Chapter 4 Muslim Scholars’ Response to …shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4413/8/08...Chapter 4 Muslim Scholars’ Response to Nationalism: Attitudes of Refutation 116

Chapter 4 Muslim Scholars’ Response to Nationalism: Attitudes of Refutation

111

n the previous chapter response of Muslim scholars to nationalism

and their adaptative attitude was discussed in detail. This is not,

however, the case with all the Muslim scholars of the early 20th

century. On the contrary, there were many others who refuted

nationalism as a political ideology. They are in favour of looking beyond

it to form a cult that values the people in terms of their adherence to

universal ethic and brotherhood. The present chapter attempts to

approach such scholars and focuses mainly on Allama Iqbal and Sayyid

„Abul „Ala Mawdudi‟s attitudes towards it.

4:1. Allama Iqbal and his Early Views

It is a fact that in the wake of spread of nationalist philosophy and

nationalist movements in the modern India a diverse influence and

impact got witnessed simultaneously. Many Muslims became the part of

nationalist movements yet many became not only indifferent to them but

criticized their philosophy which to them is more or less the outcome of

western materialist culture and sticking to narrow terrorialism. Among

them Allama Iqbal and Maulana Sayyid „Abul „Ala figure prominently.

Some have attributed the early life of Allama Iqbal to his

adherence to nationalism1. No doubt, he had a great love for Islam and

I


112

Muslims all over the world yet in the earlier phase of his poetry, he

appears to be a nationalistic and patriotic Indian poet. He tried to instill in

the minds of his readers the pride that they should feel for their glorious

past. He reminded Indians that they were inheritors of a great culture

which had outlived many other civilizations in history2. In his famous

verse mentions he its glory:

The civilization of Greece, Egypt and Rome have gone to oblivion, but

we are the fortunate ones to have survived till now3.

Prior to his departure for Europe in 1905, Iqbal‟s poems were

mostly tinged with the sentiment of nationalism. One of the longest

poems of that period is Tasweer-i-Dard (The Picture of Sorrow) which

was read by Iqbal in March 1899, at a meeting of the Anjuman Himayat-

i-Islam, Lahore. In this poem, Iqbal lamented over the internal

differences and dissensions which were deeply and rapidly prevailing in

his country. Most of the poems of his period eloquently speak of his love

for India and its people, flora and fauna. Nationalism occupies the central

place in his mind, and religion is mentioned as a decisive factor in the

building of a nation. Motherland forms the centre of his affection and

loyalty. His deep sense of emotional attachment to his country is well

reflected in another poem entitled Naya Shiwala (The New Temple). In

this poem, the poet-philosopher has dreamed of constructing a new

temple in his motherland, India, where love will reign supreme and


113

where the image of India will be worshipped4. Addressing the Brahmins

of his country, Iqbal says:

Do you think as god, the idols of stones for me, there is deity in

every particle of country‟s dust5.

The most famous and popular of such poems, however are: Hindustani

Bachon ka Qaumi Geet (The National Song of the Indian Children) and

Tarana-i-Hind (The National Anthem of India) in which Iqbal‟s

nationalistic fervours has reached the highest peak.

In his Hindustani Bachon ka Geet, the poet makes the Indian

children say:

India is my country,

Whose glory has been enchanted by Guru Nanak, Chisti

(Khwaja Moinud Din Chisti of Ajmer), Gautam Buddha

and Lord Krishna,

Where they preached their message of unity.


114

The children sing a chorus:- „That is my country, that is

my country‟6.

The another verse also collaborate to this idea of nationalism:

Of all the world, India is the best.

We are its nightingales, it is our garden7.

All these three poems were written before 1905. In 1905, Iqbal went to

Europe for higher studies and this proved a turning point in his career in

more ways than one. Where he looked into the heart of Europe and found

it diseased8.

