“The forbidden truth, the unspeakable taboo — that evil is not always repellent but frequently attractive; that it has the power to make of us not simply victims, as nature and accident do, but active accomplices.” — Joyce Carol Oates
What kind of Pakistan did the founder, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, want?
Did he want a liberal democratic Muslim state or a fundamentalist Islamic State?
Raja of Mahmudabad, a renowned League member, once probed Mr. Jinnah whether Pakistan was an Islamic State that would run according to Sunnah and Shariah. Quaid-i-Azam turned red and said, “We shall not be an Islamic State”. He justified that there were more than seventy sects of Muslims having differences in religious opinions and faith matters with a variety in practices. The statement depicts the eagerness and vision of Mr Jinnah to prevent Pakistan from radicalisation so that all the communities live in harmony as Pakistanis in the newborn State.
Historically, the formation of Pakistan in 1947 was a clear dreadful defeat of the ideologies of anti-Pakistan Islamic forces. Later, these entities adopted various standpoints to mark their acceptance in public. Particularly, pro-Congress ‘Majlis-i-Ahrar’ of Ataullah Shah Bukhari was the worst example for its weightage in Pakistani society. He addressed the Ahmadia issue in order to install hatred among general Muslim masses to fit in and restore their leadership. In this regard, Justice Munir Report of 1954 on Punjab Disturbance disclosed, “it may indeed be said that the Ahrar took their birth in the hatred of the Ahmadis”. Political entities endorsed and supported them for their own political agendas and benefits. Moreover, Objective Resolution and the stern Islamic Provisions in all three Constitutions strengthened the religious stratums for their strong hold on politics, religion as well as the society of Pakistan.
Last year the government took action in Hafeez Centre, Lahore against hateful stickers that said “Qadianis are not allowed”, but later surrendered because of huge agitation by the shopkeepers. The social and economic boycott of Ahmadis continues to increase their sufferings