congratulations on the newborn child. I know what you mean about waking up at ungodly hours. Not to mention changing diapers, trying to pat the blessed offspring back to sleep, and so on. But all worth it a million times over.

As for brother urstruly, I suppose those long drawn theological struggles between the two of you are over as well. But dont feel compelled to continue this peaceful coexistence, because there is nothing more exciting than a good old fashioned theological struggle.

Live long and prosper, you and urstruly too. (No, I am not going anywhere, just thought that was a nice touch).

Manto,

1. so what if iqbals bother was ahmedi. his grand father was a hindu, that did not stop him from acknowledging his muslim separateness. in short, an ahmedi brother is not a sufficient argument.

2. ``Jinnah, in contrast to Iqbal, declared consistently and clearly that the Ahmadis were part and parcel of the Muslim community.``

In what context did jinah have to declare that ahmedis were muslims? I thought he said that for the state of Pakistan the religion was not important (you will cease to be muslims or hindus speech e.g.).

thanks.

Malik99...

Why must you always resort to such baseless statements... the only one selectively quoting Iqbal here is escapist ... Allama Iqbal was a human being subject to human emotions. His elder brother who was his half brother was Ahmadi... and one might even argue that Iqbal might have rejected Ahmadiyat on a religious level but how does that prove that he stood for an Islamist state?

Read Allama Iqbal`s work `Reconstruction of religious thought in Islam` ... and read his Allahabad address... he is all praise for the Turkish model of governance... far from the `Islamist` state, Allama Iqbal was in favor of a democratic republic modelled after Turkey....


His most famous statement that I quote with regard is:

Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim states will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such states


You seem like a smart guy... why don`t you read Iqbal`s book ... i.e. Reconstruction of religious thought in Islam... especially the lecture `Principle of Movement in Islam` for yourself? and make your own conclusions instead of latching on to people like escapist?


Instead of making random statements ... you should be asking the following questions:

1) What was Iqbal`s view on Democracy?

While he thought that Western democracy was imperfect, he thought it was the closest thing that resembled the system of social equality as envisaged by Islam.

2) What was Iqbal`s view on `Islamic` Economics?

He believed that Interest Banking was in no form Riba. That Interest banking was legitimate `Bey`... Buying and selling.

3) What was Iqbal`s position on the Khilafat ?

He didn`t care much for it. He stayed away from the Khilafat movement ... In his `Principle of Movement in Islam` he describes the Khilafat in a whole new way, inferring that Republican Turkey itself had done the right thing by dismantling the Ottoman Empire.

4) Did Iqbal envisage religious rule in the separate Muslim state ?

He said himself ``Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim states will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such states``

Do you think he was deceiving the Hindus?


Even if Iqbal did think that the Ahmadis were Kafir... how does it change the above mentioned points?

---

Dr. Muhammad Allama Iqbal



Introduction.
As a poet Iqbal represented in perhaps the most sensitive manner, the collective consciousness of his people during a certain period of their history. He was able to do so because he maintained a constant and direct contact with his audience at all levels. In the old days the institution of the `Mushaira` helped the poet to maintain such a contact. But the `Mushaira` was an exclusive club of the literary and the social elite. By the time Iqbal appeared on the seene poetry was no longer the monopoly of a tiny minority. Iqbal was not a poet of the `Mushaira`. He was instead a poet of the `Jalsa`. His participation in the annual general meeting of the Anjuman-i-Himayat-i-Islam-a great forum for all the eminent Muslims of those day-was a regular feature for many years His audience was not the social elite but the common folks. Unlike the modern Urdu poet who followed him, Iqbal was not writing for a public he did not know, nor was his public listening to a poet it did not understand. There was excellent rapport between Iqbal and his public.


New middle class
Basically, Iqbal`s public was the rising middle class of the Muslim community of the sub-continent, particularly the new intelligentsia-a product of the Aligarh Movement. This new middle class and its intelligentsia was deeply conscious of the separate entity of Muslims as a minority community. The feeling of separate entity had its foundations not only in religion and culture but also in history because Muslims generally identified themselves as inheritors of the traditions of Muslim supremacy for more than 700 years.