4:2. Refutation of Nationalism in Iqbal

In Europe (1905-1908), Iqbal had a full view of nationalism, its

motives and results. There he saw how it had destroyed the idea of

universal brotherhood, how it had created artificial barriers between man

and man, and between nation and nation: and how it had seen the seed of

international discord. Moreover, he had also become conscious of the

dangerous consequences of the Western nationalism. He was dead sure

that the spread of this idea was bound to divide the Muslim world into

various camps. The fears of Iqbal were vindicated very soon when during

the First World War a section of Muslims in the Arab world collaborated

with the British in conspiracy against the Turks in the Balkan war. For,

now their love for nation had made them abandon their past line of


115

thinking that they should remain loyal to the Ottoman Empire, because it

was an Islamic state. On the contrary, the Ottoman Empire appeared to

many of the Arabs as detestable foreign domination9. In this context,

what Iqbal spoke of the Western concept of nationalism is worth

mentioning:

I have been repudiating the concept of nationalism since the time

when it was not known in India and the Muslims world. At the

very start, it had become clear to me from the writings of the

European authors that the imperialistic designs of Europe were in

great need of this effective weapon – the propagation of the

European conception of nationalism in Muslim countries – to

shatter the religious unity of Islam to pieces10

.

However, it must be noted that Iqbal never confused between

patriotism and nationalism. He had drawn a clear line of demarcation

between the two, and while he rejected nationalism of the Western type,

he had nothing but respect for patriotism. Iqbal made this point clear

again and again by stressing that his opposition to nationalism should not

be misconstrued as opposite to patriotism. Patriotism, in the sense of

one‟s love for one‟s country and even readiness to die for its honour is a

part of the Muslim‟s faith11

.

After his return from Europe in 1908, it is argued that Iqbal

developed a highly emotional and anti-national trend of thinking12

. Iqbal

preached pan-Islamism on the lines of Jamal al-Din Afghani‟ the late 19th

century outstanding thinker of Muslim world, saw that the international

affairs were fraught with frightful danger. He said that Europe was then


116

perched on the mouth of a volcano which could bring destruction to the

entire civilized world13

. In the poem Shikwa and Jawab-e-Shikwa (The

Complaint and Reply to the Complaint) Iqbal‟s stand against nationalism

is largely a reaction against the events of the Balkan (1912-1913) and the

Tripoli (Libya) Wars in 1912. He held that the survival of the Muslim

world depended on the unity of the Muslim world depended on the unity

of the Islamic countries which nationalism was seeking to strike into

pieces. He reminded the Muslim community that the future of Islam is

not bound up with the survival of destruction of any particular Muslim

nation, but on the unity of faith and the idea of universal human

brotherhood14

. Iqbal‟s growing dissatisfaction against nationalism is

well-expressed in his poem Watniyat (Nationalism):

Of these new gods, the biggest is the „Nation‟,

What its garment is, is the coffin of religion.


117

The rivalry of nations is due to this,

The subjugation through commerce is due to this.

If politics is devoid of truth, it is because of this,

If the home of the weak is ruined, it is because of this.

It is this which divide the creatures of God into nation;

It is this which strikes at the root of the nationality of Islam15

.

Thus Iqbal began to develop his own philosophy of life by rediscovering

the validity of the principles of Islam for his age. Nationalism was

diametrically opposed to this philosophy of life and became a target of

his attack. Not only was it opposed to the universal outlook of Islam but

was also being used by the European imperialists as a weapon against the

Islamic unity in the Muslim world16

.

Iqbal now critically surveyed his own past and found there

something to reverse. Thus for the Tarana-i-Hindi he wrote his Tarana-i-

Milli (The Anthem of Muslim Ummah):

Ours is China and Arabia, and India is ours;

We are Muslims so the whole world is ours17

.

And in place of the deification of the dust particles of his homeland, he

now called upon Muslims to shatter the ideal of nationalism and mingle it

with dust18

. He, however, was not opposed to that type of nationalism

which has all the potentialities of uniting the people of a particular

country for the achievement of freedom. This, according to him, was not


118

inconsistent with the spirit of Islam. But what could more effectively

unite the people is religion and not nationalism19

.

