Allama Iqbal is most famous in India for penning ‘Saare jahan se achha’, but it was also on the basis of his 1930 speech that the two-nation theory was formed.
Over generations, Bihar’s bane has been its utter lack of urbanisation. But now, even Bihar is urbanising. Or let’s say, rurbanising. Two decades under Nitish Kumar have created a new elite in its cities.
Indian govt officials last month skipped Turkish National Day celebrations in Delhi, in a message to Ankara following its support for Islamabad, particularly during Operation Sindoor.
Bihar is blessed with a land more fertile for revolutions than any in India. Why has it fallen so far behind then? Constant obsession with politics is at the root of its destruction.
I would say, Iqbal was a great fool of his own idea that Muslim culture will be get wiped by the majority Hindu. That fear created Pakistan in finding for peaceful nation for Muslims only. Whatever, created on the basis of fear and extreme disliking for others would lead to destruction and constant fear and hatred rule the nation(which is Pakistan suffering through). If I was there I would tell Iqbal that for love for your community or country or religion is nothing but a hatred for other communities and nations and religion.
look the suitation of indian muslims vs pakistani muslims right now, you will get the idea why it was important to become a majority rather than be a large minority.
In year 1904 India is undivided then how Mohammad iqbal became a Pakistani national in 1904 to give India sarrey jaha sey accha ????
Mr.anil not the other people who were working in British India were on the payroll of. Britisher s…????….. What’s the big deal? all the gov. Employees all who were in army, how come it justify one thoughts on not having Khudi which is self respect ……in Iqbals way……Iqbal is what ????people like u could only spit ur anger because u cannot understand ….. A nation ,it’s perspective and it’s thought before saying any thing to Iqbal or other scholors who were Muslims by hearts there are people in ur rows like founder of rss ,moodi and lakhs of who don’t say there own nation to stand but to vanish other from the face of Earth….. So who is good one who want it’s nation prosper or one who want other imprisoned
Firstly let me correct a notion repeatedly quoted that it was Allama Iqbal who gave the idea of two nation theory.Please research and research this aspect. The poetry of Iqbal was more based on development of a muslim more on the lines of teaching of Islam and in that there he didn’t want a young muslim to become a mullah.Understanding his poetry needs a well versed person in the religion of Islam.So a respected person like Mr Anil can not comprehend his poetry in right perspective.Regarding two nation theory,what he had said that there should have a been a real muslim nation ,practicing and implementing the rules of Islam in right spirit so that world at large and other muslims nations could emulate .By this he was not referring to creating a new nation from unpartitioned India but referring to existing muslim nations who had abandoned the islamic way of life.
Anybody who understands the personality of Iqbal through his poetry will never accept that he would called for partition of India or a separate nation for muslims.space and times constraint is asking me to stop here.
Iqbal’s politics is routed through his soul-stirring poetry. In his epic poem shikwa, like Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilisations, he frames the world exclusively in terms of us-versus-them and the superiority of one civilization over all others. His pan-Islamic mard-e-momin belongs to the ummah and this perfect human aspires to martyrdom: shahadat hai matloob o maqsood-e-momin. Like a falcon, the mard-e-momin is a fighter and above worldly desire: tu shaheen hai basera kar paharon kee chatanon main. These verses can be found in Pakistan Army magazines, on its recruiting banners, and are sung with great fervour.
Iqbal, unlike Sir Syed, leaves the gap between science and religion unbridged. He takes no explicit position on miracles. On the contrary, he asserts that, “Classical Physics has learned to criticise its own foundations. As a result of this criticism the kind of materialism, which it originally necessitated, is rapidly disappearing.” But no real physicist can take this statement seriously. Even with the discovery of quantum physics — which superseded and improved upon classical physics — the description of observed physical phenomena requires nothing beyond material causes.
It is to be seen whether the panacea for Muslim in India lies in Sir Syed’s rational approach or in Allama’s clarion call on emotive reasoning. Iqbal said what people wanted to hear — and his genius lay in crafting it with beautifully chosen words. Is Iqbal’s prescription not leading to Muslims in digging their graves as his mard-e-momins are no else but a bunch of Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists? It seems that day by day Jehadi Takfiri Talibani Ideology of Iqbal has won over scholarly, Golden-Age-of-Islam inspired, reasonable ideology presented by Sir Syed and as a result abrupt and ubiquitous Jihadi factories, and bigoted, hypocritical population and establishment dominates.
Moreover, Iqbal wanted a revival of jihad and he always preferred the sword to the pen. A fact remains that both were the favourites of the British masters. There is a letter/application by Iqbal to the British masters to increase his monthly stipend as he could not make ends meet. A man recognized and on the payroll of British masters giving us lessons of khudi and soar like shaheen cannot a true scholar. On the other hand Sir Syed established the first Muslim University acting as an incubator for most future Muslim politicians, bureaucrats, leaders and reformers. Sir Syed actually woke Muslims and educated them in the true sense rather than giving them stories and past history.
It is also a fact there was not just one Iqbal, Iqbal has been a Marxist, a secularist, a mullah hater, a mullah sometimes, a sufi, a Democrat and an alcoholic in the same lifespan. His writing In English was often the opposite of whatever little he wrote in Urdu.