The Hindus who constituted the majority community organized themselves politically under the banner of the Indian National Congress, and developed the concept of composite nationalism which was supposed to be broadly Indian embracing all religious communities, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and the rest, However, Muslim separateness in the cultural sphere was recognized even by the so-called nationalist Muslim who accepted the theory of composite Indian nationalism at the political level. This is apparent from a book of Prof. Mr. M. Mujeeb of the Jamia Millia, Delhi, ``The Indian Muslims`` written some 20 years after the partition of the sub-continent.

This is not the place to go into the history of Hindu-Muslim relations during the 90 year period, 1857-1947. Suffice it to say that the mass of Muslim community did not accept the concept of composite Indian nationalism. Iqbal was perhaps the single major influence in sharpening the feeling of Muslim separateness on the basis of religion, history, tradition and culture. He gave his community a massage of faith hope and struggle. He believed in a dynamic rather than static view of life. Activism, which was the corner stone of Iqbal`s philosophical thinking, had a direct relationship with the aspirations of the rising middle class of the Muslim Community.

As the years passed by the conflict between the Hindus and Muslims became more and more acute. In fact it became the central problems for the Muslim community. Iqbal`s involvement with his community was far too deep for him to ignore this problem. He always had his finger on the pulse of the national sentiment. He, therefore, considered it his bounded duty to give a lead.

Iqbal gave the lead in his presidential address to the annual session of the All-India Muslim League at Allahabad in December 1930. He argued that the principle of European democracy could not be applied to India without recognizing the fact of communal groups. He voiced the demand for a separate Muslim state because ``The life of Islam as a cultural force in this country(India) very largely depends on its centralization in a specific territory.`` He specified the territory by saying: ``I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single state the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.``

Iqbal was at pains to explain that the creation of a separate Muslim state was in the best interests of India and Islam. For India it means security and peace resulting from a balance of power for Islam an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian imperialism, was forced to give it, to mobilize its law, its education`s its cultural and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and with the spirit of modern times``.


Two fold purpose

It is apparent from the above that the purpose for the creation of a separate Muslim state was two-fold. It was to end the Hindu-Muslim conflict and also to enable Islam to play its role as a cultural force. Iqbal believed that Islam as a world fact had a commitment to history. In the context of the Indian sub-continent this commitment could only be fulfilled by the creation of a separate Muslim state.

It may be of interest to recall that Iqbal was greatly impressed and inspired by Kemal Ataturk`s Turkey. In his lecture on ``The principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam`` which forms a chapter of his book. ``The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam``, Iqbal paid glowing tributes to modern Turkey and approved its freedom of Ijtihad with a view to rebuilding the law of Shariat in the light of modern thought and experience. He wrote: ``The truth is that among the Muslim nations of today Turkey alone has shaken off its dogmatic slumber, and attained self-consciousness. She alone has claimed her right of intellectual freedom: she alone has passed from the ideal to the real.``

Iqbal thought that most Muslim countries ``are mechanically repeating old values, where as the Turk is on the way to creating new values.`` He than goes on to observe: ``If the renaissance of Islam is a fact, and I believe it is a fact, we too one day, like the Turks, will have to re-evaluate our intellectual inheritance.

So in Iqbal`s view Modern Turkey was the only Muslim country which was trying to fulfill Islam`s commitment to history. She could serve as a model for us also. It would, there fore, quite valid to suggest that the inspiration that Iqbal received from Modern Turkey was perhaps responsible for his demand for a separate Muslim state in North-West India.