One of the reasons for Iqbal‟s opposition to nationalism was his

philosophy of history. History is made by the individuals whose

personality is determined by faith. Iqbal fully knew the contribution

made by Islam towards the enrichment of human civilization. Islam has

always been a civilizing force. It is not yet spent up but he always

insisted that Islam should be viewed as a way of life. It is not an abstract

theory. Iqbal was alive to the danger in the modern world which aims at

“de-islamization” of the Muslims. One such great danger was nationalism

“At the present moment the national idea is racializing the outlook of

Muslims and thus materially counteracting the humanizing work of Islam

and the growth of racial consciousness may mean the growth of standards

different and even opposite to the stand of Islam.

Iqbal did not only attack the western nationalism but was also

afraid of its growth in India. He started with the premises that India is not

a nation. Firstly, since the Muslims are in a minority, Islam and

Nationalism are not identical in those countries where the Muslims are in

majority, Islam has accommodated nationalism20

. In other words Millat

or Ummat embraces nations but cannot be merged in them. He believed

that the Muslims are “bound together not by racial, linguistic or

geographical ties but by their communal brotherhood”21

. In 1909, he was

invited to Amritsar to attend a meeting of Minerva Lodge, which was a

cosmopolitan organization with membership open to the Muslims and the


119

Hindus. Iqbal politely declined the invitation and in the course of the

correspondence, which ensued, he wrote on 28 March 1909:

I have myself been of the view that religious differences should

disappear from this country, and even now act on his principle, in

my private life. But now I think that the preservation of their

separate national entities is desirable for both the Hindus and the

Muslims. The vision of a common nationhood for India is a

beautiful ideal, and has a poetic appeal, but looking to the present

conditions and the unconscious trends of the two communities,

appears incapable of fulfillment22

.

Iqbal thus holds that India is not a single nation23

but it does not

mean that Iqbal was not in favour of united India. “A united India”, he

said, “would have to be built on the foundation of concrete facts, i.e., this

distinct existence of more than one people in the country, the sooner

Indian leaders forget the idea of a unitary Indian nation based on

something like a biological fusion of the communities, the better for all

concern24

.

Even in 1909, he had come to the conclusion that present condition

did not hold out any promise for the crystallization of the idea of one

nation with a common culture. His insistence on the maintenance of the

distinct communities by recognizing them as separate entities gave rise to

what is described as Muslim Nationalism. This has also directly or

indirectly made him the father of the „idea of Pakistan‟. There is a feeling

that Muslim League carried Iqbal‟s concept of Muslim nationalism to its

logical end but this does not appear to be valid. Firstly, Iqbal never

thought of partitioning the country, the politics especially in the Punjab


120

and generally in India, the mergence of Hindu militant groups, communal

rights, general conditions of Muslims and lack of discipline and

organization amongst them led him to remark that the problem in India is

international and not national. He also suggested the idea of a separate

Muslim state in the north. In his presidential address to the Muslim

League in 1928, he was in favour of the forming a state within a state,

and not for an altogether separate state. No question of partition was

involved probably he would have been satisfied with the establishment of

a true federation in which full internal autonomy is guaranteed to the

constituent units25

.

Iqbal is generally credited with initiating the idea of separatism.

There were people before him who advocated partition, but Iqbal was the

first important public figure to propound the idea from the platform of the

Muslim League. In his presidential address to the League‟s Annual

Session at Allahabad, in 1930, Iqbal discussed the problem of India at

length26

Communalism is higher aspect then is indispensable to the

formulation of a harmonous whole in a country like India. The

units of Indian society are not territorial as in European countries.

India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races,

speaking different languages and professing different religions.

