Iqbal and Democracy

IQBAL AND DEMOCRACY(Part 1) Dr. WAHEED ISHRAT TRANSLATION Dr. M.A.K. KHALIL The operation of democracy in the West has not been an unmixed blessing, and history is replete with oppression of the religious and ethnic minorities. The shortcomings of democracy have been disturbing Western intellectuals over the past two centuries. They have expressed fears and disappointments in their works, several of which have been reviewed. The alternative Western political systems of monarchy and dictatorship have also been reviewed. Their performance has been found to be even more disappointing than that of democracy. As these are the only alternatives to democracy in the experience of the West this has added to the frustration of Western intellectuals. These events in human history highlight the Qur‟anic message that man-made systems are defective and that the human race is standing at the edge of an abyss. falling into which can be avoided only by Divine guidance. The Judeo-Christian ecclesiastical literature was, at best, vague and incomplete in providing any guidance, and the operation of theocracy in Europe during the middle ages had been a nightmare to the people. Allamah Iqbal‟s service to humanity at this critical juncture was a very timely beacon of light. He declared to the world not to despair because there was hope of redemption in the “Islamic spiritual democracy.” In addition to the above objections to Western democracy Iqbal objected to its unaltered application to the undivided Indian sub-continent, on account of the country‟ special conditions in which Hindus formed a large a privileged majority and Muslims a small and handicapped minority. In these circumstances obviously the Muslims would have been losers and subservient to the Hindus. Al efforts of the Muslim League, over a period of two decades in which Iqbal had played a prominent role, to come to workable understanding with the Hindus, had failed. Ii these circumstances it would have been impossible for the Muslims to lead their lives according to the dictates of Islam in the Western democratic system had been adopted Political partition of the subcontinent was, therefore unavoidable for the Muslims if they wanted to fulfil their Divine Commission of establishing the sovereignty of God first in their majority regions in the sub- continent, and then to extend it to the rest of the world in cooperation with their brethren in other Islamic countries. The paper cites extensively from Allamah Iqbal‟s works, especially from his opus magnum The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, and concludes that Allamal-Iqbal was convinced of the indispensability of the establishment of “Islamic spiritual democracy” for Muslim and that Islamic society could not be established without an. Islamic State, which he considered as “the sixth pillar of Islam”. As Pakistan was the first country established in the name of Islam, after the Divinely guided Khilafah, it was obviously Iqbal‟s Prime Choice for being the bulwark of such a State. The paper considers the following objectives essential for the Islamic State: 1. The Objectives Resolution passed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly in 1950 should form the basic guideline for all legislating and executive decisions. 2. We should realize that all Muslims are jointly responsible for establishing the Islamic State, and not any individual or group. The Consultative Assembly should be established by adult franchise and should, in turn, appoint the Executive. should enact and enforce, through the „Executive, legislation in conformity with God‟s will and Commandments and should have the power of ijtihad. The Executive should he accountable to the Consultative Assembly and the latter should be responsible to the people. Important matters, including controversial ijtihads, should be referred to the people‟s referendum. Political parties should be permitted to formulate and enact their programmes for establishment and operation of the Islamic State on the basis of which they should obtain people‟s mandate periodically through elections. 3. The State should provide the four basic needs of free education, free justice, equitable distribution of country‟s resources and economic freedom to all citizens, 4. Privileged classes on religious, social and political bases should be gradually, but surely, eliminated. 5. The State should guard the interests of Muslims all over the world and should struggle for freeing them from oppression of all kind and degrees. 6. Having established an ideal society, the State should invite all mankind to follow their example by adopting it and benefitting from Islamic ideals and their blessings. 7. The State should fight for the emancipation of un-privileged and under-privileged people all over the world, and should cooperate in all efforts for establishing a world society based on peace and freedom from want, which is the ultimate objective of Islam. INTRODUCTION Even apart from Allamah Iqbal‟s concepts democracy is a controversial subject which needs viewing with deep insight. Evidence exists in Allamah Iqbal‟s verse as well as prose which gives the impression of his strong opposition to the concept of democracy. The Allamah was particularly a strong critic of the present clay commonly held concepts of Western democracy. As the Allamah has pointed out several basic defects of the Western concept in democracy it would be appropriate to clarify that he was against the well known and widely understood western concept of democracy only. This also was with special reference to the conditions prevailing in the Indian subcontinent, where the Muslims were a minority and the Hindus a majority. In opposing the Western concept of democracy the Allamah also had the fact in view that the promulgation of the Western democratic system in undivided India, with Muslim minority and Hindu majority, would result in perpetual political power for the Hindu majority and slavery for the Muslim minority. This fact should not be ignored in connection with Allamah Iqbal‟s opposition to democracy. Still, the question arises whether the unaltered Western democratic system was acceptable in a new Islamic society outside the mixed society of Muslims and non-Muslims. The Allamah‟s reply to this also is almost in the negative. However, the system of government which Allamah Iqbal considers indispensable for the spiritual freedom of Muslims, according to the concept of ijtihad and “spiritual democracy” has the Islamic democratic consultation as its foundation and spirit. Sovereignty belongs to the people in Western democracy and they are answerable to none except themselves. As opposed to this, sovereignty in Allamah Iqbal‟s “spiritual democracy” befits God alone. The Muslims are its guardians by virtue of being God‟s Vicegerents. They are empowered to establish an institution, by mutual consultation, some form of election, or by vote, in the present day parlance, for the administration of their affairs in conformity with the dictates of God and His Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H). In this way based on the Islamic concept of consultation, Iqbal strongly supports the establishment of a parliament or consultation, Iqbal strongly supports the establishment of a parliament or consultative assembly for the Muslim society, elected by the majority of Muslims. This assembly would produce new interpretations of ijtihad in conformity with the demands of the present age, so as to bring justice and prosperity to the Muslim society and harmonise them with the demands of the present age. This is the basic point of the “spiritual democracy” of Allamah Iqbal. We explain below the basic concepts with reference to Allamah Muhammad Iqbal. WHAT IS DEMOCRACY? In the commonly known Western sense democracy is a system of government in which sovereignty belongs to the people and the legislature is created by their majority opinion, which is obtained through votes. This legislature is the highest legislative organisation of the country. Maulana Muhammad Haneef Nadvi explains democracy thus: “Democracy is composed of two Greek components; one means the people and the other means government and law. Technically, it is applied to a system of government in which the greatest number of people participate.[1] The Encyclopaedia of Philosophy explains the concept of democracy thus: “The correct meaning of democracy is that this is a form of government in which citizens have the direct collective right of political decisions, and the principle of the rule of the majority is accepted as the law. This is called direct democracy. Secondly, it is the system of government in which people do not exercise political rights individually but do so through elected representatives and the latter are responsible to them. This is called representative democracy. Thirdly, this is a form of government which is generally representative democracy but the powers and activities of the majority operate within a special institutional framework, which is constitutionally so framed as to allow people to enjoy their collective and individual rights These rights relate to freedom of expression and religion. This is called balanced or constitutional democracy. Fourthly, the word democracy is also used for the political and social characteristics of a system which is not covered by the above mentioned three definitions of democracy, but which does aim eliminating economic and social distinctions, especially the distinctions resulting from the right of individual ownership and distribution of wealth. This is called social and economic democracy.”[2] Dr. Khaleefah Abdul Hakeem in his book titled, Fikr-i-Iqbal (The Thoughts of Iqbal) considers democracy to be an ambiguous concept like many other social concepts. He says: “Democracy is also like those ambiguous concepts which have no meaning. In the present day world every nation desires for and strives to establish democracy, or claims to be the custodian of the correct democracy, and considers the claims to other forms of democracy baseless and impostrous[3].” However, notwithstanding the various ambiguities about democracy, it has the basic attribute that “The most common meaning of democracy, which appears to be acceptable to all, is that no individual or class rules over the people against their will[4]“. Further explaining this Hakeem says: “.Democracy is a system in which sovereignty should not belong to the king or the rich, the reins of the government should be controlled neither by the feudal lords nor the capitalists and industrialists. The people‟s representatives in the legislature should be persons of sound judgement freely elected by the people[5].” A brief definition of democracy would be, in Abraham Lincoln‟s words, “The government of the people, for the people, by the people”. In other words democracy is a form of government in which people participate by expressing their opinion through votes. They have the feeling of participation in their affairs in a government established only for the common weal by the common consent of the people. This feeling of people‟s participation promoted Abraham Lincoln to call it “the last best hope of this world”, and Jefferson, had called it “a respect for the people‟s opinion[6]“. In short democracy is a system of government in which: 1. Sovereignty belongs to the people 2. The people establish the parliament or the country‟s highest legislature by their common votes, and the legislature is answerable to them. 3. The government is established for the common weal and prosperity. 4. It is also elected by the common vote. In other words democracy per se is not the purpose or goal but is only an instrument of government of a country in which the country‟s people participate directly. THE COMMON ARGUMENTS AGAINST DEMOCRACY As stated earlier, the concept of democracy is of Greek origin. Consequently, the first proceedings against democracy were also initiated in Greece by Socrates. who was regarded as one of the seven wisest persons of his time. The criticism levelled by Socrates against democracy at that. time has always been repeated by its critics. In fact democracy‟s critics neither have any stronger argument than those of Socrates sub-consciously taking shelter behind fascism or dictatorship under some excuse. Socrates had said that: “What would be more ridiculous than democracy which had been hamstrung by the mob, where emotions ran supreme, government was merely a debating society, and where the military commanders were selected, dismissed and killed without rhyme cr reason when the simple minded farmers and merchants were selected in alphabetical order to work as members of the supreme court.[7] Later, criticizing the system again he says: “Is it not naively superstitious to imagine that wisdom would be attained by mere majority? On the contrary, is it not universally experienced that the people participating in gatherings are very much more foolish, violent and cruel than those who prefer seclusion? How shameful is it that those orators should rule humanity who indulge in high sounding rhetoric which can be likened to empty brass vessels which keep sounding on being hit till somebody stops them by putting his hand over them.[8] Socrates suggests the solution of this problem to be to “entrust government‟s leadership to the wisest person”.[9] After condemning democracy up to the hilt the solution presented by Socrates in the form of “the wisest person” will be examined at the proper place. We should first identify Socrates‟ criticism, which is:- 1. This system of government is. hamstrung by the mob, i.e. decisions are made by majority opinion, which means that the decision made by the majority opinion is considered sound. 2. This system of government is dominated by emotions. 3. Such a government is a debating society, i.e. every matter is decided after a debate in the parliament. 4. Simple minded farmers and businessmen are elected, or otherwise, power is captured by feudal lords and capitalists. 5. Rhetoricians gain power. 6. Those living in public are more violent and cruel than the ones who prefer seclusion. These are the basic objections raised more or less by all. It would be better to point out the criticism of other critics of democracy before analyzing Socrates‟ criticism, so that the objections against this system and the analysis of other systems in comparison may be explained in detail. Will During writes in his book. The Story of Philosophy, on the tragedy of Western democracy:[10] Will Durant has the same objections as Socrates. that the power of decision rests with the majority. Even Rouseau, who was among the founders of the new democratic system, also objected to the decision making by the majority. Consequently, he says: “If we take the term in its strictest sense there never has existed, nor will ever exist. a true democracy. It is contrary to the nature of things that the many govern and the few he governed.[11] Professor Tahseen Firaqui in his book, Maghribi Jamhooriat Ahl-i-Maghrib Kee, Nazar Men, (Western Democracy in the View of the Westerners) has assiduously assimilated the objections of very important Western thinkers and writers against democracy. They include Rouseau. Nietzche, Carlyle, Belak, Donnelly, Agneish, Bernard Shaw, Laiky, Spengler, Mawrence, Eric Frum, Harold Laski, Rene Guenon, Joseph Schimpter, and Bertrand Russell. In addition, there must be many more who have raised objections against democracy. However, it must be admitted that of all their objections against democracy none are more worth mentioning than those of the first critic, i.e. Socrates. For example Carlyle also considers a wise man more important than many idiots. He is also in search of a wise man, and considers democracy to be the rule of the idiots. Belak, Donnelly and Bernard Shaw prefer a wise man over majority and consider democracy to be synonymous with the appointment of some unscrupulous people through elections organized by several incompetent persons. When Laski says that the creation of a conflict between the majority and the minority is the work of the election agent, he also supports the stand of socrates. He has another objection, that is, voters do not have mature judgement needed for voting. That only a rich person can contest a democratic election, is an important objection against democracy which has been levelled by Laiky, Spengler, Russell, Eric Frum and Schimpter. They have said that poverty and democracy do not go together. As it were, election is an arena in which only the rich can enter, The American intellectual, Joseph A. Schimpter calls democracy „ a government stabled with the people‟s approval, and says that we cannot call it the people‟s government but the one established by their approval. In the same way the famous French intellectual, Rene Guenon, who later accepted Islam with the name of Abdul Wahid Yahya, raised the objection against democracy in his book, Crisis of the Modern World that the lower and backward classes of the populace form the majority and they are devoid of judgment and ability, while the classes with ability constitute a minority. Hence, the superior cannot emanate from the inferior, which is approximately what Socrates had said, namely that thick-headed farmers and businessmen acquire power in democracy and the dream of the government of the people becomes ridiculous[12]. Professor Tahseen Firaqui has cited the whole of this objection of Rene Guenon in his above mentioned book. Consequently, this discussion of the critics of democracy is largely based on this book, where it has been put together to some extent. Guy Eaton (Islamic name Hasan Abdul Hakeem), who was a native of Switzerland, criticising the materialism of democracy and the misleading concept of majority, says: As for the problem of the common people, the poor simpletons mark the ballot papers as voters in favour of the person who has promised them better houses and cheaper food.[13] Professor Muhammad Munawwar has also levelled some important and basic objections in one of his papers titled, Iqbal‟s Idea of Democracy on the complete absence of ethical values and destruction of the higher ethical principles in democracy. These objections point out misdemeanors of the candidates in obtaining votes and, of the voters in giving them, which influence the entire ethical structure of the society. The objections of the professor are obviously very important and correct. The Western democracy has bequeathed all these evils of the countries of its origin in their colonies, and has destroyed the ethical, social and political structures of the latter. However, the countries gaining independence from this colonial system did not organize this Western concept of democracy under their own cultural and social principles, for accepting the experiences of the West in a constructive spirit have blindly followed them. Consequently, the virtues of the West could not be established in our countries but we did adopt their vices. Perhaps virtue, its durability is slow, and vice, being apparently bright, is fast in its influence. Consequently, the scarceness of morality in democracy exposed by Professor Muhammad Munawwar cannot be denied, because ethical values are really alien to Western democracy. The professor writes. “But the glaring drawback that transpires is the non-visibility of any moral fibre in the system. Rights are mentioned whereas the question of the right and wrong is ignored. what sort of people as human beings are to be elected? Certainly they must be ,suitable individuals. But are they suitable morally as well? What sort of people as human beings are those who elect their representatives? Are they upholders of human values and hence they can elect those who have respect for what is good for humanity? Are they elected because they can spend lavishly on election campaigns can brow-beat others into voting for them on account of their muscles or just due to their positive capabilities? Does, in the Western democracy, even legal equality prevail? Are there no racial or territorial prejudices at work? Does Western democracy stand for teaching man‟s respect for man and for trying to make human beings genuinely human? Does it create feelings of sympathy and sacrifice for others? It is quite obvious that Western democracy is not essentially for forming a government of good people, elected by good people and making people good.”