From: srahman@seas.gwu.edu (Shafiq-ur Rahman)
Subject: Mullah, Ulama, Jinnah and Two Nation Theory
Organization: George Washington University
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 02:40:59 GMT

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am using my friend's account to post this letter. This is my viewpoint.
                                   Arshad Hussain(ahussain@prism.poly.edu)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder)
Subject: Re: Pakistan

>1: Orthodox Muslim ulemas (from Deoband...) mostly were sidlined
>   after 1857 because they decided  not to compromise with the British.
>   They realized that Muslims could not live harmoniously with the masters.
>   As they were out of power, they hid themselves in their madrassahs.

When  'Islamic Empire'-- founded by Aurang Zaib that imposed Jazia 
on non-muslims( which were of course Hindu majority), killed non-muslims
( Hindus and Sikhs) disintegrated and collapsed, mullah lost power. So he
started  looking inward and tried to consolidated its base--backward muslims.
Mullah started Brayelvi-Deobandi Fasaad, decreed against 'English knowledge' 
etc.  Certainly, mullah's policies and views cannot be called 'Two Nation 
Theory'.  There is a famous case in which one sect refused to allow people of 
other sect to use a MOSQUE. These two Islamic sects fought their battle
up to House of Lords( Privy Council?) which declared that any muslim 
can go to any mosque. Remember? This was the STATE of MULLAH and ULAMA
of that time.

>2: Sir Syed and like minded people opposed this policy of seclusion
>   of the general ulemas. They embarked on a more compromising path.

Thanks God, he realized that Muslims MUST be educated in order to survive. 
BTW, Syed Ahmad Khan never worked for Hindu-Muslim unity. He never joined
Congress. Read his speeches.

>3: Generation raised under Sir Syed lost sight of the reasons of 
>   (i) why ulemas didn't compromise, (ii) why Sir Syed compromised.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

>4: Therefore, we saw between 1900-20 efforts by Mohammad Ali Jauhar and
>   co to follow Turkey's youthful march towards modernism.

You must be joking. Khalafat Movement, for example, was to turn clock back: 
foolish act of short-vision by a sincere mullah. Do you know Jinnah opposed it?

>5: Some of the leaders like Jinnah, etc in the mean time went 
>   to the extreme and became believer of HIndu-Muslim unity.

 Compare (5) to (1) and see which one is 'extreme'.

>I said that Ulemas and Jinnah and co. were both believers of the
>same two nation theory. 

 Who were these 'ulama' ? Any names??? Any references??

Jinnah wanted to form a very loose federation --3 units. He was willing
to compromise: less autonomy for larger land. Till  March 1947, that
was his strategy. He used 'Pakistan' as a trump card to get concessions
from Congress and the Raj. When he could not achieve his goals, he  even 
asked Soherwardy to work for INDEPENDENT Bengal if Calcatta was included.
That was the 2-Nation concept as Jinnah understood. How Mullah and Ulama 
understood this concept,  you tell me.

>I already mentioned that ulemas had lost the national leadership of
>the Muslims. 

When was mullah 'national leader' of muslims??

Arshad Hussain

Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.afghanistan,soc.culture.turkish,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.asean,soc.culture.arabic