Their behaviour is not all determined by a common race-

consciousness. Even the Hindus do not form a homogenous

group. The principle of European democracy cannot be applied to

India without recognizing the fact of communal groups. The

Muslim demand for the creation of a Muslim India within India is


121

therefore, perfectly justified. The resolution of the all parties

Muslim conference at Delhi is to my mind wholly inspired by

this noble ideal of a harmonious whole which, instead of stifling

the respective individualities of its component holes, affords

them chances of fully working out the possibilities that may be

latent in them and I have not doubt that this house will

emphatically endorse the Muslim demands embodied in this

resolution. Personally I would go further than the demands

embodied in it. I would like to see the Punjab, the North-West

Frontier Province, Sind and Balochistan amalgamated into a

single state. Self-government within the British Empire or

without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated

North-West Indian Muslim state appears to be the final destiny of

the Muslims at least of North-West India27

.

In 1937, Iqbal suggested that in order that Muslims in modern

India could solve their problems it would be necessary to redistribution

the country and to provide one or more Muslim states with absolute

majorities28

.

For Iqbal, then, the Muslims and their culture are indispensable for

the world. He did not like that the Muslims should be sub-divided into

mutually antagonistic nations; Nationalism for him became a bane to

Muslim unity. Medieval Europe, under the Catholic Popes, remained one

single entity known as Christendom, but it declined with splits in the

church and growth of the territorial nationalism, Europe rejected religion

and assumed a secular outlook. Territorial nationalism, among the


122

Muslims, had already played havoc to the unity of the Muslims to such

an extent that many of the independent Muslim countries had lost their

liberty. The western intellectuals, including social scientists,

anthropologists and historians were advancing the theory of “cultural

areas” on the basis of geography. Thus, territorial nationalism and the

theory of “cultural areas” were complementary aspects of the same idea,

which if accepted by Muslim thinkers, would have led the Muslims on

the path of further fragmentation. Iqbal strove hard to reject this idea of

culture which keeps a geographical area separate from other areas; He did

not believe that one common language is a prerequisite of culture, and his

own writings in Urdu, English and Persian are as attempt to transcend the

limits of mono-lingualism and mono-culturalism, so that his audience,

wherever they may be and whatever language they may speak, know the

spirit of his message.

For Iqbal, Muslims were in need of a culture which could unite

them and cement their energies into one indivisible whole. This could be

provided only by the two basic ideas of Islamic faith – Unity of God and

Finality of the Prophethood. If Muslims had firm faith in these basic

ideas, their institutions, codes and customs as well as the works of art

could be shaped distinctively and uniformly. Iqbal had firm conviction

that only by reverting to our pristine and glorious spiritual sources could

Muslims can promote universal humanity non–Muslim forces in the

world. His own poetry was an effort to awaken the dormant

consciousness of Muslims and to strengthen their belief in Islam29

.


123

Thus, Iqbal, an outstanding Muslim scholar of India, although had

some nationalist tendencies in his early stage which are depicted in his

poems of that period. Yet very soon he came to know its weaknesses.

His love for India and its people, its flora and fauna, its glorious past,

pride to be a part of his nation, India clearly indicates that he was a

nationalist. It was his visit to Europe that changed his mind where he got

a full view of nationalism, its motives and results. There he discovered

how it had destroyed the idea of universal brotherhood, and created

artificial barriers between man and man. So he amplified that no nation

or even obtaining the freedom cannot bear the fruits in nurturing this

narrow political ideology. No doubt, he tried to find the solution of the

Indian predicament of nationalism and suggested the idea of Muslim state

for realizing its cultured goals. At the same time, he was searching for the

social order for humanity that could rise above the barriers of race, colour

and region and that is found in the system of Islam.