[14] In fact these objections can be raised against any system devoid of prophetic consciousness. However, in contrast with democracy-fascism imperialism and dictatorship are completely devoid of the very concept of ethics. People are at least counted in democracy, while they are driven like despicable wild beasts in systems other than democracy. Scrutiny of the methods of formation of the governmental structure of the systems other than democracy would show them to be much more cruel, vindictive, narrow minded and destructive to ethical values than democracy. The crimes committed by all the democrats of the world are for less than the cruelties and crimes of one dictator. Examples are available even in Islamic history of the way in which the neglect of the mechanism for the transfer of political power created moral evils. The non-observance of this mechanism for the transfer of political power created the dispute between Hadhrat Ali (R.A.) and Hadhrat Ameer Muawiya (RA.) and brought Yazeed, Hadhrat Ameer Muawiya‟s (R.A.) son to political power after his death. During his reign several prominent companions of the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H), and his grandson with his whole family was sacrificed at the altar of dictatorship by substitution of the voluntary ba‟at (ba‟at bil raza) with the ba‟at by force (ba‟at bil Jabr). If the system of the Ba‟at of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Faruque (R.A.) had been continued as an effective system for the transfer of political power, the pathetic tragedy of the martyrdom of the oppressed Imam would have been avoided and the would not have been changed to monarchy. The fundamental essence of democracy is the transfer of political power and establishment of the governmental structure by majority opinion. It is unrealistic to expect anything more than this from democracy. It can resist the devastation of ethical values only with the help of other ethical ideals and cultural limitations. We will have to seek guidance from our deen for it and will have to fix the objectives and the modus operandi of democracy in the light of prophetic consciousness. After achieving it, this democracy will be a means of accomplishing ethical values instead of breaking them down, as in the present conditions when all systems are devoid of ethical values, work on the principle of `might is right‟. These are not even remotely concerned with the eminent status of humanity and dignity of man. In fact the very object of Islam is the reorganization of democracy in the light of Islamic principles and its application to Islamic society, through which alone it can gradually evolve into a government elected by pious people, for pious people, which would be instrumental in promoting virtue and endeavours in the pursuit of the common weal. Expecting this from any other system is self deception. If a good king or dictator in power per chance takes interest in the common weal it would be considered only fortuitous. The dictatorial, fascist and monarchical systems cannot be expected to do that. In the same way the gist of the objections of Laski, Repairdfi, Eric Frum and Russell on democracy is also that it is a trick of the capitalist class, which brings incompetent people to political power through press, specious language and wealth. Lord Russell says the same things in various ways. So, an analysis of all the objections against democracy compels us to admit that the critics of democracy have not gone beyond its first critic, Socrates, while this democratic system has laboured its way to a mighty system in spite of all these criticisms. Democracy‟s being a controversial system is a criticism levelled by various classes. Directly or indirectly it has been entangled in various h‟ confusing concepts such as social democracy, economic democracy, constitutional democracy, noble democracy and people‟s democracy. It has no clear and identifiable form. The different forms of democracy, appearing in different circumstances prevailing in different societies and resulting from centuries of experimenting are in themselves in need of definition, so that a society may be able to adopt any of the forms it prefers to suite its own circumstances. It would be better to review Allamah Iqbal‟s criticism also before discussing these criticisms. ALLAMAH IQBAL‟S CRITICISM OF DEMOCRACY- The basic objections raised by Allama Iqbal against democracy in his works are not different from those raised by Socrates. Allama Iqbal expressed the following thoughts about democracy: ظبؼ یہو ےہ يہک مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه یطصیه ےئاوً ظا طیؿ ںیہً ںیه ںوزطپ ےک ػج ےئبپ ںی ٰ هٰ بجه یضوہوج زاسجحؼ ا ویز ةوک یطپ نلیً ےہ یک یزاظآ ہی ےہ بحھجوؼ وج مووح و تبیبػض و حلصا و يیئآ ػلجه یضوآ ةاوذ طثا ےھٹیه ےعه ںیه ةطـه تط !ںبهلا ػلبجه ےئبضػا ضبحلگ یهطگ یبهطؼ کا یھث ہی یطگضظ گٌج ےہ یک ںوضاز ہ The Western democratic system is the same old orchestra Its notes have nothing but the melodies of Caesar The demon of despotism is treading the path of democracy Thou considereth it to be the fairy of freedom The constituent assembly reforms grant concessions and rights In the Western medical system tastes are sweet but the effects are sporadic The heat of the debates of assemblies! May God protect us! This too is a sham quarrel to deceive others Thou considereth this mirage of attractions to be a garden O simpleton! thou considereth the cage to be the nest”[15] یئوج ںبجططك ںوزظا ہًبگیث ئٌؼه عبحه سیآ یوً یًبولؼ غجط ئذوـ ںاضوهظ وـ ےضبک ہحرپ ملؿ ،یضوہوج ظططظا عیطگ سیآ یوً یً بؽًا طکك طذ سص وز عؼه ظا ہک Thou seekest the treasures of unfathomed wisdom from people of mean nature Surely, ants cannot attain the wisdom of a Sulaiman Flee from the Mechanisations of democracy, follow an experienced sage For the brains of two hundred donkeys cannot produce the wisdom of one man.[16] ثؼزبہً یضوہوج يیئآ گًطك ضز یہو طگ اض یہوطگ ثؼا يیوک ثؼا يیٌچ ؾو بک طگا ضبی ؿی اسذ یهبیپ ٍاض ةطـه لہا ٍ و يهظ یهبیً یث ؾیج ثؼاضوہوج ہک ثؼزبفک یویز ىزطگ ظا يؼض The West has founded the democratic system It has loosened the rope from the demon‟s neck A host of people are running like robbers While many hungry mouths are running for a loaf of bread One group lies in ambush for another one May God help it if these are its ways Convey the message from me to the West That the populace is an unsheathed sword.[17] ؾبك بیک ےً یگًطك زطه ک ا وک ظاض غا ےجطک ںیہً لوھک ےؼا بًاز ہک سٌچ طہ ںیه ػج ہک ےہ ثهوکح ظطط کا ثیضوہوج ےجطک ںیہً ل وج ںیہےجطک بٌ گ وک ںوسٌث Some European sage has unveiled this secret Though wise men keep these secrets concealed Democracy is a form of government in which People are counted but their worth is not assessed.[18] مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه ںیہً بھکیز بیک ےً وج طج کیضبج ےؼ عیگٌچ ںوضسًا يـوض ٍطہچ Hast thou not seen the Western democratic system Whose face is bright but the inside is dark; darker than Changiz?”[19] غبجل یضوہوج ےہ بیبٌہپ وک یہبـ زوذ ےً نہ طگً زوذ و غبٌـ زوذ ےہ اوہ مزآ اضش تج We have ourselves bestowed democratic role on monarchy Then has man become somewhat self conscious and self cognizant[20] ںیه یلگ طہبث وز کٌیھپ ےک بھٹ ُ ا ےسٌگ ںیہ ےڈًا ےک تیصہج ئً تضاسص ،لؽًوک ،یطجوه ،يفکلا ےسٌھپ ےً یزاظآ ةوذ ےئبٌث ھجبؼ ےئگ ےلیھچ یھث ضبجً ںبیه ہ عیج ثیبہً ےسًض ےک پضوی ںی Cast them away into the street The eggs of the new civilization are rotten Elections, membership, council, presidency Sham freedom has invented strange nooses The carpenter has also been scraped Very sharp are the Europe‟s planes.[21] سیلوج و یهلؿ ےہ تجؼ بک ضطه ںبہی مبظً یضوہوج تجؼ بک ضطه ںبہو In the East bondage and mimicry has caused the malady In the West the democratic rule causes the disease‟[22] We have assembled some verses from Iqbal‟s Persian and Urdu works containing some criticism of democracy so that a consolidated comprehension may be acquired of the Allamah‟s‟ criticism of democracy, free from emotional and humorous diction. Consequently, the following objections arise from the background of the verses. 1. The Western democratic system is the same old European Caesarism or imperialism, and the old capitalistic despotism of Europe is operative behind the smoke screen of democracy. Hence, the system bears only a deceptive resemblance to freedom. 2. Parliament or legislative assembly is only a debating society and an institution established by capitalists for the protection of their own interests. 3. Just as the assembling of two hundred donkey‟s brains cannot produce a human brain the majority of the common people cannot produce a wise man, or in the Allamah‟s words “a man of attested intelligence” We should avoid a democratic system which makes decisions by simple majority and does not seek the guidance of a wise man or a man of Faith. Democracy is a system in which the simple majority of persons makes decisions without considering the ability of these persons, whereas one wise man is better and more effective than thousands of simpletons. 4. Though the Western democracy has a bright face. its interior is darker than that of Changiz. Due to the general awakening of the common people (brought about by the influence of the awakening created by the Muslims in Spain and Baghdad) Europe has presented imperialism in the wrappers of democracy. The democratic institutions such as election. membership, council and presidentship etc. are the rotten eggs of the new civilization. Europe has invented these in the name of democracy. 5. The Allama says that the bane of the Eastern people is their, enchantment with blind following of the ways of their ancestors and the root of all ills of the West is this democracy in which the numbers of persons are considered instead of their intellectual worth. Reflection on the Allamh‟s criticism of democracy would give the feeling that his criticism of democracy is the same as that levelled by Socrates or other critics of democracy. We want to present a fundamental matter about Allamah Iqbal‟s criticism of democracy before analyzing it. This fundamental matter is the Allamh‟s foresight which discerned the psychological problem constituting the background of his criticism of democracy and this was interconnected with the special political atmosphere of that time. THE BACKGROUND OF ALLAMAH IQBAL’S CRITICISM OF DEMOCRACY During Allamah Iqbal‟s time the concepts of democracy and democratic thinking, like one person one vote, right of representation, joint and separate electorates were moving fast from the West to the East and were increasingly becoming popular. Under the conditions prevailing in the Indian sub-continent, resulting from the British terminology, all big and small nations there, had been designated Hindus. Thus the Hindus were elevated, to the status of majority by herding together all the different nations of the sub-continent, although the real Hindus were a minority. This catapulted the Hindus into a majority and relegated all other nations to the status of a minority. The latter included the nation which had formerly ruled the sub-continent. i.e. the Muslims. The relegation of Muslims to minority status meant that in the event of the subcontinent gaining independence under the concept of one person one vote, the political power in India would have been transferred to the Hindu majority, and the Muslims being a minority would have become subservient. Consequently, Allamah Iqbal supported the right of ijtihad for the consultative assembly or parliament of an Islamic State, but did not support this right for the parliament composed of the non-Muslim majority which would have been established in united India. He plainly said: “In my opinion this (ijtihad by parliament) is the only way by which we can stir into activity the spirit of life in our legal system, and give it an evolutionary outlook. In India, however, (with Hindu majority and Muslim minority) difficulties are likely to arise, for, it is doubtful whether a non-Muslim legislative assembly can exercise the power of ijtihad”[23]. This extract reflects Allamah Iqbal‟s thinking that he did not like any system or state of affairs in united India . which would enable the Hindu majority to influence the interests of the Muslim minority. This is the reason for which democracy was not acceptable to Allamah Iqbal in any form in the united India. Not only to Allamah Iqbal, this state of affairs could not be acceptable to any Muslim. This was so because the Hindus dream of their renaissance included the annihilation of Muslims from the sub-continent on the pattern of Spain. In these circumstances Allamah Iqbal‟s support of democracy in united India would have amounted to his recommendation of slavery for Muslims. This is the social psyche which made the Allamah a critic of democracy in united India. But was the Allamah an opponent of democracy even in an Islamic State and was he not prepared to accept any form of democracy? Judgement. should be passed on this, only with much caution. To prove the Allamah to be an all out rejector of democracy. on the basis of a few of his verses, would be against the truth, because the Allamah was a supporter and friend of democracy in an Islamic State where political power would be in the hands of the Muslims. AN ANALYSIS OF THE CRITICISM OF DEMOCRACY The objections resulting from the above mentioned verses of Allamah Iqbal have been levelled even by democracy‟s supporters. These are the defects of democracy and it is desirable to remove them, but- the outright rejection of the system is not at all right. This is so because comparison of these defects with other non-democratic systems leaves no choice but to adopt democracy. The systems presented in contrast with democracy are the worst examples of despotic dictatorship in which the individual is not even counted, leave alone assessing his worth. The individuals in the democratic society are at least consulted, whereas in other systems every dictator, acquiring power by force, considers himself to be the Angel Gabril, the man of Faith and the perfect Man. Consequently, the gleaners of power convince such a dictator that the world has never produced a wiser and more intelligent person than him. Searching for a wiser person is even more difficult than obtaining the moon. Nobody has an instrument which can search for such a person. Moreover, having found such a person it is neither always possible to obtain people‟s consensus in his support, nor is it necessary that he would be able to comprehend the affairs of the State. In these circumstances the power for enforcing his decisions would not be the common consent but the power of the bullet, and he would appear in the form of an absolute dictator on the strength of this power. The question is as to who beside his own claim, would decide that he is a man of Faith and proven truthfulness. In social environment finding such a person in every election may be possible for a village council, but is impossible in the present day State comprising millions of people. Insistence on or support of such concepts is equivalent to establishing and maintaining a State on perpetually shaky foundations. This is an abstraction with which the present day State cannot be bracketed. How many such wise men has any State been lucky enough to acquire since the time of Socrates? Surely, those acquiring political power by force have compelled people to call them wise men and men of steel. In the present day world, talking of such concepts cannot be considered short of knowingly or unknowingly gaining favours from dictators. Lastly, it cannot be ensured that such a wise and righteous man also has the ability of operating the political system of a country. The second objection levelled against democracy is even more meaningless than this, i.e. only capitalists and - rich people can acquire political power through democracy. The question is whether the poor people and labourers acquire political power in monarchy and dictatorship? Such a thought is no less than folly, Surely some slaves became kings and some poor and middle class people became dictators. But poverty was not instrumental in their becoming kings and dictators, in that somebody conferred political power on them on the basis of their poverty and excellent ability. In actual fact the internal wire pulling and intrigue provided such military power to these kings and dictators which enabled them, not only to ascend the pedestal of political power but also to join the ranks of capitalists. Also, a labourer does not remain a labourer after ascending the pedestal of political power. His mental and political approach acquire the character of those of the capitalists. Hence, it is a pure fallacy that only capitalists acquire political power in democracy. On the contrary these people acquire political power under every system. The people of the labouring and poor classes who acquired political power through democracy outnumber those who did so by force. Hence this objection is a mere jugglery of words. The third objection also deserves little attention, because the opinion of two hundred persons should be considered more reliable than that of one, as one person is more liable to err than two hundred persons. A solitary person dispensing political power, surrounded by flatterers and over loaded with problems cannot be make a better decision than two hundred people elected by a social unit. These people have the common will as well as the power of validation, whereas the dictator has no power of decision except that of his own egotism. The people of Pakistan, who have a twenty to twenty five years experience of dictators climbing the pedestal of political power through the bullet instead of the ballot, know well the game played by these “men of Faith”, men of God”, and “men of iron will”. They know that these men have used every cunningness to frustrate the democratic ambitions of the people. Certainly, one human brain cannot evolved out of the brains of two hundred donkeys. However, are the two hundred persons always idiots? Besides, how can it be ensured that the one individual preferred over two hundred persons would measure up to the desired standards required by these critics of democracy? In fact every. dictator regards himself as the Universal Spirit and others as donkeys. This is the psyche which also exists in the subconscious of the opponents of democracy. Considering the common people to be donkeys and the dictator as the Universal Spirit is nothing short of insulting the populace and flattery of the dictators. These attitudes result only in strengthening the hands of the dictators. The establishment of Pakistan, which has resulted from the common vote, testifies to the appropriateness of the collective decision of the Muslim Ummah. They are worthy of trust, whereas the decisions of the Jamiat-i-Ulama-i-Hind, Jama`at- i-Islami, Majlis-i-Ahrari-Islam, Khaksar Organization and many others righteous people were in conflict with Muslim interests, indifferent to the future of Islam in the sub-continent, fostered by false personal egotism and completely against the interests of Islam. If the right of final vote had been in the hands of these righteous people Pakistan would not have come into existence. The establishment of Pakistan is a masterpiece of the sound judgement of the common people of Pakistan. The majority of democracy‟s opponents in Pakistan, by depriving the people of Pakistan of their voting rights, wants to chastise them for their decision in favour of the establishment of Pakistan theocracy in the name of religion wants to thrust on them their own self made theocracy of the righteous. This will be an oligarchy in which the power of decision would be in the hands of these righteous persons. Consequently it is only proper for Muslims to beware of the advocates of dictatorship in preference to democracy. Dr. Khaleefa Abdul Hakeem writes: There appears to be no course open to Muslims except to abstain from looking up to dictatorship in opposition to democracy, and to use their intelligence and practical sagacity combined with sacrifice, for slowly reforming the democratic system so as to make its virtues more prominent than its defects.