Pakistan was made for all the right reasons and religious extremism was not one of them!

Published: March 30, 2013

More than 90 per cent of the Muslim League leaders and workers were beardless moderate Muslims.

The discussion regarding the object of the creation of Pakistan, stirred by Mr Yaqoob Khan Bangash and Mr Yasser Latif Hamdani in the recent weeks resulted in very useful and illuminating arguments.

Both sides have given solid grounds to prove their point of view. I would like to give my understanding of the issue based on my study of history and analysis of different intellectuals including Mr Bangash and Mr Hamdani.

To understand the object of Pakistan and the vision of our founding fathers, we need to keep in view the circumstances which forced the demand of Pakistan and the people who struggled for it.

As regard the circumstances, there is no denying the fact that prejudices based on cast and creed were deeply rooted in religious Hindus and were at their extreme manifestations against Muslims during the Congress ministries, formed in 1937 until they resigned in 1939.

It is pertinent to note that the Muslim League performed dismally, receiving very nominal votes in those elections and was not able to form a government in any province. However, in the two year stint of the Congress ministries, the Muslims were oppressed to such an extent that they became completely disillusioned with the secular character of Congress.

Consequently, the tables turned in the 1946 elections in favour of the Muslim League. The Muslim minority was instilled with so much fear and insecurity that they swallowed the bitter pill of partition suffering the worst kind of atrocities and hardships.

Whilst the Muslim minority of India was oppressed and discriminated against by extremist Hindu elements on the basis of creed, the moderate Hindus failed to check the oppression. Though the Muslims were divided in different sects holding various beliefs, they were all treated with hate and discrimination by Hindus equally; to them they were all just Muslims.

Accordingly, Congress ministries, dominated by extremist Hindus, paved the way for the partition of India as the harsh and discriminatory treatment meted out to the Muslims on the basis of their religious faith left them with no option but to demand a new country.

Therefore, the reason for the creation of Pakistan was not to promote religious extremism but to defend the people’s right to freedom of belief and to save them from oppression and discrimination on that count.

Furthermore, it is said that Pakistan was demanded to enable Muslims to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of Islam. These much quoted words have been repeated many times but rarely understood in the real sense of the purpose.

In the days when this slogan was made, the world that the Muslims and Islam represented to the minorities of India, who were being persecuted and oppressed because of their faith, was that of a separate state where such persecution would not be possible.

To put it simply, the slogan meant that Pakistan would be a state where minorities would be free to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of their religion without the fear of any persecution. No other interpretation is possible, as the Muslims in those days were comprised of so many different sects whose principles of Islam were different on many points and in some cases contradictory.

Additionally, no minorities except Hindus and Sikhs emigrated from Pakistan. Had Pakistan been created only for Muslims then all the minorities would have tried to immigrate to India.

Moreover, Pakistan cannot be a country created to promote a way of life different from those who created it. It is pertinent to note that the people who faced the worst of oppression and discrimination were not the Muslim scholars, but the common man whom these religious leaders considered as non-practicing or secular Muslims.

These moderate Muslims faced Hindu employers, traders, ministers or bureaucrats in their vocations and tasted the worst of discrimination and oppression. The religious leaders were generally spared from oppression because they mostly dealt with their own community in performing their duties and earning their livelihood.

Most importantly, more than 90 per cent of the Muslim League leaders and workers were beardless moderate Muslims. Some of them were even addicted to alcohol, but they strived hard for the creation of Pakistan. These moderate Muslims bore the brunt of oppression and discrimination and stood up to get out of it.

Hence, Pakistan was created for the common, oppressed man, and not an extremist Muslim scholar.

Quaid-e-Azam, the founder of this nation, was a non-practicing Muslim himself and it was a task to establish his school of thought in Muslim sects after his death, in order to determine inheritance issues. The main reason for this uncertainty was that he rarely performed any religious rites or prayers witnessed by the people.

So how can such a man struggle for the creation of a religious state?

How can he be accepted as a leader if the purpose of the Muslims was to create a religious state?

How come most of the extremely religious personalities opposed the idea of Pakistan?

The only answer to the above questions, in my view, is that the rationale and object for the creation of Pakistan was to create a country to save the persecuted Muslim minority of India from persecution by the Hindu majority.

Islamisation was resorted to only after the government failed to provide any substantial progress for the welfare of the masses. It required doing so to justify death, pain and misery involved in the grand partition.

To cut it short, Pakistan was created to protect people against oppression and discrimination on the basis of cast and creed — only.

Follow Tahir on Twitter @TahirMahmoodAdv

tahir.mahmood

Tahir Mahmood

A lawyer with 17 years of legal experience. He tweets @TahirMahmoodAdv

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of The Express Tribune.

  • Ali tanoli

    Ahmedis or Qadianis were forced to moved to pakistan too from Gurdhaspur punjab even though they are non muslim i understand your argument but did we created a fare and balanced system yet can we forget hindu discrimination they themself discriminated by fellow reliegouse peoples…Recommend

  • Mj

    On the contrary, I think that people in Pakistan, or at least the majority, is freely exercising their religious freedom to persecute all others, thus satisfying the raison d’être of this country. We can argue all we want whether the founding fathers wanted a secular democratic state or a theocracy/religious state, but the fact is that the unfolding of events has pushed Pakistan towards a bigoted and highly discriminatory state whose key social policies are dictated by theocrats through display of street power and intimidation. Unchecked religious freedom is not necessarily a good thing if people think that their religion commands them to commit injustices. Recommend

  • BlackJack

    Whatever is in those textbooks, it clearly stays with you long after your education is over.Recommend

  • http://usa Babloo

    Pakistan was made with the aid of instruments and tools that were based on religious extremism. Please study ‘DIRECT ACTION DAY”.Recommend

  • Indian

    You’ve been over fed with false stories of victimisation. Get over it. Ab jaisa bhi hai, aapko aapka watan mil gaya, ab kya karna is justification ke fizool mein baar baar jaane se? Man-hi-man please shukar mana lo ke aap minorities ke jahaan (yeah right!) Pakistan mein hain, save your and our time by refraining from writing such rubbish. Recommend

  • http://usa Babloo

    This write up is not based on history but based on wholesale lies. First of all there was no such thing as oppression of Muslims in British India in the 1936-47 period. In fact , the chief ministers of some muslim majority areas were muslims ! Many leaders of Congress were Muslims. On top of that the commentator says “Additionally, no minorities except Hindus and Sikhs emigrated from Pakistan. Had Pakistan been created only for Muslims then all the minorities would have tried to immigrate to India.” That is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard. Hindus and Sikhs made of about 25-30% of Pakistan and Hindus and sikhs constituted 95% of the minorities of Pakistan in 1947 and the author dismisses there demise in Pakistan. Compare that to India were Muslims continued to live and now make greater % of Indian population than they did in 1947 !Recommend

  • Yoghurt lover

    You have written 24 paragraphs.

    Out of which in 11 parapgraphs you talk about the oppression of muslims at the hands of Hindus.

    Your narrative is extremely poor. Nobody mentions the same topic in 11 paragraphs unless he is a hate-monger or a propagandist. Any good writer broaches a topic in one or two paragraphs and does not repeat it ad-nausea like you have done in 11 paras.

    Your writing quality itself is extremely poor, devoid of facts and figures. Except for TWO facts (only 2 facts? please read more), the rest are rhetoric. Even Maulana Fazlur Rehman will cringe reading your writing.