4:3. Maulana Sayyid ‘Abul ‘Ala Mawdudi’s Response

Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Mawdudi (1903-1979), also falls in the

category of those who refute nationalist ideology in India. He is regarded

as great scholar and thinker of Islam who wrote about a hundred books

on the various themes of Islamic thought including political themes. He

also founded a movement called Jamat-i-Islami in 1941 which is spread

now in the whole sub-continent. His views about nationalism are

elaborated in his Maslah Qawmiyat, Musalman aur Mujuda Siyasi

Kashmakash and Tafhimat, specifically rejected nationalism because in


124

his view it would lead to the predominance of wrong influences. Even a

cursory glance at the meaning and essence of nationalism, he wrote, was

enough to reveal that Islam and nationalism were poles apart, and that the

Muslim‟s loyalty, which is religious, cannot be given to an entity such as

the nation. For these reasons, Muslims should become better Muslims,

and cast off any Indian, Western or secularist influences30

. Mawdudi does

not regard nationalism a sentiment or a subjective feeling which produces

unity of purpose. According to him the theory and practice of nationalism

is not only defective but fatal to the interests of mankind as it is based on

selfishness, “What is selfishness in individual life is nationalism in social

life”31

.

Mawdudi held that there are four ingredients of nationalism. i) The

sentiment of national pride. It compels a nation to exalt itself over-all

other nations in every respect; ii) the sentiment of national consciousness.

It obliges man to support his nation whether it stands for right or wrong;

iii) the sentiment of self-preservation. It protects its actual and visionary

interests, compels every nation to adopt tactics which commencing with

self-defence end in invasion; and iv) the sentiment of national prestige

and national aggrandizement which produces in every progressive and

powerful nation the assertion that it should dominate over the nations of

the earth32

.

Thus the basic elements of nationalism are national consciousness

and pride, national self-preservation and aggrandizement. It treats man

not as a part of humanity but as a member of a particular country set

against other countries. It necessarily leads to the division of mankind on


125

considerations of race and territory and is nurtured on the sentiments of

hostility and revenge33

.

This nationalism means not only that a person should love his

nation and wish to be free, happy and progress. If it were so it would be a

noble sentiment. It is, in fact generated and nurtured by the sentiments of

hostility, hatred and revenge rather than by those of love. The spirit of its

inception is that fire which is enkindled in the hearts of men by trampled

national ambitions and the injured sentiments of a nation. And this fire,

this stupid national love inflates the noble sentiment of patriotism so

much so that it becomes ignoble and ugly. Apparently it rises to redress

the injustices inflicted or supposed to have been inflicted on the nation by

another nation or nations, but since it is not guided and regulated by any

moral code, by any spiritual teaching, by any God-made law, it exceeds

its limits and assumes the forms of imperialism, economic nationalism,

racial hatred, war and international anarchy34

.

Therefore, if Muslim is one who upholds the Islamic ideology in

every concern of life, and if the word “Muslim” does not mean any thing

else, it follows automatically that a Muslim, wherever and in whatever

condition he happens to be, must fight against nationalism. This principle

having been accepted, it becomes futile to think what part Muslims

should play in the nationalistic movement of this or that country. But

when Muslims of India are told that nationalism should be encouraged in

India and that the salvation of India lies in the progress of this thing.

They themselves feel ourselves obliged to consider the special condition

prevailing in India and examine as to what is, or what would be, the


126

ultimate end of the progress of nationalism in this land, and determine

whether the salvation of India really lies in this procedure35

.

Mawdudi‟s rejection of nationalism is on special grounds and he

makes a strong plea for the acceptance of Islam as the only alternative to

it. Islam and nationalism are diametrically opposed to each other36

. Those

who accept the principles of Islam are not divided by any distinction of

nationality or race or class of country37

. Islam makes appeal to mankind

in general and “dissociates men from their love of sanguinary and

material affinities”38

. To Mawdudi, “A man who wants to be loyal to

Islam, as well as nationalism only betrays confusion of mind and

looseness of thinking”39

.