[24] The correct approach is that in the matters of decision making on concepts and articles of faith nobody except God, His ordained Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) or His Book has the right to make even the most infinitesimal alteration. In these matters it is more useful and effective to assess the worth of people than merely counting them, so much so that even in the interpretation of the deen people would be assessed. At the time of ijtihad in deen both the opinion and the worth of the mujtahid would be kept in view. Still the worth of the mujtahid would be assessed more rigorously than his opinion. In other words the worth of people would have to be assessed in matters pertaining to deen and doctrine, but in matters of State administration participation of the greatest number of people in this decision making is more appropriate than their personality precedents. For this is available in the immaculate life of the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) Himself. He was bound by God and the Holy Book in matters of deen and at the time of the Battle of the Trench and on several other occasions concerning State administration, He asked for and accepted counsel in spite of having full authority. We cannot adjudge the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) to be bound by consultations but other sovereigns certainly do not enjoy the same status. A Prophet P.B.U.H is appointed by God whereas other sovereigns do not have the same status. Hence, it is only proper to compel them to consultation and to abide by it, so, that they do not become autocratic. Maulana Muhammad Haneef Nadvi has explained this matter to some extent in his book, “Asasiyat-i-Islam (The Basics of Islam): The distinction between right and wrong in matters of deen and doctrine is doubtlessly not bound by majority opinion. The Truth is the Truth even if it may be accepted only by one person and opposed by the whole society. However, when considering matters of State administration the criterion for making a decision would be the suitability of the course of action instead of arguments.[25] This is so because application and not experience is important in democracy[26]. Here, considering the majority opinion alone as decisive is proper. Maximum participation of the people makes it more acceptable the people, and if some decision enjoys common acceptance it is conducive to the increased stability of society. The fourth objection to democracy becomes meaningless when we comp are democracy with other systems and see that the heart of dictators is much darker than that of Changiz, compared with that of democratic rulers. Every ruler from Oliver Cromwell to those of the present day are the worst examples of oppression and fascism. They do not want to hear anybody‟s opinion, leave alone accept it. All their powers are wasted in suppressing their opponents, and psychologically they suffer from the complex of non-acceptance of the views of the people. They are permanently paranoid, which makes them psychologically suffocated, leading them to hardheartedness and cruelty. They become bent on suppressing every opposing thought and its expression. If the silence of the graveyard can be called peace it abounds in dictatorship. If the expression of the differences of opinion and views, listening to others and the acceptance or rejection of each other‟s views after their consideration is regarded instability then it certainly exists in democracies. A little reflection would show that this right of decision making is also a product of democratic disposition. Dictatorship forces decisions by power, force and fear. There cannot be, two opinions about considering dictators darker than Changiz. In, the fifth objection the Allamah says that the charm of ritualism is the bane of the Easterners, and being ensnared by democracy, that of the Westerners. The Allamah ha very rightly diagnosed the malady of the East. He wants the East to abandon blind ritualism and to be the architect of its own destiny, making use of the experience of the West but with due regard to the environments and the problems of the East when applying those experiences. He goes to the extent of advising them‟ against blindly following the west even in the matter of democracy. On the contrary, the East should reorganize democracy according to its own conditions and goals. When the Allamah adjudges democracy to be the bane of the West he has in view the unbridled democracy adopted by the West, which is harmful even to its own civilisation. By adjudging the Western civilization as being devoid of prophetic consciousness and being enamoured by the visible, i.e. materialism, the Allamah means that if it were to reorganize itself in the light of prophetic consciousness it can avoid the problems which are leading to its decline. The absence of prophetic consciousness alone has brought about the decline of ethical values in the Western-style democracy. If we organize democracy in the light of our concept of sovereignty and Islamic ethical values democracy can help in the enlightenment and glory of ethical values also. It has the potential of being cast into a system in which good people may be elected for parliament in order to enlighten and glorify the higher ethical values, and participate in the progress of virtue. This also can be expected only from democracy because in other systems even a good hearted person cannot protect himself, on account of being caught in the web of the struggle for political power. TWO BASIC ATTRIBUTES OF DEMOCRACY- All definitions of democracy have two basic points. One is making some arrangements for participation of public opinion in the framing of a country‟s or nation‟s councils of executive and legal administrations. At the time of shaping the country‟s administration, conducting political affairs and enforcing administrative decisions it is necessary to keep in view the opinions of the people on whom these decisions would be enforced, so that their acceptance of these decisions may be obtained through their own free will rather than under any force of authority. Now, compare this attribute of democracy with other systems. In theocracy decision making on country‟s affairs and administrative matters is the prerogative of the select ecclesiastical group. They play with the people‟s destinies as they please, and claim this right under religion, i.e. the power of the Church. Following in their footsteps the kings started designating themselves as the “Shadow of God”, implying that their power was bestowed upon them by God. Consequently, they presented themselves as protectors of God‟s people and co- sharers in the will and intentions of God. The clergy derived their power and authority from the institution of the Church, but the powers of kings resided in their inheritance, their own military strength and the divine right to rule. The same applies to the dictators of the old as well as the present age, who acquire their right to rule over their people by the sword or the bullet. Decide for yourself whether these dictatorships and monarchies are not the products of the law of the jungle in which “might is right”? What can be a bigger insult to human conscience and dignity than these monarchies and dictatorships which are born of the power of the sword or the gun. Supporting them is tantamount to crime against human dignity, and all those who support these dictatorships and monarchies are criminals against humanity, because support to them resembles the support of the law of the jungle. When offered the choice between the ballot and the bullet the present day conscientious man would select the ballot in preference to the bullet. The ballot is the expression of respect for man‟s rights and opinion in the affairs of the State and the bullet is the emblem of the use of ruthless power and force for subduing him. Peaceful transfer of political power is the other attribute of democracy. It is a means of transfer of political power from one hand to the other, a better formula than that which has not been established by the human race. There are only three ways for the transfer of political power. One is the method of inheritance by the son on the death of the, ruler. The second method is the snatching of political power by force. The third one is this democratic way in which those to be ruled elect their own rulers by their own votes. The first or the second method is current in monarchies. After the death of a king either his son ascends. To the throne or some other person usurps political power by his military might. In dictatorships military power is the only way for transfer of political authority. Now consider both these methods of transfer of political power and also view the method of the transfer by common vote and decide which one is safer, easier and more peaceful and has human dignity, honour and magnificence, It is a fact that there is less than one percent possibility of a man of Faith acquiring political power by the first method of inheritance. In the Muslim history of the Indian subcontinent a good ruler has seldom acquired political power in this way except Aurangzeb. Tippu Sultan and a few others. Among these also, the former had to use the sword to ascend to political power and even a pious person like Aurangzeb could not escape the ignominy of shedding the blood of his brothers and his father. If such a pious ruler could not avoid being implicated in this wrong way to political power the less said the better about other rulers. The whole human history is a tale of woe resulting from the atrocities of kings and dictators. In these circumstances change in government or transfer of political power by common vote alone is proper for human dignity and humane perceptions. In human history the number of people killed in connection with transfer of power in the democratic way bears no comparison to those killed at the time of such a transfer in monarchies and dictatorships. Hence, there is no alternative to adopting the method designed by democracy for transfer of political power. All monarches and dictatorships fail in comparison to it. Democracy comprises of only these two basic concepts, i.e. participation of the people in the affairs of the State and transfer of political power through the ballot. All other aspects and definitions of democracy are only explanations and clarifications of these two basic concepts, and these explanation and clarifications can be modified by every country and nation according to its own ideologies and conceptions. (To be continued) NOTES [1] Nadvi, Muhammad Haneef; Asasiyat-i-Islam. Idara-i-Saqafat-i-Islamia, Lahore: p. 205, 1973. [2] The Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Vol.2: pp. 77-78 [3] Hakeem, Dr. Khaleefah Abdul Fikr-i-lqbal. Bazm-i-Iqbal, Lahore, Fourth Edition p. 281, 1968 [4] Hakeem, Dr. Khaleefah Abdul Fikr-i-lqbal. Bazm-i-Iqbal, Lahore, Fourth Edition p. 281, 1968 [5] Hakeem, Dr. Khaleefah Abdul Fikr-i-lqbal. Bazm-i-Iqbal, Lahore, Fourth Edition p. 281, 1968 [6] Firaqui, Professor Tahseen Maghribi Jamhooriat, Ahl-i-Maghrib Kee Nazar Men. v Markaz-i-Tahqique Dayal Singh- Trust, Lahore: p.3, 1983. [7] Durant, Will (1885); History of Philosophy. Urdu Translation (Dastan-i-Falsafah) by Syed Abid Mi. Maktaba-i-Franklin, Lahore: p.44. [8] Durant, Will (1885); History of Philosophy. Urdu Translation (Dastan-i-Falsafah) by Syed Abid Mi. Maktaba-i-Franklin, Lahore: p.44. [9] Durant, Will (1885); History of Philosophy. Urdu Translation (Dastan-i-Falsafah) by Syed Abid Mi. Maktaba-i-Franklin, Lahore: p.44. [10] Durant, Will (1885) The Pleasures of Philosophy. Urdu Translation (Nishat-i-Falsafah) by Dr. Muhammad Ajmal. Maktaba-i-Khawar, Lahore: p. 101, 1966 [11] Rouseau, Jean Jaques - Le Contract Sociale. Vol.III, Chapter IV; p. 762 [12] Guenon Rene; The Crisis of the Modern World, Urdu Translation (Nai Dunia Ka Bohran). Suhail Academy, Lahore: pp. 69-78 (cited in Professor Tahseen Firaqui by Maghribi Jamhooriat Ahl-i-Maghrib Kee Nazar Men; p. 45. [13] Eaton; Gui; The King of the Castle: Chapter 3,4, [14] Munawwar, Professor Muhammad; Iqbal's Idea of Democracy. Iqbal Review, Vol. 27, No,1; p. 104, 1986. [15] Iqbal. Dr. Sir Muhammad Bang-i-Dara. Shaikh Mubarak Ali, Lahore, Pakistan, Third Edition (1924). p. 296. [16] Iqbal. Dr. Sir Muhammad Payam-i-Mashriq Javid Iqbal, Shaikh Ghulam Ali & Sons, Lahore, Pakistan, Thirteenth Edition 1971, p. 158. [17] Iqbal, Dr. Sir Muhammad; Zaboor-i Ajam (Gulshan-i-Raz Jadeed. Ninth Edition, 1970, p. 233. [18] Iqbal. Dr. Sir Muhammad; Zarb-i-Kaleem. Maktaba-G Jamia, Delhi, India. First Edition., 1941, p. 150 [19] Iqbal, Dr. Sir Muhammad; Armaghan-i-Hijaz, Published by Kapoor Arts Printing Works, Lahore, Pakistan, First Edition, p. 218, 1938. [20] Reference 19: p. 217 [21].Reference 15: p. 335 [22] Reference 18:p. 164 [23] Iqbal. Dr Sir Muhammad (1930); The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Shaikh Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore, Pakistan, p. 174, 1982 [24] Reference 3-5, p. 298 25-26. Reference 1:p. 212. [25] Reference 1:p. 212. [26] Reference 1:p. 212. (www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/oct93/4.htm) IQBAL ON DEMOCRACY Mohammed Maruf Iqbal was basically a democrat. He was not only a theoretical politician, but he also practically participated in the politics of Indo-Pakistan subcontinent. In 1926, he stood for election and was chosen to the Punjab Legislative Council. As Dr L.S. May writes, Iqbal was ―an active member of this Council, speaking often on land revenue and taxation, demanding greater justice in land assessment and even land revenue deductions in hardship cases.‖[1] In his speech of 10 March 1927, he pleaded the case for compulsory primary education,[2] and in his speech of 5 May 1927 on the 1927-28 Budget he advocated for better sanitation conditions in villages as well as for medical aid to India's women?[3] He started his political career as a member of the National Liberal League but later on joined the A11-India Muslim League. When the Muslim League was split in 1928, Iqbal became Secretary of the Shafī' branch, from which position he later resigned. Iqbal was actively involved in the political broiling of the sub-continent and, in many important respects, he rather moulded the destiny of Muslim India which was later to become Pakistan. Thus, Iqbal lived a full political life as a democrat. In Bāl-i Jibrīl, he ushers in the democratic era in these strong words: ہًبهظ ےہ بجآ بک ضوہوج ئًبطلؼ وز بٹه ےئآ طظً وک نج يہک ؿوً وج [4] and links it, somehow, with the destiny of the teeming millions of India. He is opposed to all forms of feudal lordism, kingship, despotism, etc., and pleads that the people should be the captains of their own destinies. To Iqbal, the form of government is a very important deter-mining factor of human destiny and life. He disagrees with Alexander Pope who held: ―Let fools fight for the forms of government,‖ and says, ―To my mind government, whatever its form, is one of the determining forces of a people's character. Loss of political power is equally ruinous to a nation's character.‖[5] History bears out his opinion because we find that people under dictatorial or despotic rules are generally submissive and meekish. Again, one of the reasons for the moral deprivation of Muslims was their loss of power in the subcontinent. Iqbal endorses the democratic system on the ground that it gives the individual a maximum of freedom and a fair play to his potentialities and capabilities. Democratic rule has its impact on scientific thought also. As Iqbal says: ―The growing spirit of individualism in politics is not without its influence on contemporary scientific thought. Modern thought regards the universe a democracy of living atoms.‖[6] Thus, the government determines the character as well as the thought of a people; it has its inroad into the philosophical and scientific ideas of a nation. He goes on to add that a democratic system exerts a healthier influence on the thinking and conduct of a people. But ―what is democracy to Iqbal? Democracy is primarily a science or a methodology rather than an ideology or a philosophy, and this is how Iqbal seems to treat of it. It is a way to ensure and confirm a certain ideology through common suffrage. Iqbal subjects democracy as a methodology to searching criticism. To start with, it is a methodology and should be treated as such but as used in the West, this methodology is quantitative. Iqbal expresses this fact in the following verse: ںیه ػج ہک ےہ ثهوکح ظطط کا ثیضوہوج ےجطک ںیہً لوج ںیہ ےجطک بٌگ وک ںوسٌث [7] In this method no discrimination is made on the basis of education, talent, mental calibre, and individual potentialities it fails to differentiate between a Fidel and an infidel, a Muslim and a non-believer; that is why Iqbal compares it to an unsheathed sword. He says in Gulshan-i Rāz Jadīd. یهبیپ اض ةطـه لہا ٍز يهظ یهبیً ےث ؾیج ثؼا ضوہوج ہک سًبحؼ یهبہ ںبج ہک یطیفوـ ہچ سًاسً طكبک و نلؽه عیوج لؿ ضز سًبه ہً یًبهظ زوذ ف یًبہج ىبج و زوذ ىبج ززطث [8] It overlooks the important individual differences which modern psychology accentuates. A quantitative democratic system is prone to ignore these very important differences. The basic principle of this democracy is the utilitarian rule of justice: ―Everyone to count for one, and nobody for more than one‖[9] —the absolute principle of justice which is hardly just. Iqbal refers to the same quantitative approach to democracy when he says: وـ یضبک ہحرپ ملؿ یضوہوج ضوط ظا عیطگ یوً یًبؽًا طکك طذ سص وز عـه ظا ہک سیآ [10] Here Iqbal beautifully brings home the implicit fallacy of composition ingrained in the qualitative approach and urges that thinking of two hundred asses will not make one human brain. It was this argument which disillusioned Iqbal with the Western concept of democracy. Again, democracy being a methodology, it will endorse any ideology which gets a common suffrage, irrespective of its moral import or its worth as an ideology. It is a method, as said before, and can be used to introduce or perpetuate any ideology for which is being used. This method is responsible for a motley variety of governments in the world, right from kingship and dictatorship to people's government; it perpetuates capitalism with as much force and justification in one country as socialism in another. Where it is fostering kingship in Britain and a presidential form of government in the U S A., it is endorsing dictatorship, the Russians claim. The capitalists, who have their leadership in America today have the pretensions that only capitalism is democratic because it does not interfere with individual rights; the socialists, divided into two blocs, assert that socialism and democracy are indivisible.[11] In the name of democracy, history tells us, thousands of atrocities have been committed in the world. In the hands of infidels, this method perpetuates infidelity, and has failed to mitigate the miseries and black spots of the world. In Bāl-i Jibrīl, Iqbal reports the Satan as saying: ثؼبیؼ ةبثضا ںیہ ػیلثا ےک ضوہوج !کلكا ہج تضوطض یطیه ةا ںیہً یهبث [12] Again, Iqbal condemns democracy which is divorced from religion or belief. The European democracy is pestered with this ill. Iqbal says: ےہ ںیه ٍبگً یطه ںیزل ثؼبیؼ ہی طیوض ٍزطه و زبہً ںوز و يهطہا عیٌک زاظآ یوکبح ےؼ بؽیلک کطج ےہ يئوہ طیجًظ ےث ویز ےہ ثؼبیؼ یک ںویگًطك [13] The European democracy is not only irreligious and faithless. it is also wrought by the capitalists for their own sinister designs. He says : گًطكا ثؼبیؼ ةض بی ےہ قیطح یطج !ػیئض و طیها ظوك یضبجپ ےک غا ںیہ طگه [14] As said before, democracy can be equally efficaciously used to ensure supremacy of a ruling class or a community. In one of the verses Iqbal reports Satan saying : غبجل یضوہوج ےہ بیبٌہپ وک یہبـ زوذ ےً نہ ذ و غبٌـ زوذ ےہ اوہ مزآ اضش تج طگً زو [15] Thus, democracy is also used to camouflage the same old king-ship and despotism. It is subservient to the perpetuation of same old system by sugar-coating it, and democracy provides the requisite sugar-coating. When lqbal was disillusioned at this outer garb of democracy, he was forced to reject it in so far as it retained the racial and status preferences. He says: ےحکؼ ںیہً طک وک ںوهلؿ نکح کیطـ !کاضزا طہوج بک ىا ظوك ںیہ ےجسیطذ [16] It is sometimes not good for a community to have a democratic approach. It may be very useful to a majority, but it will always keep a minority suppressed and wretched. This is also another use of democracy. It was in view of such a situation in the subcontinent that in 1886 Sayyid Ahmad Khan urged that ―if the democratic principle was introduced in India, the Muslims would find themselves completely at the mercy of the Hindu majority.