    Your writing lacks structure. You start with muslim oppression and end with non-sensical rhetorical questions.

    I’m sorry to say ET, this quality of writing won’t qualify even for e primary school essay competition. It’s basically one full page of rants and ramblings of an ignorant man. I’m sorry, you are so desperate to publish such a piece of garbage.

    The most redonculous thing of the entire article is how he justifies Zia’s islamization through the sufferings of muslims at partition.Recommend

  • جج

    USA was made for all the right reasons and religious extremism was not one of them!

    India was made for all the right reasons and religious extremism was not one of them!

    Israel was made for all the right reasons and religious extremism was not one of them!

    Do i need to write more.

    It is easy to criticize Islam, Pakistan.

    ready what happened with Lord Nazir Recommend

  • Foreign Leg

    @Author: I was going to say that perhaps you read the Pakistan Studies textbook, but looking at your age perhaps you wrote it instead. Your narrative on what happened on the eve of independence is revisionist.
    .
    Accordingly, Congress ministries, dominated by extremist Hindus, paved the way for the partition of India as the harsh and discriminatory treatment meted out to the Muslims on the basis of their religious faith left them with no option but to demand a new country.
    .
    So now you say Congress was dominated by extremist Hindus who wanted a partition but now the very same Congress is secular. You also forget that the nationalist RSS was in existence back then and it was they who opposed partition and though never proven, Gandhi lost his life as result. So do you mean to say that Congress was more extremist than the RSS in 1947? Also how would you explain the fact that the Congress had many Muslim leaders including Maulana Azad?
    .
    Also I know that authors in Pakistan always love to see India’s independence from a Hindu-Muslim mindset. How then would you explain the fact that states that had little political representation and tall leaders such as Kerala and to a certain extant even Tamil Nadu and Karnataka still joined the union which was dominated by a few leaders from Bombay and the North?
    .
    What Bungash says is correct. Jinnah altered his message according to the audience, really did not have any vision beyond getting a state and the very fact that he wanted a state for Muslims was when the protection of other minorities went out of the window. As Bungash says, Jinnah wanted an Islamic state. Now dear Author it is up to you to figure exactly what kind of Islamic state Jinnah wanted.Recommend

  • Faizan Kayani

    The article does not address all the aspects for creation of Pakistan. The writer has just tried to prove that Islam has nothing to do with creation of Pakiatan , and with no offence he is totally wrong.

    Mr Tahir has himself clearly mentioned that Muslims were bieng supreessed by Hindus in all fields of life. They were not bieng given even their basic rights. So the need to establish a state where all the people irrespctive of cast , creed and religion can live independantly was mandatory.

    And such a state was made under the flag of Muslim League. The name itself suggesting that the state would be Based on Islamic Principles. And for your kind information it is the very basic rule of any islamic society to give respect to all minorities and people.

    More than 90 per cent of the Muslim League leaders and workers were beardless moderate Muslims doesnt mean that their intent was to make a Buddist , Christian or hindu state , but having the same aim of Islamic republic of Pakistan.

    And i think you should first Read Ideology of Pakistan to make your doubts clear. Recommend

  • Proletarian

    @Tahir Mahmood
    You keep talking about how the Hindus under congress rule oppressed the Muslims so much that this Hindu oppression drove them to call for Pakistan yet you do not mention a single incident which backs your claims. You fail to take into account that large and diverse sections of India’s Muslims were against Pakistan, including the Gaffar Khan secularists, the Punjabi Unionist party, not just the goddamn Mullahs who are generally the first to cry wolf when some other sect or religion challenges Muslim power.

    You pooh pooh the flight of Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan as if thats nothing but fail to point out that they make up a fifth of the population of that the which you now call Pakistan and that any other minority apart from them such as the Christians and the Parsis where extremely small in number and that from their point of view living in either India or Pakistan did not make much difference to them, since they would be minorities in either place.

    In defense of your absurd claims you say “no minorty apart from hindus and sikh migrated from Pakistan” but if Pakistan was created as a secular land for all minorities then tell me, WHY DID NO MINORITY APART FROM MUSLIMS MIGRATE TO PAKISTAN?, If Pakistan was for all minorities (apart from Hindus and Sikhs), then why didn’t Christians’ Jain and Buddhists flock to Pakistan? India has 3 christian majority provinces, in case you didn’t know.

    What I go from your article was that the educated upper-class Muslims, so used to living lives of privilege, felt they could not compete with the Hindus when it came getting top jobs and business since the Hindus both outnumbered and outclassed them, this anxiety in the face of fair competition is what you call ‘persecution’. Unwilling to subject themselves to a system of open merit many of the nominally religious, beardless, and (even in some cased alcoholic) Muslims of India decided it would be a great idea to make their own country where they could be the unchallenged capitalist elite. This is the same logic used by the separatist Baloch leaders.

    Tahir Mahmood, you beleive in false narratives. You should read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it will lift the veil from your eyesRecommend

  • SIdrah

    I have to say I agree with Mr. Bangash’s second article on this topic.
    Quaid-e-Azam was no doubt a great man who Pakistanis must respect deeply and I myself really respect his determination and resolve but both him and Allama Iqbal prove to be very contradicting personalities if you study them. At least other Muslims like say Mirza Ghalib (I know a terrible comparison) were the same people both privately and publicly.

    Anyway does it matter anymore why Pakistan was created? It’s here now. Pakistan now is what we make of it not what some people 60-70 years ago wanted. They are not here today but we are. We have to stop getting in these pointless debate’s and think about the present and future.

    All I see now is a nation stuck in the past. Recommend

  • Rajesh

    If the writer thinks that the Muslims of the sub-continent were so oppressed and discriminated by the Hindus, he must also explain why 85% of Muslims living in India chose not to migrate.Recommend

  • Insaan

    Author “Had Pakistan been created only for Muslims then all the minorities would have tried to immigrate to India.”

    Go study history how forefathers of present day Pakistani Muslims were forced to convert to Islam. How come Muslims minorities get along better with each other in India then in Pakistan.

    Pious Pakis forget to expel other minorities, but Pakis are terrorizing Christians now using Blasphemy and preparing Christians for the inevitable choose Islam or die. Ahmadis and Shias were not minorities when Pakistan was created. Now history will repeat itself and same thing that happened to Sikhs and Hindus at partition will happen to Christians, Ahmadis, Shias, Hindus and Sikhs in the near future.Recommend

  • Iyaz Ali

    So u got all this hindu extremists info from Pak school textbooks. No wonder it doesnt make sense.Recommend

  • http://India Feroz

    You seem to have learned your history at a Madarasa. If as you say Hindus were extremists and Muslims were discriminated against before Independence, you are revealing your bigotry. Before Independence the British ruled India, not Hindus or Muslims, dear brother. Secondly, India was and is secular because of Hindus love of diversity and kindly read the Indian Constitution as well as the Pakistani Constitution. You can speak any number of lies and nobody will care as long as you feel good about it. However your attempt to pull those you dislike to your own level, is contemptible. Have you managed to protect minorities against discrimination — please educate yourself by seeing the census figures after Independence and now.Recommend

  • Hashim

    Dude may i remind you of the rallying cry

    Pakistan ka Malta kiya la ilaha .il Allah.