According to Maulana Mawdudi, there are two types of

nationalism in Muslims. One is “nationalist Muslim” and another is

“Muslim nationalist”. But Islam does not allow any nation worship so

both of them are mislead. He says:

Apparently this combination of the words “Muslim” we find two

kinds of nationalists: the “Nationalist Muslims”, namely those

who in spite of their being Muslims believe in „Indian

nationalism” and worship it; and the “Muslim nationalists”,

namely those people who are little concerned with Islam and its

principles and aims, but are concerned with the individuality and

the political and economic interests of the nation which has come

to exist by one name of “Muslim”, and they are so concerned

only because of their accidence of birth in that nation. From the

Islamic view-point both these types of nationalists are equally

misled, for Islam enjoins faith in truth only; it does not permit


127

any kind of nation-worshipping at all. But unfortunately both

these types of nationalists are ignorant of their un-Islamic

position. Particularly the second type of people are today

vaunting loudly that they are the champions of Islam in India,

although their position is hardly different from that of the Hindu

nationalists. A Hindu nationalist, because he is born in the Hindu

nation, endeavors to enhance the cause of those who are Hindus,

and those Muslim, nationalists, because they are born in a nation

which is called “Muslim, want to exalt those who are connected

with this nation. Neither of the two comes forward with a moral

end or which a creed that is supported by universal principles. As

the Hindu would be satisfied in his own case, so these people

would be fully satisfied if Muslims were to rule supreme – they

would little mind if they had established their government on un-

Islamic foundations, and if their behavior and procedure did not

differ, in the least, from those of non Muslims40

.

Nationalism has made life of man miserable but there are still

some Muslims in India who support and recommend to adopt European

conception of nationalism. Maulana Mawdudi says in this connection

that:

The most important philosophy of life that is today governing not

only India but the entire world is the philosophy of Nationalism. This

unfortunate passion of nations has made the life of man miserable on this

planet. The strangest thing is that even Muslims, who by the very nature

of their creed ought to have been free of this bias, have succumbed to it.


128

There is a notable section of Muslims in this country which vehemently

recommends the adoption of European conception of nationalism for the

following reasons:

1. The whole earth has been conquered by the Western philosophy

of life, therefore, if we want to exist we must submit to it.

2. In ancient times our country enjoyed a great reputation among

the nations of the world. In order to regain that past glory we

must enhance and establish our prestige among the nations of

today. And this prestige we can establish only by aping

Europe41

.

Maulana Mawdudi is of this thought that it is only Islam which can

solve the problem of nationalism. The Shariats of God are represented

only by the Muslims in this world42

. Only Islam can do away with the

“Devil of Nationalism” and its “Satanic principles”. The Islamic solution

is the Islamic Nationalism which is based on Kalima – there is no god but

one God and Muhammad (SAAS) is His Prophet. Maulana said that

acceptance of this tenet brings about unity and rejection results in

disunity43

.

Maulana Mawdudi was aware of the popularity of the doctrine of

nationalism with the Indian people irrespective of religion. He regarded it

as an imitation of the western doctrine of nationalism. It is adopted not on

account of its inherent righteousness and truth or its moral worth and

propriety but on account of pure expediency and utility44

. The nationalists

who are fighting against the British Raj are not on the “right path” as

expounded by Islam45

. What is needed according to him is righteousness


129

of viewpoint which is wanting in the nationalists. What matters is not

independence but the object of independence. If the object is not Islamic

all fight against the British rule is haram (religiously illegal)46

. The

nationalists in India claimed that British rule would be replaced by a

democratic system which was not “un-Islamic but anti-Islamic”47

.

According to Mawdudi, the nationalists are not in a position to

examine the question of nationalism dispassionately because they do not

possess “true insight” and are unable to be free from their mental slavery

from the west. Mawdudi believed, that nationalism will not lead to the

salvation but to the ruin of the country. First, because “to achieve

freedom by this means would be a long and tiresome business”; it will

mean “the destruction of cultural nationality” and “its getting enkindled

into nationalism”48

. If the attainment of political liberty depends on

nationalism, India will have to wait for several generations more.

Secondly, freedom through nationalism would “ultimately hurl down the

whole country into the inferno of moral degeneration”49

. Thirdly, “all

those nations which have the least consciousness of their individuality

would certainly resist this nation-making most stubbornly” and the dream

of political independence may never be realized. Mawdudi, therefore,

concluded that for liberty and political and economic progress of India,

national unity and nationalism are in the least essential50

.