‖[17] Democracy is not advisable if it is manipulated to suppress a minority, because it is, in itself, the handmaid of majority, irrespective of their views and the moral value of those views. If the case between the early Muslims and the non-believers of Mecca were decided by a common suffrage rather than in the battlefield of Badr, Islam would have been buried there and then. lqbal very rightly says that democracy, being a methodology, is in itself neither good nor bad; it is the use to which we put it that decides its value, and which is again relative. He says: ؟طـ ہک بؿوؿ بک ضوہوج ئًبطلؼ ےہ طیذ !طجذبث ےہ ںیہً ےؼ ںوٌحك ٍظبج ےک ںبہج وج [18] It is not the rule of democracy, but the wicked designs of the present world which are pertinent, because democracy in itself is amoral like any other method. It is a sword, as Iqbal said, which knows cutting only, and not whom it cuts—a fidel or an infidel, a socialist or a capitalist, the bourgeois or the proletarian. But its forms in vogue, as we find in the West, are very malicious and devised to serve some sinister designs of the Western world. Again, talking of the ills of democracy in the West, Iqbal writes: `Democracy has a tendency to foster the spirit of legality. This is not in itself bad; but unfortunately it tends to displace the purely moral standpoint and to make the illegal and the wrong identical in meaning.‖[19] This tendency we have witnessed in the West, which has become more and more legal- minded, but has left the moral standpoint far behind. Democracy is among those potent reasons which have been responsible for the gradual consignment of morality to the grave. Keeping in view all these ills of the Western democracy, Iqbal epitomizes his polemic thus: ؟مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه ںیہً بھکیز بیک ےً وج کیضبج ےؼ عیگٌچ ںوضسًا ،يـوض ٍطہچ !طج [20] Iqbal analyses his discussion on Western democracy in the following words: ―The idealism of Europe never became a living factor in her life and the result is a perverted ego seeking itself through mutually intolerant democracies whose sole function is to exploit the poor in the interest of the rich.‖[21] He points out that the uses of imperial ambitions in Europe indicate that the Westerners are tired of democracy. This reaction against demon racy in England and France has not only purely historical causes, but also deeper psychological causes.[22] But where to get democracy free from all these ills? What is the proper use of this methodology? To Iqbal, unless man has right notion of life and is imbued with love and fraternity, democracy cannot be but oppressive and demonic. Democracy, free of all these ills, is possible only in a society which knows no apartheid, no racial or caste discrimination, no feudal relation-ship between master and slave, no hatred of one against the other. Only Islam has envisaged such a polity in which Maḥmūd (signifying the master) and Ayāz (signitying the slave) stand in the same ranks. Dr K.A. Hakim delineates Iqbal's notion of democracy thus: ―Islam imbibes constituents of the best possible democracy and, according to Iqbal, they need to be embedded in specific institutions. It was Islam that gave the lesson of equality of rights and practised it, included the concept of a republic among its basic teachings, taught that government should be run by a Council or mushāwarat. An ordinary subject could summon the Amīr al-Mū'minīn to the court as a respondent. Islam declared the freedom of conscience; gave the concept of a welfare state, the duty whereof was not only to run administration, but also to provide for the basic needs of the people; dispelled the colour and race differences. Everybody was at liberty to choose his own avocation and way of life. Islam played the pioneer in teaching that wealth should not concentrate in a few hands.‖[23] Islam at the moment is beset by narrow-mindedness and obscurantism, but ―if it is freed from this narrow-minded and obscurant approach of the mullā, if the Muslims take to developing their spiritual potentialities rather than paying heed to the superficial form, they can offer the world such a kind of democracy that the political systems of England and America will feel shy and small.‖[24] This system will not be a quantitative approach, like counting of heads; it will be a qualitative assessment of the participants and the principle of equity ensuing upon it shall be: ―Everyone according to his deserts, rather works‖—in short, Musāwāt-i Muḥammadī. As against the Western democracy, which I have described as quantitative in approach, the Islamic democracy delineated in the above paragraph, I describe as ―spiritual democracy‖ with a qualitative approach. This is possible only in a society consisting of developed egos, practicing Islamic or ―Muhammedan‖ equality. Such a society Iqbal calls the Kingdom of God on earth. In a letter to R.A. Nicholson he briefly, but clearly, describes what he means by the Kingdom of God. He writes: ―The Kingdom of God on earth means the democracy of more or less unique individuals, presided over by the most unique individual possible on this earth.‖[25] Thus, ―Kingdom of God‖ and ―spiritual‖ democracy mean the selfsame thing, according to Iqbal. The establishment of such a democracy necessitates enforcement of the Islamic Law, which is useful only after the Ijtihād or necessary reorientation of that Law to the demands and requirements of the time has been affected. What is worth noting, Iqbal believes that Ijtihād or reorientation in law can well be affected through democratic process. In the words of Iqbal: ―The republican form of government is not only thoroughly consistent with the spirit of Islam, but has also become a necessity in view of the new forces that are set free in the world of Islam.‖[26] Iqbal, in agreement with Turkey, believes that ―the Caliphate or Imamate can be vested in a body of persons, or an elected Assembly.‖[27] In his discussion of Ijmā`, as a source of Ijtihād, lqbal re-commends that, in view of the present needs, the power of Ijtihād can best be vested in a Muslim legislative assembly rather than in a single representative individual. He says: ―The transfer of the power of Ijtihād from individual representative of schools to a Muslim legislative assembly which, in view of the growth of opposing sects, is the only possible form Ijma can take in modern times, will secure contributions to legal discussion from laymen who happen to possess a keen insight into affairs. In this way alone we can stir into activity the dormant spirit of life in our legal system, and give it an evolutionary outlook.‖[28] He, however, suggests that ―The Ulema should form a vital part of Muslim legislative assembly helping and guiding free discussion on questions relating to law.‖[29] Iqbal concludes his chapter on ―The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam‖ (Ijtihād) in the following suggestion: ―Let the Muslim of to-day appreciate his position reconstruct his social life in the light of ultimate principles, and evolve, out of the hitherto partially revealed purpose of Islam, that spiritual democracy which is the ultimate aim of Islam.‖[30] The spiritual democracy, unlike European democracies, did not emerge from any economic considerations. In 1916, Iqbal said: ―The Democracy of Islam did not grow out of the extension of economic opportunity; it is a spiritual principle based on the assumption that every human being is a centre of latent power, the possibilities of which can be developed by cultivating a certain type of character.‖[31] Had it grown out of the extension of economic opportunities, it would have been no less quantitative in its approach than the European democracy. The very basis for such a type of democracy was laid down by the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) in his famous address of the Dhil-Ḥijjah (7 March 632). He said: ―I he aristocracy of old time is trampled under my feet. The Arab has no superiority over the non-Arab. And a non-Arab has no superiority over the Arab. All are children of Adam, and Adam was made of the dust of the earth.‖[32] The fundamental basis of Islamic democracy is Tawḥīd. As Iqbal expresses: ―Islam, as a polity, is only a practical means of making this principle [of Tawḥīd] a living factor in the intellectual and emotional life of mankind. It demands loyalty to God, and not to thrones.‖[33] Again, Iqbal's concept of democracy, as rightly said by Dr. H. H. Bilgrami, is not limited to any particular geographical, racial or linguistic boundaries. Iqbal urges, while talking of Islam: ―As an emotional system of unification it recognizes the worth of the individual as such, and rejects blood-relationship as a basis of human unity.‖ And this stress on the worth of individual is the very basis of democracy. NOTES [1] Dr L.S. May, Iqbal: His Life and Times, p. 169. [2] Ibid. [3] Ibid. [4] P. 110. [5] 5. Dr. Javid Iqbal, Ed., [Iqbal's] Stray Reflections, p. 14. [6] Ibid , p. 41 [7] Ḍarb-i Kalīm, p, 150. [8] 8. Pp. 167-68. [9] The utilitarian principle of 'ustice or Equity as enunciated by H, Sidgwick. [10] Payām-i Mashriq, p, 135. [11] Article by N. Podgorny, "Socialism : Theory and Practice," June 1977 [12] P. 162. [13] Ḍarb-i Kalīm, pp. 152-53. [14] Ibid., pp. 142. [15] 15. Armaghān-i Ḥijāz (Urdu), p. 7. [16] Darb-i Kalim p. 139. [17] Dr L.S. May, op. cit., p. 171. [18] Armaghān-i Ḥljāz (Urdu), p. 7. [19] 19. Javid Iqbal, Ed., op. cit., p. 120. [20] Armaghān-i Ḥijāz (Urdu), p. 8. [21] The Reconstruction, p. 179. [22] Pp. 121-22. [23] Dr. K.A. Hakim, Fikr-i Iqbāl, pp. 287-88. [24] Ibid., op. 288-89. [25] 25. A.J. Arberry (Eng-tr.), livid Namah, Intro., p. 11. [26] The Reconstruction, p. 157. [27] Ibid. [28] 28. Ibid., p. 174. [29] Ibid., p. 176. [30] Ibid., p. 180. [31] Dr. R.A. Nicholson, Secrets of the Self, Intro., p. xxix, n.32. Quoted in Dr. Bilgrami, Glimpses of Iqbal's Mind and Thought, p. 94. [32] The Reconstruction, p. 147. [33] Ibid., p. 146. (http://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/apr77/5.htm) IQBAL’S IDEA OF DEMOCRACY Muhammad Munawwar I make bold to deal with a topic which has assumed a form of bitter controversy charged with emotions. The topic is democracy. Arguments are being advanced for and against democracy, and references are lavishly being made to what Iqbal thought of it. Interpretations of Iqbal‟s idea of democracy are being offered, duly twisted to suit the stance of the arguers. Excitement on both sides, i.e. for and against, is generally, out of all proportions to the subject. No respect is shown to the opinions of those who differ. Usually in our society, and especially, over the last two decades, the level of mutual toleration of those who entertain contrary ideas, has touched the lowest ebb. Those who differ are often called insincere, dishonest and even treacherous folk. We have tried in the following pages to lay down our findings regarding Iqbal‟s opinion about democracy. Democracy, no doubt, has many facets. Iqbal liked some of them while disliking others. Iqbal was an idependent thinker. He observed things dispassionately. He did not accept things because of their popularity and vice versa. His mind was never static. His thoughts and ideas, constantly kept evolving till the last moments of his life. For him to live was to progress. Hence he loved change, not change for the sake of change but change for the better. The following verse does appreciably epitomise this aspect of his outlook. ی ّ لجج مطث ضو ُ ط بیً ہظحل طہ !! ےطوہ ہً موـ ہئلحطه ےطک ا ! (We, every moment seek a new Sinai Mountain and a new Illumination. By the grace of Allah, our love-journey may never come to an end.)[1] Similarly his ideas regarding democracy kept evolving. He had not picked them up ready- made, as we would see. But to have an idea of what democracy means and what it stands for we down here a substancial quote. “A word originating in the classical Greek city states, and meaning the rule of the demos, the citizen body:the right of all to decide what are matters of general concern. The size of modern nation states has meant that (apart from those which include provision for a referendum in theīr constitutions) democracy is no longer direct but indirect, i.e. through the election of representatives; hence the term representative democracy. The criteria of democracy are therefore; (a) whether such elections are free: i.e. whether they are held frequently and periodically, whether every citizen has the right to vote, whether candidates and parties are free to campaign in opposition to the government of the day, and whether the voter is protected against intimidation by the secrecy of the ballot; (b) whether such elections provide an effective choice: i.e. whether the choice of the electors is not limited to a single party, and whether a majority vote against the government in power leads to, a change of government; (c) whether the elected body of representatives variously known as parliament, congress, national assembly has the right of legislation, the right to vote taxes and control the budget(deciding such, ii matters by majority vote), and the right publicly to question, discuss, criticize, and oppose government measures without being subject to threats of interference or arrest. Democracy is based on a belief in the value of the individual human being, and a further criterion is therefore the extent to which certain basic rights are guaranteed (in practice, not ju_, on paper) to every citizen. These are: security against arbitrary arrest and imprisonment; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly (i.e. the right to hold public meetings), freedom of petition and of association (i.e. the right to form parties, trade unions, and other societies), freedom of movement; freedom of Religion and of teaching. As a corollary, democracy is held to require the establishment of an independent judiciary and courts of an independent judiciary and courts to which everyone can have access. Critics of democracy fall into two groups. The first is opposed to democracy root and branch, on the grounds that it is the least efficient form of government and one in which the stability of the State is threatened by faction, complex issues are distorted by popular discussion, difficult dicisions evaded or put off, and matters of judgement reduced to the lowest common denominator acceptable to a majority of the voters. The second, in favour of the principles of democracy, agrues that these are inadequately realized unless carried further, e.g. by extending equal rights for all citizens from the political and legal to the economic sphere, without which democracy remains at best incomplete, at worst a sham (formal democracy) disguising the reality of class rule. A variant of this type of cirticism argues that, with the growth of Bureaucracy and the power of governments, decisions are no longer effectively influenced by the view of the government or the elected representatives; hence the demand for greater Participation at all levels of decision- making and the problem of how to reconcile this demand with the need for prompt and effective decision on complex and controversial issues.[2] We peruse the quoted above and we find that many good and positive points can be added to it. But the glaring drawback that transpires is the non-visibility of any moral fibre in this system. Rights are mentioned whereas the question of right and wrong is ignored. What sort of people as human beings are to be elected? Certainly they must be suitable individuals but are they suitable morally as well? What sort of people as human beings are those who elect their representatives? Are they upholders of human values and hence they elect those who have respect for what is good for humanity? Are they elected because they can spend lavishly on election campaign, can brow-beat others into voting for them on account of their muscles or just due to their positive capabilities? Does, in the Western democracy, even legal equality prevail? Are there no racial and territorial prejudices at work? Does Western domecracy stand for teaching man‟s respect for man and thus try to make human beings genuinely human? Does it create feelings of sympathy and sacrifice for others? It is quite obvious that Western democracy is not essentially for forming a government of good people, elected by good people, for promoting good and making people good. Allama Iqbal in an article “Political Thought in Islam” published in 1910, referring to al- Māwardy, states that he (al—Māwardy) divides the Ummah into two classes; (1) the electors and(2) the candidates for election. The qualifications absolutely necessary-for a candidate were (1) Spotless character (2) Freedom from physical and moral infirmities (3) Necessary legal and theological knowledge (4) Insight necessary for a ruler (5) Courage to defend the empire (6) Belonging to the family of Quresh (Modern sunny lawyers do not regard this as indispensable) - (7) Full of age (al—Ghazālī) (8) Male sex (al—Baidāwī)”[3] Just as the candidate for Caliphate must have some qualifications so according to al— Māwardi the elector must also be qualified. (1) He must possess good reputation as an honest man (2) Necessary knowledge of state affairs (3) Necessary insight and judgement.[4] From a legal standpoint the Caliph does not occupy and privileged position. In theory he is like other members of the commonwealth. He can be directly sued in an ordinary court of law.[5] 2. The Caliph may indicate his successor who may be his son but the nomination is invalid until confirmed by the people. The caliph cannot secure the election of his successor during his lifetime.[6] 3. If the caliph does not rule according to law of Islam, or suffers from physical or mental infirmities, the caliphate is forfeited.[7] Democracy of Iqbal‟s liking requires the candidate whose first and foremost qualification is “spotless character; freedom from physical and moral infirmities, whereas the elector is required to possess above all other qualifications the attribute of “good reputation as an honest man”. Western democracy does not lay down such conditions. For Iqbal, Islamic government has to be God‟s kingdom on earth. Such government can be established only in the light of what Islam stands for. Obedience to God and loyalty to the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) is to be the pivotal point in the overall behaviour and conduct of the governmental machinery. And, as is obvious, he who is devotedly obedient to God and loyal to the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) cannot be other than an essentially moral man. Such an individual has to be free from mundane and base considerations. His behaviour is not to be determined by lust and covetousness, treachery and deceit. He has to act as to how he can deserve God‟s Grace. If persons of such attitude and way of life establish their rule it can‟t be but a benevolent rule where spiritual brotherhood and justice must be the order of the day. On the contrary, in secular democracies the elected as well as the electors conform to the policy of behaving honestly if and when honesty looks to be the best policy. Iqbal, writing to Prof. Nicholson had made the meanings of Islamic government manifest thus: “The kingdom of God on earth means the democracy of more or less unique individuals, presided over, by the most unique individual possible on this earth.”[8] Iqbal, by “The Kingdom of God on earth”, means the government of shariat-i-Islāmia which is according to him the best government. It is God and then His Prophet (Peace be upon him) who know what is most suitable for human beings. Human reason howsoever developed and human farsightedness howsoever acute, stands absolutely nowhere as compared to the Creator‟s wisdom. Hence the way of life revealed through the Last Book. i.e., Quran and elucidated by the practical example of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) is the best and the most congenial way of life for mankind. This “way of life” is called Shariah by the Muslims (and non- Muslims too). Prof. Hasan Askari elaborates this point in the following lines: “The shariat regime is superior to rational regimes in 3 all respects. The ideas and the beliefs it enjoins, the institutions it prescribes, the type of coercion it practices, the centre of loyalty it identifies, the common norm it engenders, are all superior to the principles and instruments of the rational orders. Shariah regime is the only stable and wholesome form of cultural and political existence. Rational regimes are given to fluctuations, rise, fall and death. Man can escape these cycles by putting his trust in the shariah and adopting a political form that is based on revealed law.”