    Oppression of caste and creed my derriere.Recommend

  • http://USA Observer

    I also applaud the people who have given the comments here because they have nailed the fictitious nature of this article. Absolutely no grasp of the history.A product of biased and 3rd education of Pakistan school system. Recommend

  • BlackJack

    Had Pakistan been created only for Muslims then all the minorities would have tried to immigrate to India. You are left with 3% minorities.
    Had Hindus been actually oppressing Muslims then all of them would have tried to migrate to Pakistan. India has at least 15% muslims.Recommend

  • asma khalid

    I congratulate u on this effort.u are the person who have observed the actual facts. I believe it is the need of the hour to justify Muslims and Islam in the eyes of the world and among us as well.it is a journey of realization so keep it up.Recommend

  • Omar Malik

    Thought provoking and the reasons seem credible. I really appreciate the dialogue started on this.Recommend

  • Naveen

    Some of the Author’s core arguments such as->
    1.”there is no denying the fact that prejudices based on cast and creed were deeply rooted in religious Hindus”
    2.”no minorities except Hindus and Sikhs emigrated from Pakistan.”
    3.”Pakistan was demanded to enable Muslims to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of Islam….the slogan meant that Pakistan would be a state where minorities would be free to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of their religion without the fear of any persecution.”

    are emotion-based, rather than fact based assertions. Anyway, I will share with the author and commentators on this page what Indian Textbook of Class XII says on Partition ->
    http://ncertbooks.prashanthellina.com/class_12.History.ThemesinIndianHistoryIII/14.pdf

    PS: I am yet to make up my mind on whether Partition was a good or a bad thing but I prefer fact based realistic arguments to arrive at my conclusion.Recommend

  • khizer

    Disappointing writing to say the least. This is stuff we used to read of in the outdated propaganda filled pakistani school textbooks. Get out of that phase please. Oppressed muslims in India? Go ask the muslims who are now a ‘minority’ in India how they feel vs what shia or christian minorities in our country feel. We were made for different reasons.. Not what you have written in the article: Power hungry muslim leaders of that time. It’s just sad what our politicians and army has turned us into 60 odd years later. Recommend

  • abhi

    Is this some kind of joke?Recommend

  • Mj

    We can argue all we want whether the founding fathers wanted a secular democratic state or a theocracy/religious state, but the fact is that the unfolding of events has pushed Pakistan towards a bigoted and highly discriminatory state whose key social policies are dictated by theocrats through display of street power and intimidation. Unchecked religious freedom is not necessarily a good thing if people think that their religion commands them to commit injustices. Recommend

  • http://IE dmf

    The Taliban in Pakistan have after over a decade of violence ,against establsiment , have an historical opportunity here . Should Taliban make a commitment for far reaching peaceful outcome for their political agenda ? A declaration similar to Abdullah Ocalan , the leader of Kurdish people would be the path . . Abdullah has ordered his fighters and declared that hence forth theirs would be a political struggle . If Taliban enter into mainstream as a political force , and support any of existing Islamic political parties ! If that is the path for their future , why not now get into May 11 2013 elections ? Recommend

  • Rahul

    I congratulate you and the textbook team for getting rid of ‘out of control’ Hindu Extremists through partition. Now I would like to know what grand plans you have for the non-Hindu extremists currently ravaging Pakistan. Recommend

  • Punjabi from other side

    Author mentioned the Congress ministries but failed to mention that only province where Congress ministry was formed in Pakistan (Then NorthWest India) was KP and if I am not wrong 50% of the Pathans even in 1946 said that they don’t want partition(even when Bachha Khan and Congress boycotted the elections). In Punjab Sikandar Hayat Khan and in Sindh Bux Somro both muslims. But thanx for writting the article because it shows how brainwashing is done by Pak school textbooks.Recommend

  • Parvez

    On this subject I found Jaswant Singh’s book ‘ Jinnah, India Partition and Independence ‘ very objective though a bit laborious to read…………its a scholarly attempt to make sense of a complicated issue.Recommend

  • SM

    This post is sad if it was not so hilarious. Lets get this straight from a Pakistani Muslim point of view — Muslims ruled India for 800 years but there were so discriminated and oppressed by Hindus that they had to make a new country only for Sunni Muslims? And Indian Muslims are so stupid that they all collectively decided to stay back in India and take a chance with the discrimination rather than go to Pakistan!? Is that what are you saying? I will stop here. Anything I write from here on will be farsi (its a language of your ancestor, remember? or was it arabic? you are probably sunni so I think you can figure that out. lol) for you, so no point explaining. Enjoy life in ignorance. I know its bliss just not for us, but I am sure you will enjoy it. Recommend

  • Raj – USA

    To the Author:
    On the discrimination of non-muslims in India, I had asked one question earlier but no one ever came with a reply. I repeat my question here again. May be the author can come with a reply. I am prepared to correct my views if anyone can come with authentic proof, not just statements or verses from Quran.

    Muslims in Pakistan do not eat with non-muslims, nor do they eat anything prepared by non muslims. High Court canteens have even banned mango juice from a Ahmedi manufacturing company. You will not find this level of discrimination anywhere in India. You will find muslim owned and muslim operated restaurants anywhere in India and both muslims and non-muslims eat in these restaurants. Can you find any hindu or christian owned and operated restaurant or even a small samosa shop anywhere in Pakistan? I would appreciate if anyone can mention the name and address of even one such restaurant or samosa shop. You will not find any hindu or christian cooking or serving food in any muslim owned restaurants in Pakistan. At best, they may be working in cleaning the dirty plates. Even in restaurants in Pakistan, non-muslim customers are served in separate plates and served in separate sections of the restaurants. You will find non-muslim owned and operated, even hindu owned and operated restaurants in any other muslim country, including Gulf countries. This type of caste system is much more prevalent and widely practiced in Pakistan than in India. Even in their homes, Pakistani muslims do not serve non-muslim gusts in the plates that they keep for their muslim friends and families. Even water is served in cups that are kept for the use of non-muslims only.
    My conclusion, no where in the world is discrimination and victimization practiced as much as in Pakistan. No other country comes even close to Pakistan. You name any discrimination or victimization happening in any other part of the world, it is practiced several folds more in Pakistan. It is not Pakistan or muslims or religion that is the problem. It is the special bread of Pakistani muslims who are the problem.

    PS: I have read in Pakistan newspapers that for the last few years, printed handouts are being handed out in the streets of Lahore that claims that Shias are kafirs and should be killed. I have also read that there are many billboards propagating such message in Lahore.Recommend

  • Two cents

    Dear Author, one should be very careful in the present times before putting ones pen to the paper. We live in the era of the Internet and live in a world that is getting smaller and smaller by the day. People know their stuff and have a mind of their own to analyse things outside of what is taught to them in their text books. While the Jinnah debate initiated by Mr Yaqoob Khan Bangash and Mr Yasser Latif Hamdani had a mature element of critical analysis, your article just reset the bar to a low point by towing the official line of the history taught in 7th grade classes. Recommend