Maulana Mawdudi was opposite to Indian nationalism because of

its communist and Western character. Moreover, he thought that

nationalism of Congress was merely political nationalism, and a reaction

to alien domination. He held that it is not sufficient to originate the


130

sentiment of nationalism. What is needed is cultural nationalism which

will give birth to genuine nationalism. The Indian people do not

constitute a cultural nationality which signifies the mental temperament

and moral constitution of a nation. It is not an artificial product but

evolves through centuries in a natural order. In India it will lead either to

the absorption of one culture by another or to the evolution of a common

culture which would deny the identity of both51

. The nature of these

differences between the various communities in India is not “communal”

but “international”52

, which implies that the Hindus and Muslims are two

different nations. Moreover, the movement of independence of the

country aims at the establishment of “Hindu Raj under the Britishers”.

Mawdudi, therefore suggested that the solution of the Indian problem is

not to be sought in the unitary principle but in the federal principle. The

permanent status and the individuality of every nation should be

recognized; every one of them should be allowed autonomous and

sovereign control over its national “subjects” and the different nations

should agree upon a joint action only in so far as the common interests of

the country are concerned53

.

The Muslims were creating political nationalism out of cultural

nationality which according to Mawdudi is not opposed to Islam and

stands for the maintenance of its individuality54

. The League leaders who

claimed to be Muslims argued that Muslim cultural nationality could not

be secure in India where the domination of the Hindu majority is

inescapable. The interests of Islam and cultural nationalism therefore

made the creation of Pakistan imperative. The Muslim League was


131

inimical to Indian nationalism which it regarded as tainted by Hindu

revivalism. Mawdudi despised both Indian nationalism as well as Muslim

nationalism. According to Mawdudi, the Muslim nationalists are those

people “who are little concerned with Islam and its principles and aims,

but are concerned with the individuality and the political and economic

interests of that nation which has come to exist by the name of Muslim

and they are so concerned only because of the accident of their birth in

that community55

. Indian nationalism and Muslim nationalism are both

un-Islamic. Muslim nationalism is as vicious as Indian nationalism56

. The

Muslims have accepted nationalism because of their „basic weaknesses‟.

They are “unaware of Islamic culture and its characteristics”57

. Secondly,

they are disintegrated and disorganized58

. Thirdly, poverty, ignorance and

slavery have made them opportunist59

. Fourthly, Muslim society contains

a large number of munafiqin60

(not true followers of faith). Their soulless

religiosity has deprived the Shari„ah of all flexibility61

. Maulana

Mawdudi considered Muslim nationalism as a consequence of the

ignorance of Islam. To him, the considerations of minority and majority

are absurd. There was a time when the Prophet Muhammad (SAAS) was

in the minority in population.62

Islamic society does not rely on the

strength of population but on the strength of faith. The demand of

national government, protection of fundamental rights, national

independence, opposition to imperialism are all the “vices of sheep” and

not the virtues of a “lion” who is entitled to govern63

. For the

achievement of the goal of a world state, Islam acts not only as a mere

religion but as a movement, for a nation represents the settled goal of a


132

people while the idea of a world state calls for infinite efforts and

expansion64

. He looked upon Islam as not merely a faith but as a system

which has provided mankind with set answers to all its problem65

. Thus,

Maulana Mawdudi was of this thought that Islam and nationalism are

poles apart. Islam is a religion which gives great importance to human

brotherhood while as nationalism divided mankind in different groups

and sects.


133

References

1. S. M. Ikram, Modern India and the Birth of Pakistan, Institute of Islamic

Culture, Lahore, Pakistan, 1997, p. 166.

2. A. R. Anjum, Iqbal and Muslim Culture, Bazm-i-Iqbal, Lahore, 1985, p.

167.

3. Allama Iqbal, Kulliyat-i-Iqbal, (Urdu), Markaz-i-Maktaba Islami

Publications, Delhi, 1999, p. 69.