[9] Mian Muhammad Shafi states: “He(Iqbal) desired to dictate an intorudction to the study of Islam in which Islamic philosophy of jurisprudence were to be brought into bold relief. His eye-sight was declining day by day hence he intended to dictate that book to me. Had that book been written out, it would have proved to be the most authentic and the best book on Islamic form of government, social system and the philosophy of Islamic jurisprudence.”[10] Similarly, Khawaja Abdul Waheed relates what Iqbal once said to him; “I have expressed my ideas thoroughly in verse. But something much greater than that is still in my mind which I want to produce in the form of an interpretation of the Quran.“[11] Whether the desired book was to be called “An Introduction to the study of Islam” or “An Interpretation of the Quran”, the fact remains that Iqbal ardently desired to deal with some very important topics concerning Islam, for the benefit of the Ummah Islamia. He knew the significance of such a work which in his opinion was to be far more valuable than what he had expressed in his poetry. One topic to be dealt with was Islamic form of government as indicated by Mian Muhammad Shafi. But the sad reasons of health did not allow Iqbal to realize that eager aspiration. What Islamic form of government could be like? Could it be called a monarchy, aristocracy, theocracy, oligarchy, dictatorship, democracy, or still what? Dr. Taha Hussain, in his book “al-Fitnat-ul-Kubrā” [ ٰ یطجکلا ۃٌحللا] vol—I, has compared all known forms of government, pertaining both to past and present era, one by one, with—Islam. His conclusion is that Islamic method of governing human societies could not be likened to any form of rule established by different nations of the world in different ages including those in vogue in the contemporary world of man. Whether Iqbal liked democracy is a controversial topic. Was democracy, according to Iqbal, a form of governance nearest to Islam? But the question arises what sort of democracy? Democracy $ itself is not a plain and simple phenomenon. There can be direct democracy, indirect democracy, constitutional democracy, monarchical democracy, social democracy, totalitarian democracy, democracy of the aristocracy, democracy of the proletariate. Democracy as an abstract phrase gives no clearly understandable meanings. Democracy needs some qualifying clause. Yet democracy, as against monarchy and dictatorship attracts sympathy. Iqbal also had a soft corner for democracy. In an article “Islam as an Ethical and Political Ideal” written thirty years before his death i.e.in the year 1908, he took up the question of Islamic Democracy. We should keep in mind that Iqbal had returned to India after completing his education in Europe that very year and was thirty-one years of age. This is how he deals with Islam, Muslim Community and Democracy: “Having thus established that Islam is a Religion of peace, I now proceed to consider the purely political aspect of the Islamic ideal----the ideal of Islam as entertained by a Corporate Individuality. Three Main Problems 1) Given a settled society what does Islam expect of its followers regarded as a community? 2) What principles ought to guide them in the i management of communal affairs? 3) What must be their ultimate object; and how is it to be achieved? You know that Islam. is something more than a creed, it is also a community, a nation. The membership of Islam is not determined by birth, locality or naturalisation, it consists in the identity of belief. Islam is Above all Considerations of Time and Space . The expression “Indian Muhammadans”, however convenient it may be, is a contradiction in terms since Islam in its essence is above all conditions of Time and Space. Nationality with us is a pure idea: it has no geographical basis. But in as much as the average man demands a material centre of nationality the Muslim looks for it in the holy town of Makkah so that the basis of Muslim nationality combines the real and the ideal, concrete and abstract. When therefore, it is said that the interests of Islam are superior to those of Muslims it is meant that the. interests of the individual as a unit are subordinate to the interests of the community as an external symbol of the Islamic principle. This is the only principle which limits the liberty of the individual who is otherwise absolutely free. Democracy of Islam The best form of government for such a community would be democracy, the ideal of which is to let a man develop all the possibilities of his nature by allowing him as much freedom as practicable. The Caliph of Islam is not an infallible being: like other Muslims he is subject to the same law, he is elected by the people and is deposed by them if he goes contrary to law. An ancestor of the present Sultan of Turkey was sued in an ordinary court of law by a mason who succeeded in getting him fined by the town Qazi----Muslims Failure to Improve the Political Ideals of Asia Democracy, then, is the most important aspect of Islam as a political ideal. It must, however, be confessed that the Muslims, with their idea of individual freedom could do nothing for the political improvement of Asia. Their democracy lasted only thirty years, and disappeared with their political expansion ---------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------------------- Democracy has been the great mission of England in modern times, and English Statesmen have boldly carried this principle to countries which have been for centuries groaning under the most atrocious form of despotism.”[12] I may kindly be excused for this elongated quote. But in my opinion it was necessary. This article which he wrote when he Was only 31 years of age shows clearly his idea of Muslim nationalism. In express terms he has laid down that the Muslim community is a spiritual brotherhood and its members are bound to one another on account of common beliefs and ideals. Muslim Community according to Iqbal was thus supra-territorial, supra-racial and supra- lingual. It was a brotherhood which could accommodate any individual and society from whatever ethnic stock it came and from whatever territory, provided it shared their essential Islamic beliefs. Such an individual or society which.may be free from all material and earthly shackles could be nurtured only by Islam. In Islam there were no racial, territorial, lingual, material distinctions on account of which a particular class or caste of people entitled them to rule others and condemn others to remain subjugated and in a state of servitude. Here the standards were different from other societies. Here it was not as a rule the best who belonged to the most powerful clan or the most wealthy family. In a Muslim society the best were those who feared God most; who were purest in respect of character. And the most prominent feature of an Islamic Society was the law based on Quranic injunctions and prohibitions as enforced by the Holy Prophet and amplified by his immediate successors. That law epitomised the egalitarian principles of a spiritual fraternity. These laws had the capacity to beat down all kinds of discrimination and injustice. Let justice be administered, was the most vital fibre of Islamic structure. Iqbal has stressed this point in the excerpts quoted above. But the example laid down of Islamic justice pertains to Sultan Salim, who was not the elected head of a Muslim state, who rather was the most powerful Emperor of the Sixteenth century. Islamic law is essentially democratic hence cannot spare any one even the highest authority in hierarchy of administration. In Islamic law none is above law. Here a question inevitably arises. What would Iqbal prefer, a king who administers justice or an elected head of the state who is unjust? -------- I hope the reply is obvious. We have seen in the above quotation from Iqbal‟s article that he had named the Islamic form of government as Islamic Democracy. This shows his sympathy with the word democracy, although what he presumably meant was Islamic spirit of equality before law, Islamic spirit of equality in respect of opportunities and Islamic spirit of equality irrespective of class or ethnic differences. And we have observed that for Iqbal, in 1908, it was democracy at work in Britian that he felt was comparatively better than other forms of rule then prevalent in the world. But perhaps the article written in 1908 was the last thing written by him in support of British type of democracy. Anyway, it was the British type of democracy which had its impact on Indian political and administrative life. It was naturally the British type of democracy then that became the focal point of Iqbal‟s critical observation. The way, the British Imperialism bestowed political rights and brought about legislative Reforms, was castigated by Iqbal in un—equivocal terms. From 1909 on, some progress on the road to Self Rule was apparently taking place. After World War I and Act of 1919, the British Government looked more benign, constitutionally, in spite of Jalianwala Bagh tragedy, Khilafat and Non-cooperation Movements launched by Indians, Muslims and Hindus forging a sort of unity although a shortk lived one. What was the spirit of those Reforms, is depicted by Iqbal in the following verses, composed in 1922, forming part of his famous poem “Khizr—i—Rah” ]ٍاض طضذ[ مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه يہک ظبؼ یہو ےہ ےئاوً ظاطیؿ ںیہً ںیه ےزطپ ےک ػج یطصیه ةوک ےئبپ ںیه بجه یضوہوج زاسجحؼا ویز یطپ نلیً ےہ یک یزاظآ ہی ےہ بحھجوؼ وج مووح و تبیبػضو حلصا و يیئآ ػلجه یضوآ ةاوذ طثا ،ےھٹیه ےزطه ںیه ةطـه ّ تط ىبهلا ػلبجه ےئبضػا ضبحلگ یئهطگ یطگ ضظ گٌج ےہ یک ںوضاز ہیبهطؼ کا یھث ہی ھجؼ ںبحؽلگ وک وث و گًض ةاطؼ غا و ُ ج ےہ ب و ُ ج ےہ بھجوؼ ںبیـآ وک ػله ںازبً ےا ٍا 1) Western democratic system is the same old• musical instrument which contains no tunes other than Imperial ones. 2) It is the demon of autocracy dancing in the garb of democracy. And you think it is a fairy of freedom come from Paradise. 3) Legislative Councils, Reforms, Concessions and Grants, Rights etc are the Western medicine which tastes sweet but in effect is opiate. 4) This eloquence of the members of the Legislative Council is irresistible. It is (in reality) nothing but a warfare of Capitalists to make more money. 5) You take this mirage of colour and smell for a garden. I am sorry for you. You on account of your foolishness, see cage as your nest.[13] These verses so clearly declare about and warn against Western sham democracy, by which he meant the British form of it, because it was the British Government that were granting Reforms and Rights to Iqbal‟s country-men. Iqbal characterised all that democratic process and apparatus as deceptive. Outwardly it was granting of freedom, inwardly it was tightening of the rope around the neck of the slaves. Appearance was democracy, reality was Imperialism and the most cruel type of autocracy. Moreover these playthings of democracy were meant only for the aristocratic and capitalist classes, who, through this democratic exercise aimed at nothing but earning more wealth. Thus earning more, the capitalists served the purpose of their masters in a more handsome and more artful manner. Around this very period i.e. 1922, Iqbal was compiling his Persian poetry in the form of Pyam-i-Mashriq which was published in 1923: In it under the caption “Jumhuriat” he wrote:[14] یئوج ںبجططك ںوزظا ہًبگیث یٌؼه عبحه سیآ یوً ےًبویلؼ غجط یذوـ ںاضوهظ وـ ےضبک ہحرپ ملؿ یضوہوج ظطط ظاعیطگ سیآ یوً ےًبؽًا طکك طذ سص وز طـه ظا ہک “You seek the treasures of an alien philosophy From common, low grade people, themselves poor of mind. Ants crawling on the ground cannot attain The heights of wisdom of a Solomon. Avoid the method of democracy; Become the bondman of some one of ripe intelligence For a few hundred donkeys cannot have combined The brains of one man, of one homosapiens.”[15] These and other verses containing the same derogatory strain regarding democracy were written, as is obvious before he himself entered the arena of practical politics in 1926, when he fought elections to the Punjab Legislative Council and won a seat for himself. This he probably did to see the democracy work from still closer quarters. To suppose that he was misguided and was provoked into fighting an election by īll-guided people because it was below his dignity to become a member of an Assembly, dogs not carry much weight. He gained personal experience and due to it could afterwards talk of the divisive and deceptive nature of that democracy more vehemently. He wrote the following verses around the time he was a member of the Punjab Legislative Council: ثؼا زبہً یضوہوج يیئآ گًطك ثؼا زبفک ےویز ىزطگ ظا يؼض جضز ےًازضبک ىعھضوچ ضبجو گ ظبج و گج ضز ےًبً طہث بھ نکـ ثؼا يیوک ضز ےھزطگاض ےھزطگ ثؼا يیٌچ ؾضبک طگا ضبی ؿیاسذ ےهبیپ اض ةطـه لہا ٍو يهظ ےهبیً ےث ؾیج ثؼا ضوہوج ہک 1) Europe has enforced Democracy and has thus unleashed a demon 2) A caravan, is actively in search of some other caravan, like a robber. It is stomachs out to snatch a loaf. 3) A group of people is sitting in ambush to fall upon some other group. God help it if this be its performance. 4) Impart this message from me to the Westerners that government of the people is like a sword out of its scabbard, killing ruthlessly.[16] And during this very period Iqbal was preparing his Lectures which he later on delivered at Madras and Aligarh. He referring to Turkish Ijtihad in respect of Khilafat had stated: “Turkey‟s Ijtihad is that according to the spirit of Islam the Caliphate or Imamate can be vested in a body of persons or an elected Assembly. ---Personally I believe that the Turkish view is perfectly sound. It is hardly necessary to argue this point. The republican form of government is not only thoroughly with the spirit of Islam, but has also become a necessity in view of the new forces that are set free in the world of Islam.”[17] As is obvious, Iqbal was a supporter of democracy but was against the amoral way of its exercise. How could he reconcile with what the Western democracy stood for and what it brought about. Where fifty-one meant one hundred and where it were the number of votes and not the worth of voters that were to be the deciding factor, then how good and truth could find support. Iqbal had expressed such forebodings in as early as 1908. He had said: “The democracy has a tendency to foster the spirit of legality ----This is not in itself bad; but unfortunately it tends to displace the purely moral standpoint and to make the illegal and wrong identical in meaning.”[18] Where there are persons to count and not personalities, anything can be voted for and then given authority. The other day we read in a newspaper that a certain gentleman had sought permission of the British Parliament to marry his mother-in-law and the permission was granted ----as a special case though. Thus any moral requirement can be done away with, under democratic permit. Where voters have the final authority, no sin can remain sin, no crime can remain crime, even Divine Writ can be voted down and defied. We know that about a year ago a marriage between two adults belonging to the masculine gendre was ceremonised at a Church in England and Priest bestowed his benedictions on the couple and prayed for the success of the marriage. Tomorrow all kinds of incest can be voted through and thus brought in vogue. Any aggression and high handedness, on the international level can be validated. The world forum, United Nations, too, is apparently working democratically but it is the vote that sells away the souls inhabitants and homelands of Palistinians, Eritarians, South-Africans, Namibians and so on and so forth to others with a permission to perpetrate all kinds of imaginable and unimaginable atrocities on the biped herds handed over to the cruel masters. Members of Parliaments and World Forums, with no morals and no notion of values are masters, more ferocious than carnivorous animals. But they are “heads” occupying parlimentary seats, nobody bothers about what the heads contain. Iqbal not without reason chastised this inhuman way of constituting legalities. He says: ؾبك بیک ےً یگًطك زطه کا وک ظاض غا ےجطک ںیہً لوھک ےؼا بًاز ہک سٌچ طہ ےہ ثهوکح ظطط کا ثیضوہوج ںیه ػج ہک ےجطک ںیہً ل وج ںیہ ےجطک بٌگ وک ںوسٌہ 1) A European gentleman has disclosed this secret although men of wisdom as a rule, do not give away what they have in their minds. 2) Democracy is a form of government in which persons are counted and not weighed.[19] As has already been stressed one reason why Iqbal was against European democracy, in whatever country it worked and under whatever cover, was that it were the number of votes that characterized a thing right or wrong. And those who voted were not worthy of doing that job. In his very famous poem, “Devil‟s Advisory Council” written hardly one year before his death, contained in his “Armughan-i-Hijaz”, published after his death, he expressed his utter disgust with the so-called “Democracy”. He makes an advisor of the Arch Devil refer to the European democratic method of rule in these words: مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه ںیہً بھکیز بیک ےً وج چ ںوضسًا يـوض ٍطہچ طج کیضبج ےؼ عیگٌ “Have you not observed the Western democratic system? The face of this democracy is bright but the soul is darker than that of Chengis Khan.”[20] And now we come to his statement which was broadcast from All India Radio Lahore as the New Year Message on January 1st, 1938 i.e. only three months and twenty days before his death. A part of that Message is being given below: “The modern age prides itself on its progress in knowledge and its matchless scientific developments. No doubt, the pride is justified. Today space and time are being annihilated and man is achieving amazing successes in unveiling the secrets of nature and harnessing its forces to his own service. But in spite of all these developments, tyranny of imperialism struts abroad, covering its face in the masks of Democracy, Nationalism, Communism, Fascism and heaven knows what else besides. Under these masks, in every corner of the earth the spirit of freedom and the dignity of man are being trampled underfoot in a way of which not even the darkest period of human history presents a parallel. The so-called statesmen to whom government had entrusted leadership have proved demons of bloodshed, tyranny and oppression.------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- As I look back on the year that has passed and as I look at the world in the midst of the New Year‟s rejoicings, if may be Abysinia or Palestine, Spain or China, the same misery prevails in every corner of man‟s earthly home and hundreds of thousands of men are being butchered mercilessly. ----- ------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------- So long as this so-called democracy, this accursed nationalism and this degraded imperialism are not shattered, so long as men do not demonstrate by their actions that they believe that the whole world is the family of God, so long as distinctions of race, colour and geographical nationalities are not wiped out completely, they will never be able to lead a happy and contented life, and the beautiful ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity will never materialize![21] Mention has been made in the foregoing pages that the Caliph who did not rule according to the shariah, forfieted his right to rule. This shows that between Islamic government and the Muslim society, there exists a tacit understanding, or to be more manifest, a contract. Iqbal understands the nature of relation between the elected and the electors according to al- Mawardy‟s view who defines this relationship as “Aqd” --binding together, a contract in consequence of which the caliph has to do certain duties If he fulfils his duties Muslims obey him and assist him.