Q. Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam, the founders of Pakistan, envisioned an Islamic democratic state. They were not ‘fundamentalists’ in the sense, which is currently understood and used for you (the Islamists). The type of Pakistan you want to build, is probably not what the founding fathers wished?

In this respect it is to be kept in mind, by way of principle, that Allah is the Creator and the Lord of the Universe and the Master of the Day of Judgment, who revealed the holy Qur’an as the ultimate guidance for the humanity. And to authenticate His guidance, He annunciated the last of the prophets, Muhammad (p.b.u.h.). Therefore, the whole life of a Muslim, no matter where on the earth and under what conditions he lives, has to be according to the injunctions of these two main sources of guidance and final criteria - the Qur’an and the Sunnah. All the rest, no matter how accomplished scholars and respectable personalities they be, come secondary in position and consideration. Rather, their views, thinking and decisions will be judged on the criteria of Qur’an and Sunnah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

With respect to the question of "Islamic Democratic State", what Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam supported and held, and for which they made all out struggle, was to establish a Muslim society and a Muslim state in the light of the unmatched and eternal guidance of Qur’an and Sunnah. A society that fulfilled the imperatives of social justice and in which the Law of Islam (shariah) is acted upon; one in which the Muslims, free from the slavery and imitation of the Western powers, present Islam as a religion of guidance and a permanent culture. So this was the concept of the founders of Pakistan. Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam criticized those who were following a different path. They particularly criticized Turkey which was busy transforming itself into European mould.

This is exactly the concept presented by Jama’at-e-Islami, which these people today name as ‘fundamentalist’. In fact we (in the Jama’at) are struggling to give practical shape to the thinking and concept of Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam which are guided by Islam and derived from the Qur’an and Sunnah of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.). Thus there is no difference between what we think and do and what was perceived by the founders of Pakistan. The ideals of the founding fathers have been betrayed by those who introduced secularism, materialism, westernization and licentiousness in this country, paved the way for socialism or were its lackeys, propagated capitalism and let the cancer of feudalism grow and expand here. They are the ones looking for ways to deviate from Islamic law and who created regional and ethnic prejudices and clashes. We, in fact, are fighting these menaces through our faith in Allah (iman), sound arguments (dalael) and firm conviction (yaqeen). We are fighting the same battle which Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam fought. In this way, we have no practical conflict or conceptual contradiction with the founding fathers.

Q. Concerning the fact, that Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam were against theocracy, it is said, that using all means, you intend to lead Pakistan to theocracy?

It is a fact and the same has been clearly expressed by Allama Muhammad Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, that Islam is not theocracy. Taking advantage of such statements (of the founders), some people try to impress that we held different opinion from them. In fact, these people forget that where Allama Iqbal discussed this subject, is the sixth speech of his ‘Khutbat’. The sense in which he expressed it in the speech is, that, "To say, that by way of a principle the process of ‘tauhid’ (unity) is the base of freedom, equality and solidarity of the human species. Now if we see from this angle then according to Islam, the State will mean our endeavour, that these supreme and ideal principles be expressed as the space time forces, as if it is an aspiration that these principles be seen openly working in a definite human social organization. It is, therefore, in this meaning that the Islamic State is expressed as the theocracy (Hukumat-e-Ilahiya), and not in the sense that authority is conferred upon some representative (Zil) of God on earth, who under the excuse of his supposed innocence (infallibility) screens his despotic rule." It means that theocracy in Islam is not in the sense that there be some monopolist religious class, which alone should be the source to know the will of Allah. So this was the thinking of Allama Iqbal in the light of Islamic teachings and disposition.

Quaid-e-Azam has said, that he was against theocracy, because there was no concept of such a class in Islam that would enjoy the monopoly in religion, as it is found in Budhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism. The same thing has always been said in the same tone by Sayyed Abul a’ala Mawdudi and Jama’at-e-Islami, that, "We are against theocracy; that theocracy has no relation to Islamic system". In this respect, Maulana Mawdudi’s view could be ascertained from his books. Now, if an educated person does not go through all this, and considers the false Western accusations and slander to be sufficient knowledge, then it is only a proof of his fooly and narrow-mindedness.

In fact Allama Iqbal, Quaid-e-Azam and Sayyed Abul A’ala Mawdudi held similar view. Those who are attempting to create conflict in them and a division at the practical level, are not showing intellectual honesty, or else, instead of looking for the facts, they are prone to secular biases. Such elements neither understand theocracy, nor they are aware of the social, economic, international and political thoughts in Islam. I understand that from this aspect, they should correct their view point at the national level, so that we are able to put to practice the message given by Allama Iqbal and for which the Quaid struggled. As far as Maulana Mawdudi is concerned, he was an exponent of this thinking at the ideological front and proclaimed it in practical life.