  • Rahul Ghosh

    At the outset, I will say that this is a very ill-researched, fanciful and historically incorrect article. There was no large-scale oppression of the Moslems int the Congress governments from 1937-39.Maulana Maodood’s son nails this lie as a completely imaginary and touchy-feely Moslem League propaganda. Moslem League was full of tadies who supported British Raj and rode piggy back on Indian freedom struggle to get their fascistic – part apartheid state of Moslem Pakistan. They are now wallowing in its misery with all the violence and fanaticism which is a matter of course there. My commiserations to the common folk of Pakistan in this regard. The Partition of the India was a Death Blow to Moslem power in the subcontinent. From a powerful well-knit 25% of United India’s population, they got divided into 3 parts, Pakistan, India and later Bangladesh. The Partition of India in real terms was the partition of the Moslems. Tariq saheb, some Mohajirs may have prospered. UP Mohajirs used to get top-class education in India and then migrate to Pakistan till the middle 50’s (Mustafa Zaidi is a very good example). Overall the Moslems suffered- The self-absorbed, selfish ML leadership in UP left their poor religious counterparts (nais, julahas, Sheikhs etc) at the mercy of communal minded Hindus. Always a anti-national tag would plague these people. Still 20% of UP’s population is Moslem (mostly backward or Pasmanda). Only the salariat the well to do migrated to Pakistan. Pakistan was a cynical selfish bourgeois plot of Moslem middle classes and Moslem elite and brought ruin to the intermediate and lower classes. Indeed the only people who voted for Pakistan were upper/middle class people and constituted about 14% of the Moslem population. So it was a very undemocratic move also. In a united India today there would have been 500-600 million Moslem, many of them liberals, No power on earth can exploit such a large number of people. They would have gained huge rights in our democratic vote-bank politics. This group of Moslems would mostly be moderate and liberal would have been like a breath of fresh air in the Moslem world. In a nutshell, Jinnah wanted to use the demand of Pakistan to get maximum benefits for Moslems in a united India. He was not really serious about getting Pakistan. Patel primarily and Nehru understood this and they called Jinnah’s bluff and gave him a moth-eaten weak Pakistan and also solved the Moslem “problem” in India for the foreseeable future.Recommend

  • R

    Pakistan was created for Muslim landlords and feudels from UP and Punjab. The indigenous population of so called Pakistan at that time supported Unionists (in Punjab) and Congress in NWFP . Only Bengal was sort of pro-Muslim league but even then Fazl ul Haq and later Suharwardy were not too fond of Quaid e Azam. So get this straight, Pakistan was created for people like us (and by us, I mean upper middle class or rich Muslims of subcontinent). The poor people in 1947 are still poor and will remain poor for the eternity.Recommend

  • F

    “persecution” of Muslims: There is no recorded history of Muslims being persecuted in pre 1947 India. Ask non-Muslims, Shias and Ahmadis in Pakistan today what persecution means. You may get an appreciation.
    Quaid: There was a clash of word views between people that wanted Pakistan and those that did not. Congress leaders, of all religions, wanted a secular democracy with one man one vote. The Muslim League – led by Mr. Jinnah, opposed it and wanted separate electorates based on religion. With time, Mr. Jinnah repeatedly proclaimed that Muslims were a separate and distinct nation in terms of religion, customs, beliefs, practices, law, outlook etc. Living with Hindus was just not possible. He saw democracy as a diktat of the Hindu majority over Muslims. Competing for power on an equal basis, in a democracy, was anathema to those who had ruled for hundreds of years. How could the children of rulers, belonging to a “superior” faith, be “equal” to those (lesser non-muslims) who they had ruled?! Mr. Jinnah used religion and violence to demand and obtain Pakistan. His much cited speech of August 11 by the liberals and few more like that were in front of largely non-Muslim audiences.
    But despite evidence to the contrary, let us believe that Mr. Jinnah was a secularist (as the term is used by major democracies of the world). What is stopping the “secular” liberals from coming out in the streets and creating the secular state of equality that they claim Mr. Jinnah wanted? Remember the murder of Salman Taseer, the burning of Christian homes, killing of Hazaras, the shooting of Malala? The vocal majority has spoken which Quaid they want.
    Recommend

  • mind control

    A. Muslim minority of India was oppressed and discriminated against by extremist Hindu elements on the basis of creed, the moderate Hindus failed to check the oppression.

    B. To cut it short, Pakistan was created to protect people against oppression and discrimination on the basis of cast and creed — only.

    OK. So your thesis is that while India was for oppression of Minorities, Pakistan was created for protection of Minorities.. Now let us test this thesis.

    A. 85% of India Muslims did not migrate to Pakistan and their proportion in population has now increased to 17%.

    B. All minorities in India can occupy any positions of power. Right now the PM is a Sikh, Vice President a Muslim, Defence Minister a Christian and Chief Justice a Muslim.

    C. Ahmadi and Shia congregations are not bombed in India.

    D. There are no Blasphemy Laws in India.

    So the Indian side of the thesis is disproved.

    Feel free to prove the Pakistani part of the thesis.

    Best wishes.Recommend

  • paksana

    The indians that migrated to Pakistan are better off than Muslims in India. They have become prime ministers, generals, COAS, academics, entrepreneurs. FACT.Recommend

  • BigotNot

    I just jumped out of my sofa when I heard this version of “history”. :-). Recommend

  • Foreign Leg

    @Author: I wrote yesterday but the moderator did not like what I wrote. Never mind. What I wrote yesterday is that reading at this article and guessing your age, perhaps you wrote the Pakistan Studies textbook instead of just reading it.
    .
    I am a Christian, a minority in India. My community is much fewer in number compared to Muslims that if we had the same problem prior to independence, Christians would have been decimated by now. Also bear in mind that if the Hindu extremists at that time would have wanted to vent their ire against anyone, it would have been against the Christians. Yet we are thriving in India and do not face any problems. Our churches do have zero security, are open most of the time and there are are no untoward incidents even in the BJP-ruled state where I live. Certainly a far cry from the blasphemy charges, targeted killings and bomb blasts in Pakistan. So now would you care to re-examine your flawed narrative?
    .
    The way I see it, the problem with Muslims the world over has to do with integration. Muslims integrate poorly with others and are content to be among themselves. For instance many comments here from Pakistanis in the US, with the exception of one or two, show how poorly they understand the US. Integration does not mean losing one’s identity. Sikhs all over the world integrate very well with the community, city, country where they settle but still retain their religious and cultural identity. You will also see that Sikhs even though a much smaller community than Muslims are able to get special legislation for instance to allow them to keep their facial hair in the US Army due to widespread support from local communities and representatives.Recommend

  • http://India Feroz

    India is full of extremist Hindus and Pakistan full of peace loving Muslims. The track record over the last 65 years proves it, does it not dear author ? The problem of prejudice it seems cannot be resolved through Education. Recommend

  • http://tribune.com p r sharma

    we do not decide our religion or citizenship. it comes with our birth. We are brought up listening the parents/ teachers/peers/ books and the environment( social / political and religious) which creates great impact on our belief and the thought process.. Change of environment effects the change in the thoughts too with varying degree. Since Pakistan was created and someone born in Pakistan can not digest /agree that Pakistan was created for the wrong ( perceived in the present scenario) reasons. So now there shall be a quest and search to justify the reasons using many other tools. This is quite natural . We use it elsewhere too. We take a decision in our home / worldly affairs and thereafter tries to justify it by giving reasons ( which have never came to our minds at the time of decision making) to convince ourselves than the others. It gives a solace to our conscience.
    This debate/ discussion at the present juncture is meaningless ( except the same solace to self / collective conscience)Recommend

  • farrukh

    @ Punjabi from other side. Same can be said about your text books and your state of mind.Recommend

  • Gp65

    @BlackJack:
    That 15 % of India’s populations are Muslims is relevant of course to the discussion of the supposed oppression. Some other things that are relevant also.