[22] Otherwise the Aqd or the contract stands broken. This is certainly a spirit of government akin to that of democracy, in other words a form of government tacitly democratic. It is neither purely, this form, nor that. It is an amalgam of forms of rule. If has always to abide by the broad based principles of shariah. No democracy has the liberty to temper with them. Similarly no kingship or dictatorial regime can set aside what has been laid down by shariah, hence Islamic form of rule cannot be any specific mode of polity known to the West. To make this point clearer I quote Ilyas Ahmad: “The Islamic state is Theocratic Democracy. Thus to summarise: Islam was not merely a Revolution; it was a revelation also. It was not mere solution; it was full and complete Salvation. Hence if the Islamic state was the work of man in one sense it was also the work of God in another. If it was a democracy in one sense, it was also a theocracy in another. In fine, as it was both theocracy and democracy, it was a theocratic democracy as well as a democratic theocracy and as has been already said, it not only represented a democratic conception of divine government but also the divinely ordained method of democratic government. Religion and politics could never be separated in Islam and to this day Religion remains the basic foundation of Islamic social and political structure.”[23] We can conclude that according to Iqbal the spirit of Islamic government was akin to democracy but with a rider that only men of sound moral character and acute understanding of the affairs of the society could be declared candidates for the election as the Head of the State. Similarly it were individuals who commanded good repute could be the electors. This shows that adult franchise had no place in Islamic polity. Moreover party-system is not visible or at least cannot be visualized in Iqbal‟s writings. Keeping these points in view we can safely say that the Parliament in Iqbal‟s view turns into a Shura of the Shariah whereas the structure of the government takes the shape of Khilafat ---- ---------------------------- It no longer remains Democracy as such. NOTES & REFERENCES [1] Darb-i-Kalīm, Kull iyat-i-Iqbal. p. 127/589 [2] The Fontana Dictionary of Modern thought, Edited by, Alan Bullock and Oliver Stallybrass, Fontana/Collins. 1977. Pp. 161-62. [3] Thought and Reflections pp. 62-63. [4] Ibid p. 66. [5] Ibid p. 64. [6] Ibid P. 64. [7] Ibid p. 65. [8] Arberry End. Translation of Javēd Namā p. 11. [9] Society and State in Islam, Progressive Books, Urdu Bazar, Lahore. (1979) pp. 101-102. [10] Iqbal Aur Mas ala-i-Ta‟leem by Muhammad Ahmad, pub. by Iqbal Academy p. 392. [11] Malfuzāt-i-1qbāl, pub. Iqbal Academy, Lahore p. 174 [12] Islam As An Ethical and a Political Ideal, ed. by Dr. S.Y. Hashmy, Islamic Book Service, Urdu Bazar, Lahore (1977) pp. 99-105. [13] Bang-i-Dara, Kulliyat-i-Iqbal (Urdu) pp. 262-62. [14] Kulliyāt-i-Iqbāl (Persian) p. 135/305. [15] A Message from the East by M. Hadi Hussain, Iqbal Academy (1977) p. 98. [16] Zabūr-i-Ajam, Kulliyat-i-Iqbal (Persian) pp. 167, 168/559-60. [17] Reconstruction p. 157. [18] Stray Reflections” Sh. Ghulam Ali & Sons, Lahore p. 12. [19] Darb-i-Kālīm, Kulliyāt-i-Iqbāl (Urdu) p. 148/610. [20] Armughān-i-Hijāz Kulliyāt-i-Iqbāl (Urdu) 8/ 65 p 9. [21] Thoughts and Reflections, S.A. Valid, pp. 373,374-75. [22] Ibid pp. 67-68. [23] The Social Contract and the Islamic State, Shahzad Publishers Lahore (1979) p. 118. (http://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/apr85/6.htm) Iqbal’s Critique of Democracy by Mujibur Rahman (Senior Advocate, Bangladesh Supreme Court, Former Minister Information, East Pakistan.) Islam is a universal religion and Al-Quran is a guidance for mankind ( Hudal Lin Nas). Its address is to mankind as a whole. (Ya Aiyyu Han Nas). Islam does not admit of any geographical limitation.‖ It creates, rather, a League of Nations. 1 Allama Iqbal was not only the greatest Poet-Philosopher of Islam but also an outstanding thinker of the Century with international stature. So his approach was also to entire mankind. His conscious and sensitive mind used to sharply react on any invasion on human dignity, justice and equity, any where in the world. His protest was bold and highly reasoned. His criticism was deeply philosophical and pragmatic. Iqbal’s Views on Western Democracy Allama Iqbal having critically examined the concept of modern secular democracy as preached and practised by the West observed in Zarb-e-Kalim: Democracy counts the heads and does not weight the brain. His view on Payam-e_Mashriq is to remain aloof from Western democracy. According to him the brain of two hundred asses cannot produce the brain of single person. Iqbal could not reconcile with Western democracy on the main ground that popularity is yard stick, though without ability and wisdom a man can be popular. Iqbal gave this message to the West through his Gulshan-e-Raz that Satan was let loose through Western democracy which is a naked sword in the hand of the political factions. Iqbal heard the voice of imperialism in the flute of Western democracy(Khizr-e-Rah). In Bang-i-Dara (The Sound of the Caravan Bell) Iqbal castigated Western democracy and said that except imperialism there is nothing in it. In the garb of democracy a ghost of oppression has been dancing, mistakenly considered as a so-called beautiful fairy of independence. He observed inter alia that the sole function of Western democracy is to exploit the poor in the interest of the rich.2 According to him the institution and civilization built upon secular democracy can never be sound and best. Iqbal pointed out the defects of narrow concept of dialectical materialism and capitalistic Western democracy, and according to him Class War is the result of Western Democracy where as justice and unanimity are results of Islamic democracy.3 Islam does not allow to deal with others unjustly, nor it allows to be dealt with unjustly.4 He cautioned that democracy was a coat which several European countries discarded after trial and which a number of Asiatic countries have picked up to wear however ill fitting it may be. Democracy – Secular Allama Iqbal, in fact, was correct in his views about Western (Secular) democracy which despite its apparently lucrative and theoretical sense: Government of the people, by the People and for the People, in practice, failed to deliver goods. The outstanding Western political philosophers themselves had to admit the failure of secular democracy. Though sovereignty in Western democracy, it is theoretically claimed, lies with the people, but no sooner the election is over, the People in fact go under the domination of the elected rulers practically for all intents and purposes. The Western views Having studied the result of secular democracy, the Western political philosophers themselves are convinced that democracy cannot achieve at all the purpose for which it is theoretically expected and they had to corroborate Iqbal‘s view. England is considered to be the cradle of modern democracy, professor Harold J Laski observed that one cannot understand the parliamentary system in Great Britain unless one recognizes that, beneath the appearance of democracy, this is the economic and social system it is intended to uphold. It was made by the owners of the instruments of production in the interest of their property: and the safeguarding of their conception of their rights is inherent in all the rules by which it moves; it has been compelled to confer the franchise upon the masses; it has been careful to maintain for property the substance of effective authority.5 Professor Laski further observed that these are not characteristics of Great Britain only; they are universal in capitalistic democracies. Some forces are compelling the consolidation of Republicans and Democrats in the United States as a party of property seeking to resist the invasion of its hitherto uncontrolled empire.6 Professor Harold j Laski in his analysis of the conduct of the voters and the leaders in democracy in his book, Democracy in Crisis, observes that the decisions of the voters in choosing their Governors are influenced by considerations which escape all scientific analysis.7 Laski, refers to Rousseau and observes that there is a vital truth in Rousseau‘s taunt that electorate is free only at election and that freedom is but the prelude to a new domination, it cannot choose the representative it wants; it can only strike blindly against those at whom it feels a passing indignation. Every political conflict is the battle of two active minorities for the possession of the inert multitude.8 Bertrand Russell observes that when it is a democracy, the ordinary citizen has very little sense of political power, he does not decide what are to be issues in the election and he is not concerned with matters remote from his daily life, which are almost wholly outside his experiences, and his vote makes so small a contribution to the total that it is negligible.9 British Statesman Sir Stafford Cripps in Democracy Up To Dateis of the opinion that in fact democracy does not exist in any country to make an approach to achieve Government of the People, by the People and, for the People: and he further holds the view that Western European countries survive as democracies only in name.10 He points out that democratic system is highly expensive and paying capacity of the candidate contributes a lot in getting a success in the election.14 Stafford Cripps having analyzed modern democracy as a system of government, says : ― To all intents and purposes the British democracy is today accepting the dictatorship of the Prime Minister as substitute for its own actions. It is not necessary to review the very similar symptoms of democratic Government, which have made themselves apparent all over the world, in some places to a greater and in others to a lesser degree. 12 George Barnard Shaw (1856-1950) was of the view that democracy is constituted of by the votes of the incompetent many, for appointment of the corrupt few to run a bad government on a false slogan of public interest. Shaw in Man and Superman, under the heading ―The Political Need for the Superman‖ admits in an unambiguous way: ―We have been driven to Proletarian Democracy by the failure of all the alternative systems. Democracy cannot rise above the level of human material of which its voters are made. When a Great Political movement takes place it is not consciously led nor organized: the unconscious self in mankind breaks its way through the problem as an elephant breaks through a jungle. He has other interesting but wise views against Western brand of democracy. Secular World without studying Islam as a system of life and its form of Government concluded that each Government throughout the world is unsatisfactory. Winston Churchill sarcastically says that democracy is the least unsatisfactory. Let us turn to India. Mr. Kuldip Nayar in an article ―Between The Lines‖ remarks on Indian Democracy: Parliament, though democratically elected, does not evoke trust; it is considered as a part of a system that is corrupt and antiquated. Many of its members are believed to be in pay of lobbies of industrialists and even when an M.P expresses himself honestly, there is a tendency to see some kind of hand behind him. The way many members are elected with money and muscle power, has devalued the image of democracy.13 In an article ―Law: Ally And Corrective of Democracy ―reported in AIR JOURNAL 1969, Mr. Justice Tek Chand, Punjab High Court observes, ―The next question which waits enquiry is: has democracy, as an ideal worthy of pursuit, become outmoded because of its failure due to inherent weaknesses? The optimism that prevailed at one time with regard to democratic institutions is being dispelled. The democratic institutions recently seem to have abjectly surrendered before the onslaught of absolutism. Friends of democracy are supporting with declining conviction. According to some it is in retreat. According to others, it is at the cross roads. The future of democracy is said to be bleak and dismal‖.14 In a conference held in Rhodes, in October, 1958, under the patronage of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, two important papers were read, one was by Western intellectual: Bertrand de Juouvenel of France and the other by Daya Krishna of India, both of them agreed that democracy is more a myth than reality. To combat capitalism, the child of Western democracy and its other drawbacks, Karl Marx presented his concept of Communism as counterblast which also had to vanish away due to its inherent defects. The concept: ―New World Order as the last stake of the Western political gamblers repeats the past mistakes. It is an old but a stale wine in a new bottle. Absence of a sound, wise and impartial sovereign, absence of a complete code of life with an ideal sense of direction to solve basic human problem, the heterogeneous Western society, disregard to any ethical standards of life and absence of faith in accountability to the Supreme Power are the main reasons for the failure of Secular democracy. The Western Political Philosophers wanted to graft democracy as a form of government with the Western secular society divided by racialism, colour, prejudice, difference of nobles and commoners, exploiters and exploited dictators, and dictated with unavoidable result that the values of democracy proved to be totally foreign bodies to the said society. The artificial graft had to die a sure death. Basic Causes of Failure of Western Democracy THE Western Political Philosophers have, themselves pointed out the basic causes of failure. Edward Benes said: Success of Democracy requires an integrated society based on equality but he finds European society otherwise.15 Professor Laski in his article ―The Internal Conditions of Democracy‖ observed that democracy might endure so long as men felt that they had great ends of life in common and the values they sought to realize were the same values.16 John Dewey in his article ― Democracy ‖ observes that democracy is now challenged as they never have been before. The main cause of failure of Secular Democracy, according to him, is that Democracy had not become a part of the bone and blood of the people in daily conduct of life. Democratic forms were limited to parliament elections and combats between the parties and that unless democratic habits of thought and action are part of the fiber of a people, political democracy is insecure. It cannot stand in isolation. It must be buttressed by the presence of democratic methods in all social relations.17 Having realized the failure of democracy in the United States of America, Walt Whitman in his article Democratic Vistas prescribes that to meet the situation in future, whole mass of American mentality, taste and belief should be changed and a new breath of life is to be introduced into national life affecting politics for more than the popular superficial suffrage, accomplishing a religious and moral character beneath the political productive and intellectual bases of the states.18 The aforesaid pre-conditions for success of democracy as suggested by Edward Bens, Laski, John Dewey and Walt Whitman, though conspicuously absent in Western Society but are present in Islamic society in their totality. Let us examine social, political and economic democracies in Islam. Islam and Social Democracy Foundation of social democracy is laid on the concept of oneness of God (Tauhid) and Unity of mankind as members of a single Brotherhood. Islam established brotherhood and equality of man which are the basic ingredients of democracy. Al-Quran declares that from out of one pair, mankind is created and from out of it countless men and women are scattered.19 It is further declared that mankind was created out of one male and one female and made into Nations and Tribes only for knowing each other ( not that they may despise ach other), certainly the most honored in the sight of God is he who is the most Righteous.20 Prophet(PBUH) in his Farewell address also said. ―O ye people, Allah says you are created from one male and one female and made into tribes and nations so that you could be identified. Verily in the sight of Allah, the most honoured is the one who is the most God fearing. There is no superiority for an Arab over a non- Arab and for a non-Arab over an Arab, nor for white over the black nor for the black over the white, except in piety. All mankind is the progeny of Adam who was fashioned out of clay. Behold, every claim of privilege whether that of blood or property, is under my heels.‖ Muslim Ummah is also compared with a building, by the Prophet, where each brick in co-operation with other bricks maintains and strengthens the building. The brotherhood of Muslims is also compared with human body. If one part feels pain rest also react (Al-Hadith). The social status of each human being along with Ideological goal of life is same which was preached and practiced by Islam. The Prophet (Peace be upon Him) took the lead not only to free the slaves but also to establish them with social prestige and dignity. Even during the Meccan period Hazrat Khadijatul Qubra(RA) spent her wealth on this programme, Zaid on being freed was taken as member of their family and married to Zainab, cousin of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him ). The Prophet ( Peace bre upon Him) gave him generalship of an army consisting of leading persons among Muhajreen and Ansars and on his death, his son Osama was given leadership to be followed by companions like Abu Bakar, Umar and others. Belal on being freed was put in a highly respectable position of the Muadhin. Having seen Belal coming, even Umar the Great used to address him with great respect that the leader was coming. Sultan Mahmud and his servant Aiyaz, as said by Iqbal, could stand side by side on the same line with no difference between them. In the context of the failure of other religious and man made isms, modern world craves for a proper and practical guideline to solve human problems and to foster brotherhood and toleration to establish peace. Islam alone can take the leadership to fulfill the expectation of the world community and save mankind. Even the Western non-Muslim Scholars and Orientalists admit that Islam alone can give proper guidance in this respect. A.J. Toynbee in Civilization on Trial, observes: the extinction of race consciousness as between Muslims is one of the outstanding moral achievements of Islam and in the contemporary world, it is conceivable that the spirit of Islam might be the timely reinforcement which would decide this issue in favour of tolerance and peace.21 Having considered the merit of Islam for the solution of world problems, Toynbee invoked Islam in the following terms :‖if the present situation of mankind were to precipitate for peace, Islam might be moved to play her historic role once again‖. He on study of Islam was amazed with regard to Brotherhood in Islam and observed : that when the Ideology of the Brotherhood of men fired from the cannon mouth of Islam, it set the whole world ablaze. And he was highly convinced that Islam is the only framework within which the hopes and aspirations of mankind can be fulfilled.22 Islamic society by itself is a democratic one as such is an appropriate and a fertile field to facilitate the growth and development of political and economic democracies. Islam and Political Democracy In Islamic system of life, Democracy is an indispensable political ideal which as a form of world government is compatible with Quranic Way of life. Al-Quran provides a complete code of life to solve all human problems, material and spiritual. Every sphere of life is blended into one legal system Shariah of Islam which is the only system of life that has subordinate Government, Law and Justice to moral values. Iqbal criticized politics without moral basis in strong terms: If the Deen is divorced or separated from politics, what remains is Chengizi. H.G. Wells in his Outline of History, in appreciation of Islamic System of Life , said that it was the broadest, freshest and cleanest political ideal that had yet to come in to actual activity in the world and it offered better terms than any other to the mass of mankind.23 The Foundation of Islamic Democracy is laid down by Al-Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet, with all its ingredients and pre-conditions. Islam casts a duty upon men, the vicegerents of God on the earth, to individually and collectively implement Islamic Scheme of Life towards establishment of God‘s Kingdom on this earth. Consultation in matters of administration had been made obligatory in Islam and to consult them in affairs (of moment). Then when thou has taken decision, put thy trust in God, for God loves those who put their trust (in Him).24 Mutual consultation has been enjoined in conducting affairs.25Prophet and Khulafa-e-Rashedeen rigidly followed the principle of consultation. Umar had two Shuras, the first one was special and second one was broad based with wise people from among the Muhajreen and Ansars. He was of the view that Khilafat, without Majlis-e-Shura, was impossible. Functions of Majlis-e-Shura may be compared with the functions of modern Parliaments with the difference that the former acts on Divine guidance, the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) and according to ideologically homogeneous values, whereas the latter acts without any divine code and ethical mooring. In the election of Khulafe-e-Rashedeen preliminary selection in the form of a nomination used to be made by the limited elderly and wise section with mutual consultation. In each case approval by the Community was essential. The elected Caliphs in their usual speeches after election, had to address the people ensuring them that the Caliph would act according to the dictates of Al-Quran and Sunnah which ensured people‘s rights and prescribed obligation of the Caliphs. The people have all the freedom to criticise the activities of the Caliph. Deviation from the fundamentals of Islam would even entail removal from office. Umar was warned by a man ― I swear that If thou commitest errors, we shall not hesitate to punish thee with our swords‖. To these frank words Umar replied:‖ I thank God that there may be found among the Muslims the one to correct Umar‘s errors with a sword. ― While Umar was in the midst of his Khutba, one of the persons from the congregation rose up and asked: ― Where from you have got the cloth for long dress ?