4. Dr. Abdul Aleem Hilal, Social Philosophy of Sir Muhammad Iqbal, Adam

Publishes and Distributors, Delhi, 1995, p. 244.

5. Allama Iqbal, op. cit., p. 73.

6. Ibid., p. 72.

7. Ibid., p. 69.

8. G. R. Malik, The Bloody Horizon, A Study of Iqbal’s response to the West,

Iqbal Academy, Srinagar, 1990, p. 22.

9. Dr. Abdul Aleem Hilal, op. cit., pp. 245-46.

10. Shamloo, Speeches and Statements of Iqbal, Al-Minar Academy,

Lahore, 1948, p. 224.

11. Dr. Abdul Aleem Hilal, op. cit.,p. 246..

12. Ibid., p. 247.

13. Idem.

14. Shahid Muhammad Haneef, ed., Tributes to Iqbal, Sangemeel

Publications, Lahore, 1977, p. 222.

15. Allama Iqbal, op. cit.,p. 133.

16. Moin Shakir, Khilafat to Partition, Ajanta Publications, Delhi, 1983,

p.99.

17. Allama Iqbal, op. cit.,p. 132.

18. Moin Shakir, loc. cit.

19. Shamloo, op.cit., p.205.

20. Ibid., p. 142.

21. Moin Shakir, op.cit., pp.99-100.

22. S. M. Ikram, op.cit., p.170.

23. Moin Shakir, op. cit., p. 100.

24. Idem.

25. Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi, The Struggle for Pakistan, University of

Karachi, Pakistan, 1987, p. 117.

26. F. K. Khan Durrani, op. cit.,pp. 208-9.


134

27. Lawrence Ziring, Ralph Braibanti and W. Howard, ed(s), Pakistan: The

Long View, Duke University Press, Durham, 1977, pp. 285-86.

28. N. Jayapalan, Indian Political Thinkers, Modern Indian Political

Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors¸ New Delhi, 2000, p. 333.

29. A. R. Anjum, op. cit., pp. 168-69.

30. Mushirul Hasan, Legacy of a Divided Nation, India’s Muslims Since

Independence, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1997, p. 69.

31. Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Mawdudi, Nationalism and India, Markazi

Maktaba Islami, Delhi, 1993, p. 24.

32. Ibid., p. 14.

33. Ibid., p.16.

34. Idem.

35. Ibid., p. 41.

36. Ibid., p. 9.

37. Idem.

38. Ibid., p. 10.

39. Ibid., p. 11.

40. Ibid., p. 40.

41. Ibid., pp. 9-10.

42. Ibid., p. 36.

43. Muhammad Sarwar, Maulana Mawdudi ki Tahriki Islami (Urdu),

Lahore, 1956, p. 137.

44. Maulana Sayyid „Abul „Ala Mawdudi, Nationalism and India, op. cit.,

p. 6.

45. Maulana Sayyid „Abu „Ala Mawdudi, Musalman aur Maujuda Siyasi

Kashmakash, Vol. I, Hyderabad, 1948, p. 26.

46. Idem.


Kashmakash, op. cit., p. 161.

48. Moin Shakir, op. cit., pp. 217-18.

49. Ibid., p. 218.

50. Idem.

51. Ibid., p. 219.



53. Moin Shakir, loc. cit.

54. Ibid., p. 219.

55. Maulana Sayyid „Abul „Ala Mawdudi, Nationalism and India, op.cit.,

p.42.


135



57. Ibid., p. 19.

58. Ibid., p. 20.

59. Ibid., p. 21.

60. Ibid., p. 22.

61. Ibid., Vol. III, p. 15.

62. Ibid., p. 86.

63. Ibid., p. 83.

64. Moin Shakir, op. cit., pp. 213.

65. Ibid., p. 214.

`


136

Documents

Chapter 4 Muslim Scholars’ Response to …shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4413/8/08...Chapter 4 Muslim Scholars’ Response to Nationalism: Attitudes of Refutation 116