The Truth
about ‘Secular Jinnah’
By Saleena Karim
Nottingham, UK
With the recent infamous remarks
by the BJP’s Lal Krishna Advani that Jinnah’s
speech on 11th August 1947 was the ‘classic
exposition of a secular state’, the whole
prickly debate surrounding the ideological basis
of Pakistan became hot once again. Besides the
numerous newspaper articles from every quarter,
there also came the inevitable arguments that
ensued mainly in online public forums and chat
rooms. Soon people began looking to the literature
on the history of Partition to support their beliefs,
whether pro-secularist or pro-Islamic, pro or
anti Jinnah. A number of books on the subject
have come back into the limelight as a direct
result; most of them are old, but at least one
title has just been republished, presumably, as
a friend of mine has cynically remarked, to cash
in on the hype.
I have found the whole thing quite funny. At the
time of Mr. Advani’s story being circulated
in the press, I was writing my own book on Jinnah
– in which I would show that one of the
most important pro-secularist writers, the late
Chief Justice Muhammad Munir, had been misleading
his readers for over a quarter of a century. The
connection to Advani in this regard is obvious
– Advani had echoed Munir almost word for
word when he described the 11th August speech
as a ‘classical exposition of a secular
state’. In his book Munir had described
the same speech as one of ‘the clearest
expositions of a secular state’. It was
most amusing perhaps because I knew that the speech
of 11th August was not the ‘exposition’
of a secular state, but that of a transitional
Islamic one – not that many Pakistani Muslims
seem to appreciate it. And to watch every other
pro-secularist writer refer to Munir as though
his work was utterly authentic was just plain
embarrassing. In reality, Munir’s book was
so reliable that he had not bothered to reference
his sources, and to boot, a quote that he had
attributed to ‘secular’ Jinnah was
a fake – not that anyone had ever noticed
(or cared to notice) for 26 years. Oh well, better
late than never.
I have to admit that I am quite baffled as to
why the Muslims of Pakistan have so much faith
in secularism. Far from being the panacea to all
ills, it is currently the most controversial ideology
in the world. The secularists state that religion
has been responsible for many conflicts throughout
history. But so has secularism.
Whilst the modern version of the term ‘secular’
has only emerged in the last couple of centuries
or so, the root of ‘humanism’ can
be traced as far back as ancient Greece. Ancient
Greek philosophers were amongst the first to look
at the universe from a materialist and rationalist
perspective, and also amongst the first to question
the existence of supernatural deities. Certain
philosophers such as Socrates advocated the existence
of universally applicable, or absolute truths,
but also believed that these truths were natural.They
believed that humanity could find the solutions
to its problems without divine intervention.
Ancient Greek philosophies had a great influence
through the ages, but with time people’s
opinions of them changed, and new ideas were introduced,
many of which came into conflict with previous
ideas. Hence the ‘secularist’ ideals
of yesterday are not the same as the ones of today.
Secularism is considered by many in Pakistan to
be the most enlightened way of thinking, when
in reality it has done little to prevent or reduce
war, conflict or oppression. In fact, both World
Wars – by far the most devastating in history
– have been the result of modern secular
ideals – nationalism and capitalism. Religious
hatred may have been used as a propaganda tool
in the case of World War II, but it was only to
foster stronger feelings of nationalism.
Today’s religions too are largely the product
of human, not supernatural, doctrines, but Muslims
at least can find Truth in the Qur’an. It,
as well as earlier Revelation, advocated justice
and equality long before humanist liberals began
to do the same. I am sick and tired of watching
Pakistani Muslim secularists act as though the
advocates of Islam (labeled as ‘modernists’)
have been stealing the credit for ‘Western’
or ‘modern’ ideas. Read the Qur’an.
Does it not teach that all humans are equal (2:62,
5:69), that they all have a right to the essentials
of life (16:90)? Does it not teach religious tolerance
(2:256,10:99-100) and freedom (5:48)? Does it
not advocate ‘mutual consultation’
(42:38), or what we might call ‘democracy’?
The secularists will probably say no. Worst yet,
many Muslims will say ‘I don’t know
…’
And that’s the problem. I am not going to
enter a long-winded discussion of the type of
socio-political organization the Qur’an
advocates. It should be common knowledge. The
values of contemporary secularism happen to be
the same as some of the ones enshrined in the
Revelation, not the other way round. If the Muslims
of Pakistan don’t know that, then it is
little wonder that they don’t know what
Jinnah wanted.
Saleena Karim is the author of Secular Jinnah:
Munir’s Big Hoax Exposed (2005)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