    The minorities in present day Pakistan never voted for partition, yet they were driven out and the original non-Muslim population of 20% in present day Pakistan has been driven down to 3%
    The Muslims of present day India who voted for Pakistan for the most part stayed back in India (85%). If they were so concerned for partition, should they not have simply moved across – at least most of them?
    The Muslim population of India grew from 9% to 15%
    Israel who was formed in the name of religion till today will accept any Jew from any part of the world. Pakistan who was formed for safety of Muslims in Indian subcontinent stopped accepting Muslims from India after 1949 and never accepted the Muslims loyal to Pakistan who happened to be in present day Bangladesh.
    It is unclear why the Sikhs were not scared of oppressive caste Hindus and chose to come to India. No other faith was afraid of being oppressed by Hindus – not the Jains, not Sikhs, not Parsis, not Buddhists nor the atheists.
    Recommend

  • Wasim P

    Could the author elaborate the extend by which Congress government of 1937 persecuted the muslims? How many muslims were killed or forced converted to other faiths or whose women were kidnapped and forcibly married? Please understand that playing minority insecurity is an age old tactic seen in many stages of history. Indian muslims fell for it and are suffering in all the three countries that they are in now.Recommend

  • O2

    Yes my Indian fellows only you know the reason for partition & we don’t, right? Look how you guys still hate us Muslims for breaking off, doesn’t this prove the premise of the article that extremist Hindus have never accepted the fact that Muslims have their own land where they can live freely, to very this day after 65 years! Author has penned down important points, Pakistan was never really an all out extremist Islamic state, Islamic state means a state wherein peoples welfare is looked after, irrespective of religion, cast & colour. Unfortunately the “Mullahs” have distorted real Islam & they do their politics by using Islam’s name. In Islamic state minorities are protected & on them their laws are applied not the Shariah law, as long as they respect Islam while we respect their religion. But don’t worry, that day is not far away when this country is going to become a welfare Islamic state, in the mean time you guys interfere in Baluchistan, Bangladesh & Sri Lanka :) I’m extremely happy that my grandfather migrated from Amritsar, Pakistan will stay here till the end.Recommend

  • Abdullah khalid

    you have portrayed true picture,i do agree with you.Pakistani generation realy need this relation of facts.keep it up….Recommend

  • sadia husain

    i like your experiance.It is reflecting the situation very truely.Dont border of stupid indian comments and keep it up.Recommend

  • Proletarian

    What I got from your article was that the educated upper-class Muslims, so used to living lives of privilege, felt they could not compete with the Hindus when it came getting top jobs and business since the Hindus both outnumbered and outclassed them, this anxiety in the face of fair competition is what you call ‘persecution’. Unwilling to subject themselves to a system of open merit many of the nominally religious, beardless, and (even in some cased alcoholic) Muslims of India decided it would be a great idea to make their own country where they could be the unchallenged capitalist elite. This is the same logic used by the separatist Baloch leaders.

    Tahir Mahmood, you beleive in false narratives. You should read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it will lift the veil from your eyesRecommend

  • Naveed Altaf

    yes you are right mister Tahir i am totally agree with you… thanks for delivering a nice info to us……..Recommend

  • samar iqbal

    you are absolutely right..i agree with you….we need such like that concept realy……Recommend

  • Shahbaz Ahmad

    Nice research Mr. Tahir, we have to lean lesson from our past and to identify the forces that are against us and try to recreate the same scene in Pakistan that they have done with us 65 year ago. i once again appreciate your efforts in this regard. Recommend

  • Gp65

    @farrukh: Sorry. Our text books do not teach us anything negative about Islam. So the same cannot be said.Recommend

  • abhi

    @BigotNot

    and muslims who remained in India became President, CM, Chief Justice etc. Recommend

  • Jugni Punjab Dee.

    I am totally agreed with Rahul Ghosh …Recommend

  • joy

    Respected author: what exactly do you want to prove through this blog. If there was persecution of Muslims across the board in pre-partition India, how come such a large Muslim population remained in India. If religion was such a strong adhesive, pray why the majority of Pakistanis ceded to create Bangladesh.
    Having said that, I am indeed grateful to Mr Jinnah and his party men for creating Pakistan which, ironically is debating about its identity over six decades after it came into existence.Recommend

  • Raj

    Nice hate article.Recommend

  • J T

    The author makes some rather hollow arguments. While he has repeatedly used phrases like “muslims were oppressed by extremist hindus,” he never really substantiates any of those assertions with specific instances depicting the said widespread oppression. In other words, his self-proclaimed analysis sounds like mere bluster. I am glad that the broader opinion he is trying to propagate has been amply rubbished by some very astute comments above. However, what’s truly disappointing to see here is that the author apparently seems well-educated and mature and yet has such a juvenile grasp of history. This only adds credence to the findings of a recent survey which says that the average middle class pakistani is several times more likely to go radical than the average pakistani from lesser fortunate classes. click here for an article on it >> http://dawn.com/2013/03/18/the-roots-of-terrorism-2/Recommend

  • http:[email protected] viv

    respected sir..you cant say that mass- hindus were biased towards indian muslims,after analysing that few were…but one big factor was also that muslims hated hindus and for stability and religious maneouvers they created pakistan and tried to evade the problems in the society to establish an easy path…there was not larger discrimination as muslims of pak are being told…one of my friend was asked to leave the room ownered by a muslim becoz his wife used to carve rangoli out on the ground floor…so should we also mind that..? PLZ PUBLISHRecommend

  • Raj – USA

    My comments appearing above in this section asking if there is even one non-muslim owned and operated restaurant or even one such small samosa shop anywhere in Pakistan or if there are any non-muslim workers working in food preparation or food serving departments in any of the muslim owned and operated restaurants anywhere in Pakistan has gone unanswered for the 2nd or 3rd time in ET forums. I recall my first comment was posted over three months ago and no one answered it. I had posed my question to the author of this blog who, i guess would have read it but has not enlightened me and other readers on the subject. May be he will write a separate blog on this.

    I would like to pose the same question to others likes of @Lala Gee and @Ali Tanoli. I would also appreciate comments or columns with facts (not personal opinions) from authors who frequently write in ET. These authors include:
    Aakar Patel
    and
    Seema Mustafa

    I am sure these authors would have read my question. I have raised a very basic issue on the minds of Pakistani muslims. It may appear small matter but would give an idea of how deep hatred, racism, and a type of caste system of discrimination is prevalent in every Pakistani muslim. As I had said many times earlier also, I single out muslims of Pakistan and am not referring muslims in general as Pakistani muslims are a breed apart. I shall be glad to be proven wrong on my assessment with supporting facts. Recommend

  • ranjit

    @all Indians posting here

    There is one fundamental reality in this world that we cannot deny……..hindus will hate to live under muslim rule and muslims will hate to live under hindu rule………this is because we just do not have the level of kinship needed to forge a common identity……..I am quite sure every hindu posting here will flee if he has to ever live under muslim rule, even if it is the most secular one imaginable like that of Turkey or Malaysia……………so the same applies to muslims, which is why partition basically happened……….we can argue forever with all kinds of debating points, but this is the fundamental, primordial reality………

    To the credit of hindus, we have established a fairly secular system……..hence we have a fairly large muslim minority that lives with us………..but if you asked the Indian muslims in private what would they prefer, they would always prefer to be in a muslim majority country…….they know it is not possible, so are reconciled to their reality……..but it is dishonest to say that a Indian muslim is as integrated into India, as say a regular hindu Indian citizen………I am not saying that muslims are traitors or anything like that…….but what a Gujarati hindu or a Bengali hindu or a Marathi hindu feels about India, will be very, very different compared to what a muslim will feel internally………….although they may never admit it or make a big deal about it………..