‖ His son Abdullah Bin-Umar stood up with his old and short dress and replied that he had given his share of the cloth to his father. According to Islam greatest Jihad is the expression of word of Justice before the Oppressive Ruler.26 Since Al-Quran and Sunnah give the basic guideline for a homogeneous, indivisible and integrated life style, there is no scope for the rulers and the ruled to be deviated from the paths of equality, justice and fair deal to all. The ingredients and basic principles of Democracy are, as such, inherently embedded in the Islamic system of life itself. There is no scope for any ruler to be either a dictator or an autocrat in Islam, by taking recourse to a free style exercise to power, so long he follows Quranic way of life. Unlike the secular West, Islam instead of taking democracy as an isolated and casual venture during election at long intervals establishes a society which by itself is based on liberty, equality and fraternity, the sheet anchors of democracy. So success of democracy under Islam is the necessary corollary to Islamic social, cultural, political and economic systems integrated under one code of life. Non-Muslim thinkers had to admit the superiority of Islam in respect of democracy. The religion revealed to Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon Him) not only taught the loftiest principles of liberty , equality and fraternity, but also ensured the principles of cultural, political and economic democracies. It was almost twelve centuries before the idea became known in Europe that democracy was preached and practiced by Islam with a unique success. Charis Waddy takes it as a surprise that Islam preached and practiced liberty, fraternity and equality, the principles of democracy, one thousand years before the French Revolution (1789 A.D) the historians of the West, date democracy from the French Revolution without ….But unless a society is mentally trained up with fundamental values of Equality, Brotherhood and Common Ideology, democracy can neither grow nor thrive even if thrust upon from above. It is a fact of history that Napoleon took up power within 15 years of French Revolution as a monarch and was declared Emperor. The slogans of liberty, equality and fraternity, evaporated away not only from France but also from European continent as a consequence of Napoleonic hegemony. Sarojni Naidu in one of her speeches in London referring to Prophet Muhammad ( Peace be upon Him) drew the attention of the West to the fact that what the West dreamt today was not merely a dream but fulfilled fourteen hundred years ago when the lonely dreamer of the desert, communing with the stars, first realized the brotherhood of man and the right of every individual to freedom and equality. Islam and Economic Democracy The distribution of political power through democracy can not, in practice, ensure democracy without distribution of wealth. Political democracy without economic democracy is meaningless, rather, a misnomer. Ibn Khaldun the father of Sociology was the first political philosopher to pointedly tell in his Muqaddima (prolegomena ) to his Kitab al Iber that for the success of politics, the importance of economics is a condition precedent. Western philosophers also share the same view. Bertrand Russell specifically observed that old-fashioned democracy and new-fashioned Marxism have failed because the former was only political and the latter was only economic. But Islam is the only code of life to cover individual, social, political, economic, national and international spheres of life. The economic system of Islam is an integral part of Islam within its own framework. The economic system of Islam has an inseparable relationship with political, judicial, legal, cultural and social systems of Islam. And all these branches are fundamentally based on the moral foundation of Islam. So its economic scheme functions in collaboration with other branches of Islam, a complete code of life, for achieving the highest benefit for mankind in a balanced way. Islam, through the concept of ownership of God and specific economic scheme, not only forbids capitalism and exploitation but also ensures equitable distribution of wealth. Ownership of property according to Islam, lies with God as political and legal sovereignty lies with Him: to Him belongs what is in the heavens and on earth and all between them and all beneath the soil.28 The Islamic economic system is based on the concepts of ownership of God, Khilafat, Fraternity and Trusteeship of men, His Vicegerents on this earth. Around the first quarter of the 7th Century A.D. the declaration of right of the poor in the wealth of the rich was beyond imagination in the context of the then world. But Islam had recognized and declared the right of the needy in the wealth and possessions of the rich.29 Al-Quran declared that men shall be questioned by God as to how far they discharged their duties with regard to their possession and personal selves30. Payment of Zakat has been enjoined as a duty next to Salat (Prayer). Reward has been declared for spending in charity by day and night in secret and in public.31 It has been made incumbent to spend, out of love for Him, for kin, orphans, for the needy, the wayfarer, for those who ask and for ransom to free the slaves.32 Usury and Monopoly The Islamic Economic System prohibits both usury and monopoly which breed capitalism. Usury is the vehicle of exploitation, so Islam forbids it and encourages trade.33A war is declared from God and the Apostle against usury.34 The Prophet declared : he that monopolises is a wrong doer (Al-Hadith). Under capitalistic system of the West, wealth is circulated among the few rich. Islam encourages circulation of wealth in society and in consequences, hoarding is also prohibited as a great sin.35 To ensure circulation of wealth its rotation between the wealthy people alone is forbidden.36 Islam discourages both niggardliness and extravagance and it strikes a balance between the two.37 Islam takes another revolutionary stand when Al-Quran enjoins that assets beyond the need of the rich one is to be distributed among the poor.38 It ensures equi-distribution of wealth. The success of economic system of Islam reached to the extent that during the Khilafat of Umar Ibn Adbul Aziz, none was available to accept Zakat. On consideration of democracy practiced in different spheres of life: social, political and economic fields, it can be safely concluded that unlike other religions and man-made isms Islam guaranteed the success of democracy due to its own merit as an integrated system of life covering its all fields. Charis Waddy having appreciated the Islamic system observes: ―These ideas are not merely of moral value. They are legally implemented for Islam brought with it a legal system. A legal principle introduced by the Caliph Umar decrees that if a person dies of starvation, then the penalty for wrongful death should be imposed on all the citizens of the town as though they had killed him.39 She further observes that in Islam, for the first time, an economic theory of equal opportunities and fair distribution were outlined. Islam teaches that God is concerned not only with moral and ethical reforms, but also with social emancipation and economic condition.40 She further exclaimed on Prophet‘s extraordinary contribution to world civilization in the field of human affairs including democracy. She in appreciation of the merit of Islam as a complete code of life and greatness of the Prophet of Islam observes:‖ What does the life of the Prophet mean to us ? When he died at the age of sixty-three, his life‘s work had completely transformed his native land. Not only did a new pure faith prevailed, but the right of the woman and the protection of the minors had been put on a totally new basis, politics and economy were reorganized, democracy brought into public life all in a new manner incredibly audacious for those days.‖41 The basis of Shariah, the Islamic Law, is Divine Wisdom and its purpose is human welfare both in this worldly life and the hereafter. The All-Wise Creator knows best the real need of mankind, His own creation and vicegerent on this earth, while the so-called secular political leaders can not even properly conceive, and prescribe any real solution of problems. Iqbal‘s criticism of the Western democracy is quite consistent with the caution in Al-Quran : ―Wert thou to follow the common run of those on earth, they will lead thee away from the Way of God, they follow nothing but conjecture, they do nothing but lie.‖ 42 The only solution of man‘s participation lies in Islamic brand of democracy which makes it acceptable only under the control and guidance as prescribed in Al- Quran. Iqbal‘s religious devotion without any trace of fanaticism and emotionalism led him to deal dispassionately with issues of life including democracy. Democratic spirit can never be sustained by confining it in casual election, but that spirit must pervade in all spheres of life, literature and culture to integrate and discipline the nation as a whole. Since democracy is inextricably connected with the entire code of life (Islam) so to correct any of the items, entire Islam as a complete code is to be accepted and put in to simultaneous operation, as such Iqbal emphasised and urged upon the Ummah to go back to the pristine purity of Islam, since the cause of the present debacle of Muslim world is departure from the teachings of Al-Quran. He reminded the Muslim Ummah: ―Woh zamane main muazziz thay Musalman ho kar Aur tum khwar huey tarek-e-Quran ho kar‖ The Western World cunningly took the cover table slogan of democracy to win the election to switch over the various forms of dictatorship. Through the same method, Fascism and Nazism assumed power in Italy and Germany respectively. Even Marxism came to power on the slogan of democracy, i.e., Republic (USSR) in Russia. Human Rights, Civil Liberty and Human Dignity were put into jeopardy and totally denied. Iqbal was fully justified to hold that Western democracy was a Tamasha (Fun) and according to him if Deen is divorced or separated from politics, what remains is mere Chengizi. According to Iqbal, none knows what would happen after the election is over. The cause of scathing criticism of Western democracy by Iqbal, inter alia, was to stop its un-chartered destination. The only solution of the problem of forms of government of the West, according to Iqbal, is Islam. References 1. Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Published by Javed Iqbal son of Late Iqbal, Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf, Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore, p.159 2. Ibid, p.179 3. Thought and Reflections of Iqbal,(ed.) Syed Wahid, Muhammad Ashraf Publications, Lahore. P.37 4. Al-Quran, Baqara. 279 5. Harold J. Laski, Parliamentary Government in England, Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, p.43. 6. Ibid.,p.96 7. Harold j. Laski, Democracy in Crisis , George Allen and Unwin Ltd.,p.68. 8. Ibid.,p.75 9. Bertrand Russell, The Taming of Power, p.177 10. Sir Stafford Cripps, Democracy Up-To-Date, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., Museum Street London,p.20 11. Ibid.,p.54 12. Ibid.,p.15 13. Kuldip Nayar, Bangladesh Observer, November 21,1989. 14. AIR. Journal, 1959,p.50 15. Edward Benes, Democracy Today and Tomorrow, MacMillan & Co., Ltd., St Martins Street London. 1940, p.218 16. Harold J.Laski, ‖The internal Condition of Democracy‖, Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. Allahabad Central Book Depot, p.189. 17. John Dewey, Democracy in Readings in Philosophy, John Harman Randal. Jr. (ed.),p.35. 18. Walt Whitman, ―Democratic Vistas in Mass Culture,‖ The Popular Arts American. (ed.)Bernard Revenberg and David Manning White, The Free Press, New York, MacMillan, Ltd., London, p.35. 19. Al-Quran, Nissa :1 20. Al-Quran, Hujurat :13 21. A.J Toynbee, Civilization on Trial, Oxford University Press, 1949, pp.205-6. 22. Ibid, p.212. 23. H.G. Wells, Out Line of History, p.425. 24. Al-Quran, Al-e-Imran : 159. 25. Al-Quran, Shura :38. 26. Al-Hadith. 27. Charis Waddy, The Muslim Mind, Longman, p.40 28. Al-Quran, 1. Ta-Ha:6 2. Maryam :65 29. Al-Quran, 1. Zariyat :19 2. Maarij : 24-25 30. Al-Quran, Aal-e-Imran : 186 31. Al-Quran, Baqara : 274 and 277 32. Al-Quran, Baqara : 177 33. Al-Quran, Baqara : 275 and 178 34. Al-Quran, Baqara : 279 35. Al-Quran, Tauba : 34-35 36. Al-Quran, Hashr : 7 37. Al-Quran, 1. Bani Isra-il : 26-27 2. Furqan : 67 38. Al-Quran, Baqara : 219 39. Charis Waddy, op.cit.,p.39. 40. Ibid, p.47. 41. Ibid, p. 35-36 42. Al-Quran, An‘am : 116 (http://www.iqbal.com.pk/944-allama-iqbal-studies/scholarly-articles/1668-iqbals-critique-of-democracy) Iqbal’s concept of democracy still a dream: Qayyum Nizami Dr Allama Iqbal gave a real Islamic concept of democracy in comparison to the western democracy and the version of democracy presently being practised in Pakistan is in stark contrast to Iqbal‘s concept. This dichotomy explains why our society continues to go downhill in every area of national life. These views were expressed by Mr. Qayyum Nizami, renowned columnist and journalist while delivering a special lecture to senior students of COSIS, Minhaj University Lahore today. Qayyum Nizami said that Dr Iqbal‘s concept of democracy was that the poor had the right to tax the rich. He was convinced of politics, which resulted in people‘s wellbeing and state stability. The renowned columnist said that the present electoral system was contrary to the ideals espoused by Quaid- e-Azam and Allama Iqbal. He said that Dr Tahir-ul-Qadri has effectively raised a voice against this system. He said that his call for change and reforms in the system was timely. Qayyum Nizami said that there was not even a single politician in the present democratic system who was inheritor of Iqbal‘s ideology and Jinnah‘s politics. He said that there was class based democracy in the country in which the poor were getting poorer and the rich richer by the way. He said that the politicians who never tire of quoting Iqbal‘s poetry were actually acting against the spirit of his message. He said that democracy based on equality could flourish in an Islamic environment. He said that Iqbal‘s concept of democracy revolved around service of the people. He said that it was his experience of 40 years in the ruling elite always preferred personal interests to national ones. (http://www.nizambadlo.com/english/tid/19121/Iqbals-concept-of-democracy-still-a-dream-Qayyum- Nizami.html) Spiritual Democracy as Espoused in the Philosophy of Allama Iqbal Related Links Magazines Publications Articles How do the Teachings of Hadrat Sultan Bahoo (Allah Bless His Soul) Contribute to the Achievement of a Spiritual Democracy as Espoused in the Philosophy of Allama Iqbal (Allah Bless His Soul) Written By: Rana Amaar Faaruq Iqbal deals with the idea of Islam as a social movement for the basis of a structure of State and social society in his sixth lecture in ‗The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam‟ titled ‗The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam‟. 1 In order to understand fully this structure that Islam aims to create, it is pertinent to first understand how Iqbal views Islam as a movement in its essential nature. And what problems have been faced by Muslims in the past in being unable to achieve that with a view to those elements which would fulfil the said deficiencies. It is also important to bear in mind the fact that Iqbal does not wish to present an alternate view of Islam but only what he recognises as the practical manifestation of the true spirit of the Quran. To begin with, Iqbal defines the cultural movement of Islam as ‗an emotional system of unification‘ 2 . Emotional here does not mean erratic and sentimental but signifies its classification as a system which deals primarily with the control of or access to deeper human faculties of cognition and comprehension beyond the physical senses. For Iqbal and Sultan Bahoo as we shall later see, the nexus of reason and emotion is a complementary pair not meant to be opposites challenging one another. This system is unifying by virtue of its recognition of the centrality of the Human Individual as its mode. This, in turn relies upon a ‗perception that all human life is spiritual in its origin‘. 3 This is the conceptual phase of Iqbal‘s ideology. These two elements are central to the spiritual concept of the Quran and the teachings of Sultan Bahoo (RA). As for the Human Individual the holy Prophet declared: ہجضوص یلػ مزآ ا نلذ Allah created Adam in His own Image 4 Sultan Bahoo adds to this by declaring, “Adam (AS) is the Human. He who reaches the stature of Adam (AS) is Human. If someone asks if the children of Adam are capable of reaching his stature then it is possible as per the verse: 5 مزآ یٌث بٌهطک سول And we have also honoured the children of Adam‖ 6 The second element deals with the understanding that all Human life is spiritual in its origin. Sultan Bahoo‘s explanation of the origin of Humanity in the World of the Spirit (Aalim-e-Lahoot) explains in detail how all souls were once in union before Allah, as the Quran reminds: ىسھـ لث ولبه ؟نکثطث ثؽلا ا Am I not your Lord? Verily, we testify! 7 This conception of the Human Self as the reflection of Allah is central to the understanding of the place of the individual in Islam and Sultan Bahoo guides his followers towards this very purpose i.e. the actualisation of the Human potential of perfection which is based upon the common spiritual origin of mankind. This is the concept upon which, as per Iqbal, Islam‘s notion of unification entirely depends. As the Prophet (PBUH) said: ؽلً قلػ يه ہثض فطػ سوك ہ He who recognises his Self, recognises his Lord. 8 After having established the concept of Islam and its essential features, Iqbal goes on to analyse how to establish a living factor of this principle of the emotional and intellectual life of mankind. He identifies the principle of Tauhid (oneness) as the practical means of achieving this. Tauhid demands loyalty to Allah above all else. And because Allah is Himself the spiritual basis of all life, loyalty to Him amounts to Man‘s loyalty to his own ideal, actualised nature. 