Dilemma of nouveau riche petite bourgeoisie is they are penchant for generally accepted narratives without paying heed to strong and neutral historical references. Death to “Folie de grandeur” death to “le roi est mort, vive le roi”
I would say, Iqbal was a great fool of his own idea that Muslim culture will be get wiped by the majority Hindu. That fear created Pakistan in finding for peaceful nation for Muslims only. Whatever, created on the basis of fear and extreme disliking for others would lead to destruction and constant fear and hatred rule the nation(which is Pakistan suffering through). If I was there I would tell Iqbal that for love for your community or country or religion is nothing but a hatred for other communities and nations and religion.
look the suitation of indian muslims vs pakistani muslims right now, you will get the idea why it was important to become a majority rather than be a large minority.
In year 1904 India is undivided then how Mohammad iqbal became a Pakistani national in 1904 to give India sarrey jaha sey accha ????
Mr.anil not the other people who were working in British India were on the payroll of. Britisher s…????….. What’s the big deal? all the gov. Employees all who were in army, how come it justify one thoughts on not having Khudi which is self respect ……in Iqbals way……Iqbal is what ????people like u could only spit ur anger because u cannot understand ….. A nation ,it’s perspective and it’s thought before saying any thing to Iqbal or other scholors who were Muslims by hearts there are people in ur rows like founder of rss ,moodi and lakhs of who don’t say there own nation to stand but to vanish other from the face of Earth….. So who is good one who want it’s nation prosper or one who want other imprisoned
Firstly let me correct a notion repeatedly quoted that it was Allama Iqbal who gave the idea of two nation theory.Please research and research this aspect. The poetry of Iqbal was more based on development of a muslim more on the lines of teaching of Islam and in that there he didn’t want a young muslim to become a mullah.Understanding his poetry needs a well versed person in the religion of Islam.So a respected person like Mr Anil can not comprehend his poetry in right perspective.Regarding two nation theory,what he had said that there should have a been a real muslim nation ,practicing and implementing the rules of Islam in right spirit so that world at large and other muslims nations could emulate .By this he was not referring to creating a new nation from unpartitioned India but referring to existing muslim nations who had abandoned the islamic way of life.
Anybody who understands the personality of Iqbal through his poetry will never accept that he would called for partition of India or a separate nation for muslims.space and times constraint is asking me to stop here.
Iqbal’s politics is routed through his soul-stirring poetry. In his epic poem shikwa, like Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilisations, he frames the world exclusively in terms of us-versus-them and the superiority of one civilization over all others. His pan-Islamic mard-e-momin belongs to the ummah and this perfect human aspires to martyrdom: shahadat hai matloob o maqsood-e-momin. Like a falcon, the mard-e-momin is a fighter and above worldly desire: tu shaheen hai basera kar paharon kee chatanon main. These verses can be found in Pakistan Army magazines, on its recruiting banners, and are sung with great fervour.
Iqbal, unlike Sir Syed, leaves the gap between science and religion unbridged. He takes no explicit position on miracles. On the contrary, he asserts that, “Classical Physics has learned to criticise its own foundations. As a result of this criticism the kind of materialism, which it originally necessitated, is rapidly disappearing.” But no real physicist can take this statement seriously. Even with the discovery of quantum physics — which superseded and improved upon classical physics — the description of observed physical phenomena requires nothing beyond material causes.
It is to be seen whether the panacea for Muslim in India lies in Sir Syed’s rational approach or in Allama’s clarion call on emotive reasoning. Iqbal said what people wanted to hear — and his genius lay in crafting it with beautifully chosen words. Is Iqbal’s prescription not leading to Muslims in digging their graves as his mard-e-momins are no else but a bunch of Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists? It seems that day by day Jehadi Takfiri Talibani Ideology of Iqbal has won over scholarly, Golden-Age-of-Islam inspired, reasonable ideology presented by Sir Syed and as a result abrupt and ubiquitous Jihadi factories, and bigoted, hypocritical population and establishment dominates.
Moreover, Iqbal wanted a revival of jihad and he always preferred the sword to the pen. A fact remains that both were the favourites of the British masters. There is a letter/application by Iqbal to the British masters to increase his monthly stipend as he could not make ends meet. A man recognized and on the payroll of British masters giving us lessons of khudi and soar like shaheen cannot a true scholar. On the other hand Sir Syed established the first Muslim University acting as an incubator for most future Muslim politicians, bureaucrats, leaders and reformers. Sir Syed actually woke Muslims and educated them in the true sense rather than giving them stories and past history.
It is also a fact there was not just one Iqbal, Iqbal has been a Marxist, a secularist, a mullah hater, a mullah sometimes, a sufi, a Democrat and an alcoholic in the same lifespan. His writing In English was often the opposite of whatever little he wrote in Urdu.
Dilemma of nouveau riche petite bourgeoisie is they are penchant for generally accepted narratives without paying heed to strong and neutral historical references. Death to “Folie de grandeur” death to “le roi est mort, vive le roi”