    Essentially hinduism and islam just does not mix………..its like oil and water………..no matter how hard you shake it, it will always remain distinct………unlike other communities, hindus and muslims will never have ‘roti’ and ‘beti’ ke rishtey………..they will never intermarry and very infrequently interdine……….so we are different……..and Jinnah only articulated this difference with partition……….hence what happened was natural and bound to happen one way or the other……….if we had stayed united, it would have ultimately led to civil war with a 800 million community fighting against a 600 million community for domination……….it would have been a large scale Lebanon………we all saw the kind of violence that partition led to……..just that short episode in itself is the proof of how the two communities view each other under the surface…….it was sheer primordial violence of people killing each other’s children and sending trains full of dead people to each other…..and all this happened by itself at individual level, no one orchestrated it……..therefore, it has all worked out for the best for both sides…………Recommend

  • http://Bangalore Vinayak

    >As regard the circumstances, there is no denying the fact that prejudices based on cast and creed were deeply rooted in religious Hindus …
    Agreed. But, you could also find the most progressive elements among the Hindu upper caste. The Congress leadership, including Gandhi and Nehru belonged to such category. Besides, caste/race prejudice is present in Muslims as well. It is well known that during Mughal rule Hindus were imposed with special religious tax (Jizya). So prejudice is not exactly a one way street.

    >and were at their extreme manifestations against Muslims during the Congress ministries, formed in 1937 until they resigned in 1939.
    This was what Jinnah used to parrot in his speeches, without substantiating with facts. Perhaps he meant that being ruled by a party dominated by Hindu upper castes, is discriminatory for Muslims.

    > It is pertinent to note that the Muslim League performed dismally, receiving very nominal votes in those elections and was not able to form a government in any province.
    It shows how very well Congress was being percieved by common Muslims at that time, even though it was party dominated by Hindu upper castes.

    > However, in the two year stint of the Congress ministries, the Muslims were oppressed to such an extent that they became completely disillusioned with the secular character of Congres
    What was the oppression? How did they harm Muslims? Can you cite instances? How is it that the British overlooked all this oppression?

    > Consequently, the tables turned in the 1946 elections in favour of the Muslim League
    Muslim League propoganda successfully painted Congress as a party of Hindu bigots, which is the reason they could win in most constituencies reserved for Muslims. Congress did not manage to counter this propoganda, because its leaders were pre-occupied with driving the British out of India. Most of top congress leadership were in jail during this period. Nehru was in prison from 1942 till1945.Recommend

  • Nalwa

    Author has spoken the truth and nothing but the truth. In my humble opinion , his views are refreshing, hallmark of a true intellectual. Please keep writing, this is the only way many non Pakistani come to know about the the great state of Pakistan and its true Islamic people. However , i would request you to ask the Pakistani leaders to live up to the ideal mentioned by you and let the oppressed minorities of present India , especially your Ummah Brothers, fellow Muslims, to freely migrate to Pakistan. Muslims leaderships moved to Pakistan in Forty Seven and they left the common, illiterate , poor Musalmans back in India. Pakistan must accept them to be honest with Itself and great Quaid. Recommend

  • Nowsherwan

    whatever the purpose was we have failed it miserably. isn’t there a chance we could exchange our freedom to kill ,rape,plunder and cheat for some respect , life security , justice and fair play? Recommend

  • Asim Nisar

    I have read the above article. I think the author is correct.Recommend

  • mind control

    @ranjit:

    There is one fundamental reality in this world that we cannot deny……..hindus will hate to live under muslim rule and muslims will hate to live under hindu rule

    Just Google to find out how many Hindus are willingly living under ‘Muslim Rule’ all over Arabia. And, did Hindus run away from India during the 800 years when Muslims ruled India. Read some history.Recommend

  • http:[email protected] Burjor

    If Pakistan was indeed made for all the “right” reasons why did 85 percent of Muslims stay back in India???. They did not believe Jinnah, to the extent that require the “move” worth it. In retrospect the 85 percent made the right decision. India’s Muslims as India’s Hindus or for that matter any community has better future than any community in Pakistan. (Simple truth).
    How many Muslims have killed fellow Muslims in India? How Muslims have killed fellow Muslims in Pakistan? How many Muslims have killed fellow Muslims while praying in India, How many have been killed in Pakistan. This macabre comparison is just one point where security is concerned, take any other aspect of life, education, health care, job opportunities the scales are tipped in India’s favour. When a Pakistani leaves for greener pastures, they wish to pose as Indians, why?. Pakistan and terrorism have a symbiotic relationship, their names can be exchanged, they almost mean one and the same thing. When a nation reaches to this depth that Pakistan has done, and is reflected, in writings by serious writers in many parts of the world, something is very very very wrong with Pakistan. What is even more wrong is that the people, the Law enforcement agencies, the armed forces, the judiciary, all arms, all legs, all bodies of the State, are in a comatose, they seem to be paralyzed. Now that Pakistan is a reality make it work, or else just give it up. Recommend

  • 80s

    With all due respect Sir, it is about time we stop spreading hatred. May be its just me or I couldn’t understand what this self-contradictory article was imposing. Yes there was violence on both sides, yes, the differences were created but the separation was in consequence to the political movement and end of British regime all around. Strictly speaking, if this is the case than how come there was a Muslim president in India, one of the most successful cricket captains was Muslim, biggest names of their highest selling industry are Muslims. Can you say the same for Pakistan? In the Independence movement we had our differences with Hindus, in 70s we showed out hatred for Ahmadis, next were Shias and joining them the most recent are the ever oppressed Christian community. I guess we should once again fight for our independence, but this time around against Shias, Ahamdis, Hindus and Christians and may be by the end of it we should write a scripted history like the one you are referring to.

    This is a very disappointing article, with a hypocritical approach. The only thing I agree to is to the extent that Quaid-e-Azam’s ideology was different from where we stand right now. But this article is nowhere near that ideology. On one hand you are implying that we lost track and on the other hand you are passing on judgments on Quid himself.

    *“Quaid-e-Azam, the founder of this nation, was a non-practicing Muslim himself

    Most importantly, more than 90 per cent of the Muslim League leaders and workers were beardless moderate Muslims. Some of them were even addicted to alcohol”*

    How one decides to live his life is none of our concern. The bottom line is that we need to stop spreading hatred, live and let live.Recommend

  • antony

    @ranjit, You forget other minorities like christians who are pretty happy under Indian Secular goverment and in general amidst hindu neighbourhood which is not the case with christians in Pakistan..Recommend

  • Syed Junaid Zakir

    Good work Mr. Tahir.. great effort.. i m totally agree with you…Recommend

  • Prof. Makkhan Lal

    I hope Mr. Tahir Mahmood’s Blog is read by Aligarh Muslim University’s intellectuals. By giving credit to the Congress Ministries that lasted barely two years (1937-1939) Mahmood had effectively wiped out the contribution of Aligarh Muslim University right from Sir Syed Ahmed Khan to all others. Her does not seem to have heard of Sir Syed’s famous Meerut speech of 1868 and his speeches in the Viceroy’s Council in the early 1880s. He needs to know when the Muslim League was founded, who founded it and what objectives were put fourth. He does not seem to have heard the name of Allama Iqbal; what to say of his address to the delegates of Muslim League at the Annual Session at Allahabad on December 29, 1930 and then again in Lahore in 1931. He does not seem to know the name of a person called Rahmat Ali and his 1934 pomplet “Now or Never: Are We to Live or Perish For Ever”. Mahmood should know that the name “Pakistan” for the new country being demanded by the Muslims was given by was Given By this Rahmat Ali in 1934; Much before India Act 1935 waqs passed and election wre held under it in 1937.