Fight against feudalism
Iqbal was an ailing man when he assumed the leadership of the Punjab Provincial Muslim League in the midthirties. He operated from his sick-bed. This again is a proof of his intense feeling for his community and his deep involvement in its affairs. The most notable thing about the last two years of Iqbal`s life, 1936-1938, as brought our and emphasized by an eminent historian of the period. Dr. Ashiq Hussein Batalvi, is how Iqbal fought against the domination of the feudal landlords in the Provincial Muslim League. He represented the rising middle-class and in fact the mass of the Muslim community. He was acutely conscious of their problems. The Great Depression of the 1930`s had its terrible impact on the people of the sub-continent. It, therefore, not surprising to observe that Iqbal was perhaps the first Muslim leader to draw attention to the economic problem of Muslims as a community. In his letter to Jinnah, Iqbal highlighted his concern for the problem on more than one occasion. In his letter of May 28, 1937, he says. ``The problem of bread is becoming more and more acute. ``The question, therefore, is how is it possible to solve the problem of Muslim poverty? And the whole future of the league depends on the League`s ability to solve this question. If the League can give no such promises I am sure the Muslim masses will remain indifferent to it as before.``

Having posed the question in such candid terms Iqbal goes on to observe: ``After a long and careful study of Islamic Law, I have come to the conclusion that if this system of Law is properly understood and applied, at least the right to subsistence is secured to everybody. But the enforcement and development of the Shariat of Islam is impossible in this country without a free Muslim state of states. This has been my honest conviction for many years and I still believe this to be the only way to solve the problem of bread for Muslims as well as secure a peaceful India``.

In the same letter Iqbal discusses socialism or social democracy. He use these two terms synonymously. He argues that Jawaharlal. Nehru`s socialism could not be accepted by the caste-ridden Hindus society. ``For Islam the acceptance of social democracy in some suitable form and consistent with the legal principles of a revolution but a return to the original purity of Islam. goes on to reassert that in order to make it possible for Muslims India to solve modern problems, poverty being one of them, ``it is necessary to redistribute the country and to provide one or more Muslim state with absolute majorities.``

It may be recalled that Iqbal had originally specified the territory of the proposed Muslim state as consisting of the provinces of the Punjab, Sind North-West Province and Baluchistann. But in the above passage Iqbal also refers to one or more Muslim states with absolute majorities. In his letter of June 21, 1937, Iqbal mentions the other Muslim majority area, Bengal, along with North-West India and raises the Question as to why it should not be considered as a nations ``entitled to self-determination just as other nations in India and outside India``.

Iqbal then goes on to plead for holding the session of the League in Lahore because this would give a fresh political awakening to the Punjab Muslims. he repeated this request in his letter of August 11, 1937, by saying that it would prove to be ``a turning-point in the history of the League and an important step toward mass contact``.


Mass contact
As a man of the people Iqbal was deeply concerned about the political awakening of the people. Hence his emphasis on mass contact.

The League session was not held in Lahore but in Lucknow Iqbal did not attend it but in his letter of October 7, 1937 he reverts to the me of mass contact and makes the following suggestion.

``The Palestine question is very much agitating the minds of the Muslims. We have a very fine opportunity for mass contact for the purposes of the League. I have no doubt that the league will pass a strong resolution on this question and also by holding a private conference of the leaders decide on some sort of a positive action in which masses may share in large numbers. This will at once popularize the League and may help the Palestine Arabs. Personally I would not mind going to jail on an issue which affects both Islam and India. The formation of a Western base on the very gates of the East is a menace to both``.

Iqbal`s mind was agitated on the Palestine question because the question was agitating the minds of the Muslim people. It is poignant to observe that an ailing Iqbal, barely six months before his death, was prepared to go to jail on an issue which he thought was a menace both to his religion and his country.

In summing up one could say that in the Pakistan of Iqbal`s concept Islam was to play its role as a cultural force and fulfill its commitment to history. The new country was to solve modern problems by exercising the freedom of Ijtihad and in accordance with the original spirit of Islam and the spirit of modern times. The problem of poverty was to be solved by the acceptance of social democracy in a form consistent with the legal principles of Islam. Finally Iqbal`s concern for mass contact underscores his faith in the people`s power and in their right to participate and share in the shaping of their destiny. It also implies that power should rest where it belongs.