    Mr. Tahir Mahmood must read carefully and acknowledge the contributions made by several individuals and institutions in creating Pakistan and give them due credit. It is not in the fitness of the things that credit should be put in the baskets of those who do not deserve it. Recommend

  • MA

    The problem with touching upon issues as sensitive as this is that the history books on opposing sides of the border will always construe “facts” differently and claim that the other side persecuted them more.

    However, the simple truth (and what I understand the author to be getting at) is that this country’s founders, ulterior motives aside, could never have wanted the country to become what it has today.

    However you read it though, history is now repeating itself in that moderate muslims that are failing to check the oppression within Pakistan. So whatever our forefathers did or didn’t do, and why, doesn’t really matter anymore. The ideals that this country was founded upon, whatever they were, are long gone.Recommend

  • http://www.mansoorsheikh.com Mansoor A. Sheikh

    I am not in agreement with Mr. Tahir Mehmood. There were so many other factors such as two nation theory, Deoband Movement and Anjumand Hymat-e-Islam etc.Recommend

  • http:[email protected] Burjor

    @Raj – USA . As a non-Muslim, as obviously as my name would suggest, many of the things you have mentioned are incorrect. This is not a small country with only one sort of people, Pakistani’s like any other people anywhere in the world are after all individuals. You ask the names of restaurants where samosa etc can be served I can give you names of Hotels owned by non-Muslims? But I am not that naive to fall into this silly argument. Come and see for yourself, experience things for yourself. Pakistan is no heaven, ( just as well), as we are no angels either, we would be misfits if it were.
    Having said that, Pakistan is definitely changing for the worse, as far as security, intolerance, bigotry, hypocrisy, religiosity, violence, terrorism etc etc. Yes there is no doubt about that, no two ways about that. Many people have left, for many reasons, the points above would be a major reason.Recommend

  • http://India Feroz

    @ranjit:
    Your theory seems like a lot of bull to me. Your theory would hold some relevance if you had included other minorities like Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jain, Jews, Parsis — into the discussion. How secure are these other minorities in both countries ?
    Hindus are well assimilated in every country they are found in including Islamic countries. Muslims generally are not comfortable in any non Islamic country because of their beliefs — absolutely nothing to do whether that country was secular or not, whether it had majority Hindu, Buddhist or Christian population.Recommend

  • ranjit

    @mind control

    I have read history. During the 800 years of muslim rule, hindus were miserable. They could not run away because there was no place to run to. They were too weak to fight, except for Rana Pratap, Shivaji etc………the Rajputs compromised with the situation by striking one sided matrimonial alliances by giving up their daughters to the mughals……..others either converted or learnt to live like slaves in order to survive………..over a period of time, North India figured out a way to coexist by synthesizing the cultures……but it was always an uphill task and it never worked fully which is why partition happened…………and just look at what happened in 1947……..it was not a friendly divorce with people just changing labels…..it was a violent holocaust on both sides………

    Just take a look at Kashmir today…….we have tried every trick in the book…..we have given Kashmiris their own land, own government, article 370 which prohibits hindus from owning land etc…….still they want to get out of India and live independently, regardless of India’s economic strength or the money it gives to Kashmiris………its just because they are muslims and cannot bear the thought of living permanently in a hindu India when they are a majority in their province………its as simple as that and it will never change…………we can use force which is what we are doing but we can never change their minds because Islam and Hinduism can never mix together, unless the demographics is lopsided……….this is happening today 65 years after Jinnah……….so who do you blame for that?…..

    And about Indians living in Arabia, you must be joking……..people go there just to make money…….no one has any ties to that place………btw, hindu muslim dynamics does not apply to any other religion………I know Indians want to deny this all day long, but it is delusional to ignore reality…………Recommend

  • ss

    to all indians thumping their chests for increase in IMs population from 9 to15 % — have you all read SACHAR Commission report? Recommend

  • http://UK MSS

    This article has taught me a fact.
    By ‘Minorities’ it was meant Muslim Minorities that is Shias, Ahmedis and so on. There was to be no other minorities. The word Minorities’ used in India before partition was transferred to Pakistan as if there was no change in the composition of population.
    In two years Muslims were oppressed to such an extent …..
    Really? Two years long enough to form government and oppress and disaffected people? Can the author site some examples? Facts are: Mr Jinnah had lost hope of gaining personal power so a separate country was created for him thereby starting a chain reaction that is gaining speed.Recommend

  • Tahir Mahmood

    Thank you very much to all for the interest shown in my blog. The blog was written in the backdrop of the current affairs of Pakistn and was not meant to show any contempt to others. It is correct that our perspective of history is based on what we read generally and specifically in our text books at early age. What we read at early age has paramount effect on our thinking that lasts long. You will appreciate that the text books in India and Pakistan differ on certain historical facts and so do the different historians. To put it simply, I did not mean to hurt the feelings of Hindus. As some of the readers have mentioned above, we should not worry about what happened long time ago which we did not witness ourselves. Most importantly, the encouraging outcome of the above discussion is that we do not hate each other but we all hate discrimination, oppression, communalism, hatred and other related evils. I apologise to certain respectable readers who sought my replies in their comments as I could not revert to them due to my other engagements. I would try to address the main queries in my another blog in the Express Tribune soon.Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli

    @Raj u.s.a
    Merey bhai raj my last comment being send it to trash bag there i mention few of bussnises
    owned by hindus but muslim workers running the bussniss the same goes to christian in karachi most of them lived in main city or old city by the way we dont have many peoples left so its hard to see or regonized them by there faith by the way i live overseas and have one gujrathi friend we eat together but diffrence in he get subway vegies sandwich and i buy
    nice meat burger from Burger king.Recommend

  • one innocent paki.

    Pakistan is totally diffrent what we read and what we see i am not kidding guys when i was
    in school and when i got out of school i saw two diffrent world gen zia islam and hypocracy
    in one party army officers got defence and behria housing schemes and public got shanti towns political land lords and ethanic and reliegouse leader are worst of all standing in namaz in first line but when time comes for haqooq ul ibad the people rights they all cheats
    even with families too we are pakistan quaid azam was great muslim who dont never went to mosque and fought for our rights allama iqbal khudi is great but his children maid was christian lady and he was european in out it we are two world in one country.Recommend

  • Gp65

    ET I have seen repeated. Misleading references to Sachar commission in many posts. Please allow some factual information to be shared.
    @ss:
    Yes. I have read the report. Now let me ask you : have you read the statistical problems with Sachar commission? It does not take into account the higher TFR ( birth rate in lay terms) ammo ng Muslim community whichleadsto larger household sizes as well as the lower female participation in labour workforce. Both are social choices being made by the community that negatively impact their per capita income. On top of that the lower literacy rate and also even among those who are literate the number that have madrassa education which does not qualify them for government jobs is not taken into account. Nor is the fact that the more well to do Mislims from UP and Bihar had moved to Pakistan lowering the average wealth of Muslims that stayed back in India.
    If you actually rad the report you will see that it takes government jobs as a basis of integration without taking into account educational attainments which are necessary to qualify for those jobs.
    If you google, you will also find the fact that it is not some Muslim NGO but government of India that commissioned the report which means it WANTS to find the true situation and redress it. Google can also tell you the measures put in place to improve the socioeconomic status of Muslims in India including millions of scholarships.
    In any case the very fact that the population has grown tells you that Muslims are not being killed, forcibly converted or having to flee as is happening to non-Muslims in Pakistan.Recommend

  • http:[email protected] Burjor

    Pakistan was made for no right reason. Not even ONE.Recommend

  • Raj – USA

    @Burjor:
    The question of non-muslim owned and operated eateries in Pakistan is not a silly argument as you say. I am only bringing to light the deep insight of teachings, caste systems and untouchability that is practiced in Pakistan. These are taught in homes and schools for several decades. Again, it is only Pakistani muslims who do this in Pakistan and also in UK, not that much in USA. If my other comment gets published in ET, you will know more about me, my association with many, many muslims of different countries for many decades and also my upbringing.

    Perhaps, Mr. Parvez Hoodbhoy who wrote recently in ET on beef eating and hindus will, one day pick up on this and write a column, if he feels relatively safe to write on this. Recommend

  • Asok

    How about actually giving some examples of said “oppression by Hindu ministries”, instead of just repeating the claim ad nauseoum?Recommend

  • Ali tanoli

    @Raj
    Why dont u write response to Mr Hoodhbhoy ….???Recommend

  • Raj – USA

    @Ali tanoli:
    “@Raj
    Why dont u write response to Mr Hoodhbhoy ….???”
    I did, and you can see my response to Hoodbhoy if you read his article on the matter in ET.

    Coming back to you, when I was in Bahrain, its population was just 6 million (less than the population of Karachi) of which 80% were expatriates. There were more than 40 or 50 hindu operated restaurants, partly owned by hindus that were serving food prepared by hindus. Expatriates cannot fully own any business at that time and local Arabs must be 50% owner. In other gulf countries like UAE & Oman, there were many more such restaurants.

    The point I am making is that untouchability and caste system is practiced 1000 times more in Pakistan than India because every home teaches it. Yet everyone will claim there is no caste or untouchability in Islam. In many places in Pakistan non-muslims can draw water from flowing rivers on the down stream only, after the muslims so that the running water is not polluted by non-muslims. There was a report in ET on this, several months back.

    Pakistanis are by no standards muslims. They just call themselves muslims.

    It is not just me saying this. Even Afghans have said similar just recently. Bangladesh has been saying this for a long time. Recommend

  • http:[email protected]/**/ Burjor

    @MSS “Facts are Mr.Jinnah lost hope of gaining personal power so a separate country was created for him” Very correct, very true.
    Pakistan has been unfortunate that the values our “leaders” have had, and are having have had an extremely bad influence on the nation. There is no moral, ethical, social barrier. This does not happen in a more mature society, it is unthinkable, but here it is accepted, and that is the major difference.
    Pakistan came into existence, for the very same reasons as we are experiencing today, intolerance, bigotry etc, there is no stopping unfortunately. When people become intolerant, violent, irrational, and there is no one to stop this brainwashing, infact encouraged, anything can be written to support an argument as the one Tahir has written above.
    If minorities can live in peace all over the world, why cannot Muslims live as a minority in IndiaRecommend

  • http:[email protected] Burjor

    Thank you moderator for “moderating” the above article.Recommend

  • mind control

    To cut it short, Pakistan was created to protect people against oppression and discrimination on the basis of cast and creed — only.

    And this is how Pakistan is trying to ‘ protect people against oppression and discrimination on the basis of cast and creed — only.

    Recommend

  • Danish Qazi

    A well thought and researched piece of work I must say. I think anyone would be a fool to deny the brutalities of Hindu extremists after the fall of Muslim Empire. History speaks for itself, we can’t really change the facts. Well, for hundreds of years when Muslims were leading the subcontinent, things were good and Muslims and Hindus co-existed. However, after the arrival of east india company and since then, things changed drastically and Muslims were ‘forced’ to fight for a separate homeland. Any impartial and keen reader of history would know this very basic fact. What is being called ‘open merit’ above was in fact a hurtful discrimination.
    If things were so perfect back in that time, why are Muslims still facing awful discrimination in India? Why is that a retired Chief Justice of Delhi High Court wrote a report and his conclusions were that Muslims, all over India, are still discriminated in daily walks of life. Why is it that, despite being the largest minority running into billions, Indian Muslims still need NGOs to safeguard their rights. Well, this post is only to shed some light on all the misconceptions in the posts above. Recommend

  • Sane

    @Rajesh:

    *strong textIf the writer thinks that the Muslims of the sub-continent were so oppressed and discriminated by the Hindus, he must also explain why 85% of Muslims living in India chose not to migrate.*

    To make another Pakistan.Recommend

  • http:[email protected]/**/ Burjor

    “Pakistan was made for all the right reasons and religious extremism was not one of them”. Dear Mr.Tahir Mahmood. Sensible countries spend their resources sensibly on education, on health care, on human resource development etc. Pakistan has spent its resource, both officially and unofficially, i.e. state and non-state, on training, arming, nourishing, “freedom fighters”, Mujahideen, taliban, jihadi’s etc. by whatever name you wish to call them. The point is that these people did not fall from the skies, they were born, bred, trained in Pakistan by Pakistani’s, to liberate Kashmir, to liberate Afghanistan from the Soviets, for strategic depth, etc. Now what you sow, so shall you reap. So just reap the “rewards” and write something more mature. Readers of Express Tribune are not dumb, they read history, they read newspapers, they are aware, very aware. Recommend

  • Tahir Mahmood

    Dear Mr. Burjor, of course the state should spend its resources on education, health and human resource development etc. Every state should discourage religious extremism and violence. This is what the blog is about.Recommend

  • Ali tanoli

    @Raj u.s.e
    There is some truth in it but again we dont have enough peoples left. and also textbook made us to think this way.Recommend

  • http:[email protected] Burjor

    Dear Mr.Tahir Mahmood do you also play the role of moderator for this particular article???Recommend

  • Gp65

    @Ali tanoli: Ahmadis and Qadianis are considered non-Muslim NOW in Pakistan. Even today in India that is not the case. Whatever unfortunate thing that they may have experienced post partition is part of the Hindi Muslim fall out with them being considered Muslims. So your notion that some ther non-Muslims also sufffered in India during partition is not correct.Recommend

  • mind control

    @Ali tanoli:
    .
    and also textbook made us to think this way.

    Sir ji,

    If you are aware that ‘Textbooks’ or some other books ‘made you think this way’, then just dump those books and start thinking for yourself.

    Not so difficult, is it?Recommend

  • Tahir Mahmood

    @Burjor:
    Sir I am not moderator, I am the writer only. The comments posted in my name above are mine and the learned moderator has not suggested added or excluded anythingRecommend

  • M. Saif Ullah Gondal

    Aoa Tahir Bhai,

    This is fact which you write and new information for me. I really apreciate your efforts regarding the article…………………………………………………………..God bless you.Recommend

  • Raj – USA

    @Ali tanoli:
    Thank you for your response and I appreciate it. Recommend