9 The teachings of Sultan Bahoo reveal the demands of Tauhid. It is a negation of everything but Allah whether in an understanding of existence, purpose, aim or desire. Throughout his writings he repeatedly makes reference to the phrase: ا یوؼ به ػث ا غوھ On a plane of concept and belief this is an expression of the idea of wahdat ul wajood, the unity of existence but in reference to Tauhid as a matter of practice, it establishes the concept of Wahdat ul Maqsood, or the unity of purpose. Sultan Bahoo explains that Humans fulfil their purpose only when their aim or desire, talab تلطis of Allah. He regards all strife and pursuit of the pleasures of this world and the next, besides the desire to find Allah, to be vain. It must be established here that this is not a call to asceticism. He clarifies in his book Ainu ul Faqr that the Human self is like a boat floating on the waters of the world. That is how it is to travel, but to never allow the water to enter the boat itself. This is the achievement in practice of Tauhid as Iqbal sees it for the foundation of ‗world unity‘ 10 . Iqbal also states that the expression of the spiritual basis of life reveals itself in variety and change. The mobility of these ultimate principles is achieved through Ijtihad an important source of Islamic law. 11 Before considering what this Ijtihad consists of, it is important to see why Iqbal believes that the Muslim world has suffered ‗the Immobility of Islam in the past 500 years‘ 12 . His first identification is the conflict that arose with a misunderstanding of Rationalism after the theological schisms of the Abbasid era. This led to the opposition to Rationalism to preserve the social integrity of Islam through making the structure of the legal system of the Sharia as rigorous as possible. 13 Iqbal sympathises that this misunderstanding caused the need at the time for doing so but does not present an alternate recourse to how this balance with Rationalism ought to be achieved. Let us turn to the teachings of Sultan Bahoo to find an answer to this first problem. He explains that human existence comprises of three forces. The first is lust (Havas) غوھ, the second reason (Aqal)لوػand the third Intellect (shaoor) ضوؼـ. This is what separates humans from animals who only possess the first two faculties and the Angels (Malaika) who possess the later two. Human ration in this way consists of two elements, reason and intellect. Reason is the consequence of the cognitive process of the human mind while Intellect has its source in the spirit and is inspired by its source, i.e. the Divine Self. Human rationality will only ever be perfect if it achieves this necessary combination of reason and intellect, a thought process motivated and guided by the spiritual truths of the Human Self. This will only be achieved when the Heart is spiritualised and the Human Self is in its state of Divine connection. We will come back to this later. Thus Human rationality in its actualised form can never produce a result in opposition to divine law, not merely in its letter but in its true spirit. An unrestrained reason which lacks spiritual intellect will thus continue to be restrained by the exigencies of a mechanised system of religious law. 14 The second cause of the immobility of Islam, as identified by Iqbal was ‗the rise and growth of ascetic Sufism‘ 15 . While Iqbal credits Sufism‘s religious side with revolting against the verbal quibbles of earlier Doctors and its speculative side with being a form of free thought in alliance with rationalism, he criticises the emphasis laid by it on the distinction of Zahir (exoteric)and Batin (esoteric i.e. between Appearance and Reality. This he says ‗created an indifference to all that applies to Appearance and not to Reality‘. This consequentially had two effects. Firstly, that it obscured men‘s vision of social polity and secondly by offering the prospect of unrestrained thought on its speculative side, it absorbed the best minds of Islam. ‗The Muslim State was thus left in the hands of the intellectual mediocrities, and the unthinking masses of Islam.‘ 16 Iqbal here does not negate the distinction between Zahir and Batin but he is merely noting the effect of the negation of one for another. Looked at from another perspective, the Doctors of Law would be equally blamed for negating the Batin for the Zahir alone. While Sultan Bahoo maintains this distinction between the Zahir and Batin, he puts great emphasis on the need to create a balance between the two. According to his world view, perfection can only be achieved through a synthesis of the two, a tilt towards excessive inwardness would lead to asceticism and an excess of the outward aspects of religion would lead to its mechanisation and a distortion of its purpose, making it materialistic. He states: “The world of Zahir (Appearance) is a reflection of the Batin (Reality)... between them the standard for the recognition of truth is the knowledge of the word of Allah, the Quran... The Reality of some is based on falsehood (zindeeq) and their Appearance on Truth (Haq). The Reality of some is based on the Truth but their Appearance on falsehood. For some, the Reality and Appearance are all falsehoods. And for some, the Reality and Appearance are all based on the Truth.” 17 He further states in his Persian poetry: “He who meditates with his eyes shut is blind. And he who looks around is as an animal. The Human is he who sees clearly with the power of sight and such clarity is only possible with the knowledge of tariqat and marifat (path of spiritual enlightenment and recognition).” 18 He further states for his followers: “The Qadiri seeker-follower whose Reality and Appearance becomes one and who achieves the Truth of both does not ask of anyone.” At another point he goes on to explain in great detail many great spiritual stations, all of which are marked by the unification and harmony between the Appearance and Reality. He devotes an entire chapter to this in his work Noor ul Huda. If we add another oft-cited criticism to that identified by Iqbal, it would be the rejection of the laws of Shariah by the aforementioned Sufis. Sultan Bahoo, throughout his works, condemns this attitude in the strongest terms and guides his followers by stating: نحكبی ثؼیطـ ظا تجاطه طھ نحذبؼ ثؼیطـ زوذ ےءاوفیپ I achieved all stations through Shariah when I made Shariah my guide. He further states that “all paths which do not abide by the Shariah are based on falsehood (zindeeq).” 19 The third cause of stagnation that Iqbal identifies is false reverence of the past in a decaying society, manifested by over organisation. He suggests that ‗the only effective power that... counteracts the forces of decay in a people is a rearing of self-concentrated individuals.‘ For, as he believes, ‗such individuals alone reveal the depth of life.‘ 20 He does not explain how one becomes a self-concentrated individual. However, if we turn to the teachings of Sultan Bahoo, his 140 works of prose in Persian and his poetic collections in Landhi (mixture of Punjabi and Saraiki) are all exegeses of the fulfilment of the Human Self through the attainment of perfection in the Self of God. In Iqbal‘s own poetic work, the equivalent of this comes in the form of his theory of Khudi. The concept of Khudi and Sultan Bahoo‘s notions of the stages of the Human Nafs (Self) in its journey towards Allah in eternal Perfection is almost identical. However, this is not the same Nafs as found in works of other Sufis. For Sultan Bahoo, the Nafs is not something that is to be fought and restrained but to be transformed and developed. This again is through the spiritualisation of the Heart and Soul, another common concept for Iqbal and Sultan Bahoo that we will return to. The concept of social reformation through the perfection of the individual as the foundational block of society is another common element in the philosophy of Iqbal and the teachings of Sultan Bahoo. 21 After having presented his analysis of the ‗immobility of Islam‘ in the past, Iqbal establishes his idea of the Islamic State. While thinking of this it is important to keep in mind the basis we have considered above for the individual at the centre of any collection. Iqbal does not believe in the European concept of the separation of Church and State because he believes that it serves the needs to separate the spiritual from the temporal. He does not question the validity of Secularism and even admits that Islam as a socio-political system even allows such a view. 22 His view of an Islamic society dictates that actions are not dictated from a system of rules above but arise from within the structure of human unification we have discussed above. He states, ‗In Islam the spiritual and the temporal are not two distinct domains, and the nature of an act, however secular in its import, is determined by the attitude of mind with which the agent does it... An act is temporal or profane when it is done in a spirit of detachment from the infinite complexity of life behind it; it is spiritual if it is inspired by that complexity. In Islam it is the same reality which appears as the Church looked at it from one point of view and the State from another.‘ 23 Employing the ideals as propounded in the teachings of Sultan Bahoo with regards to the practical manifestation of Tauhid in the unity of purpose and the balance between Reality and Appearance, Iqbal describes the resultant state: ‗The essence of Tauhid as a working idea is equality, solidarity and freedom. 24 The State, from an Islamic standpoint, is an endeavour to transform these ideal principles into space-time forces, an aspiration to realise them in a definite human organisation.‘ 25 He continues to explain that “It is in this sense alone that the State in Islam is a theocracy, not in the sense that it is headed by a representative of God on earth who can always screen his despotic will behind his supposed infallibility... The ultimate Reality according to the Quran, is spiritual, and its life consists in its temporal activity. The spirit finds its opportunities in the natural, the material, the secular. All that is secular is, therefore, sacred in the roots of its being... The merely material has no substance until we discover it rooted in the spiritual. There is no such thing as a profane world. All this immensity of matter constitutes a scope for the self-realisation of spirit. All is holy ground. As the Prophet (PBUH) so beautifully puts it: „The whole world is a mosque‟. The state according to Islam is only an effort to realise the spiritual in a human organisation.” After making a very strong case for Ijtihad, Iqbal agrees with the Turkish Ijtihad of the Caliphate or Imamate being vested in an elected assembly of persons and declares that ‗the Republican form of government is... thoroughly consistent with the spirit of Islam.‖ He associates the concept of Ijma with such a body as well. A logical question follows which Iqbal himself realises: what if such a body consists of those untrained with the matters of the Muhammadan Law and make grave mistake in their interpretation of law? He considers one option, followed at the time in Iran, and currently in our country Pakistan, of a council of religious scholars but rejects it as a ‗dangerous arrangement‘ which ‗may be tried only as a temporary measure‘. 26 The only definitive answer he finds to this problem is in the form of education. We will further consider the nature of this education. Iqbal asks another two questions, namely, what is the purpose of religion and secondly, of the Quran? The first, he answers by quoting the Turkish nationalist poet Ziya, ‗religion is positive science, the purpose of which is to spiritualise the Heart of man.‘ 27 For the second he says, ‗The Quran... is not a legal code. Its main purpose is to awaken in man the higher consciousness of his relation to God and the universe.‘ 28 Sultan Bahoo‘s teachings guide in just that, the spiritualisation of the Human Heart through the remembrance of Allah through his Ism-e-Zaat (the Name of the Divine Self) and the perfection of the human self in Divine reflection. He reiterates the explanation of the Quranic Verse by the Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani that the sole purpose of Man is the recognition of Allah in this world: ىوسجؼیل لا ػًلاو يجلا ثولذ بهو Sultan Bahoo provides the seekers of Truth with the requisite instruments for the said spiritualisation. As he quotes a Hadith: ا طکش ةولولا ةلوصهو ةلبوص ءیـ لکل Everything has a polisher and the polisher for the Heart is the Remembrance of Allah He explain what this Heart is: “The Heart not what you have think to be the heart, for that is a piece of meat which consists of blood and muscles... the Heart is the Existence of Light for Love, Gnosis, and a testament of the Ascent (Miraj). The person with an awakened Heart stays immersed in watching the Holy Messenger (PBUH)... Whosoever studies the knowledge of the Heart stays enchanted till the Day of Judgement.” 29 He states in his Persian poetry, “The Heart is the Duldul and Burraq that takes on the Ascent. He who achieves the Heart becomes a person of Sight.” 30 And further that, “The Heart is a vast country. Every country is encompassed in the Heart but the Heart is so great that it cannot be encompassed within any country.” In his Landhi poetry he says: وھ ےًبج ںبیز ںلز ىوک ےگًوڈ ںوضسٌوؼ بیضز لز The River of the Heart is deeper than the oceans, who knows of the Hearts, Hoo He says in another work, “Allah‟s sight is on... the Perfect Human‟s Heart... whose Hearts are immersed in the visualisation of Allah‟s Self.” 31 In relation to such Hearts he quotes a Hadith: نظػلا ا ؾطػ تلولا The Heart is the Great Throne of Allah 32 In the same text, he writes a Persian verse which goes: ثؼا لكبؿ اسذ ضاطؼا ظا ہک لز ثؼا لگ ثفه ہک ثلگ ںاوحً لز The Heart that is unaware of the secrets of God Is but a fist of dust and cannot be called a Heart 33 Sultan Bahoo‘s teachings place a central function on the role of the Spiritual Guide, the Murshid. This fulfils the educational process envisaged by Iqbal for a social setup based on such individuals with spiritual realisation. He quotes a tradition as saying: “The sheikh is he who gives life to the Heart and Soul and the law of Shariah and gives death to the lower desires and lusts of the self.” He sets a very high burden for what a Perfect Spiritual Guide is and who can guide the seeker to Allah. At the same time he warns those who claim to guide others but are themselves not perfect. This is in light of the Hadith: ہل دیـ ل يول يیز ل There is no faith for him who doesn‟t have a Guide This hadith implies of course that one cannot find the true purpose of faith without a Guide, which as per Sultan Bahoo and Iqbal is the spiritualisation of society based on spiritualised individuals. For those who are seekers he declares (as is engraved above the door to his shrine): مطضبح يه زوث نح تلبط ہک طھ مطث مز کی بھحًا بج ءاسحثا ظ بیث تلبط بیث تلبط بیث تلبط لوا ظوض نًبؼض بج اسذبث Every seeker of the Truth come for here I am I will take you from the beginning to the end in one wink of eye Come O Seeker, Come O Seeker, Come O Seeker I will take you to God on the very first day The teachings of Sultan Bahoo and the teachings of the Quran that they are reflective of must be viewed in totality. It is when they come together in their entirety that they lay down the necessary elements of the system that Iqbal envisages. As he states, these are factors working towards the same end. 34 Iqbal does not wish to further the divisions between humanity and his system is only a first step in the direction of universal humanism. “... a multiplicity of free independent units whose racial rivalries are adjusted and harmonised by the unifying bond of a common spiritual aspiration. It seems to me that God is slowly bringing home to us the truth that Islam is neither nationalism nor imperialism but a league of nations which recognises artificial boundaries and racial distinctions for facility or reference only, and not for restricting the social horizons of its members.” 35 And to that end, “Humanity needs three things today – a spiritual interpretation of the universe, spiritual emancipation of the individual, and basic principles of a universal import directing the evolution of human society on a spiritual basis... truth revealed through pure reason is incapable of bringing that fire of living conviction which personal revelation alone can bring.” 36 “The idealism of Europe never became a living factor in her life, and the result is a perverted ego seeking itself through mutually intolerant democracies whose sole function is to exploit the poor in the interest of the rich.” 37 “Let the Muslim of today appreciate his position, reconstruct his social life in the light of ultimate principles, and evolve out of the hitherto partially revealed purpose of Islam, that spiritual democracy which is the ultimate aim of Islam.” 1 Allama Muhammad Iqbal, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2004), p. 129. 2, 3, 10, 11, 16, 18, 32, 37 Ibid. 4 Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, #246. 5 Hazrat Sultan Bahu, Noor ul Huda (Lahore: Al-Arifeen Publications, 2009), p.522. 6 Quran, 17:70. 7 Quran, 7:172. 8 For a detailed explanation of this see: Hazrat Sultan Bahu, Mehak ul Faqr (Lahore: Al-Arifeen Publications, 2007), p.190. 9 Iqbal, p. 130. 12 Subject to incidental exception, of course. 13 Ibid., p.132. 14 A detailed discussion of Reason and Intellect can be found in: Martin Lings, Ancient Beliefs and Modern Superstitions (London: Archetype Publications, 2004). 15 Iqbal, p. 132. 17 Hazrat Sultan Bahu, Noor ul Huda, p.510. 19 Hazrat Sultan Bahu, Ain ul Faqr (Lahore: Al-Arifeen Publications, 1993). 20 Iqbal, p. 133. 21 There is a very interesting analysis of social revolution on the basis of the spiritualisation of the Heart by Sahabzada Sultan Ahmad Ali at 22 Iqbal, p. 135. 23 Ibid, p. 135-136. 24 An obvious reference to Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. 25 Iqbal, p. 136. 26 Ibid, p. 153. 27 Ibid, p. 141. 28 Ibid, p. 145. 29 Hazrat Sultan Bahu, Aql e Bedar (Lahore: Al-Arifeen Publications, 2008), p. 194-195. 30 Ibid, p. 195. 31 Hazrat Sultan Bahu, Mehak ul Faqr, p. 253. 33 Ibid, p. 255. 34 Iqbal, p. 149. 35 Ibid, p. 140. 36 Ibid, p. 156. (http://www.alfaqr.net/en/spiritual-democracy-espoused-in-philosophy-of-allama-iqbal) IQBAL ON DEMOCRACY Dr. Sultan Khan DEFINITION: Democracy is a word that comes from two Greek roots. Demos, the populace and the Kratia the Rule, taken together, rule by the people, hence democracy in this sense means government by the mass of the people as distinguished from those with special rank or status. The Greeks used the term to describe the government of Athens, and other Greek city states, that flourished in the fifth century B.C.[1] Democracy is the government by the people. All the competent adults participate in all decisions of government. Elections are insituted in which the people vote on questions of policy and for persons to represent them on an Assembly (legislature) that determines policy on day to day issues. In the case of Parliamentary democracy, this Assembly in turn appoints a cabinet and a leader (P.M.) to carry out the policies determined. In the case of congressional democracy, the leader is elected separately and then appoints the executive committee with the advice and consent of the legislative committee.[2] Beginning with the reborn of democracy in late 18 th century, its debates boiled down in to three basic schools of thought i.e. ideological, classical and empirical or pragmatic. The ideological school, which usually overlaps with liberalism in its ideological sense, emphasized on the questions of justice, equality, liberty and whether or not the mass of the people actually participated in the decisions of the government. The classical school did deny the contention of ideological school, but contended that the ideals would tend to be natural outcome or result of certain institutions and procedure. They believe that democracy provides mechanism through which the decisions were made by the poeple and ideological characteristics would then follow naturally.[3] The empirical school defined democracy in pragmatic terms as a form of government, in which individuals acquire power to decide on policy issues by means of periodic competitive struggle for the people vote.[4] Both etymology and history suggest that primary meaning of „democracy‟ relates to a form of government. According to the classical tradition it is government by the many, as contrasted with government by one or few.[5] Heroditus, a renowned political philosopher, defined democracy as “the rule of many as also as a society in which equality before law” prevails and where the holder of Political Office is answerable to what he does.[6] Lord Bryce accepts the definition of Heroditus and says that “democracy devotes that the form of government in which the ruling power of the state is largely vested in the member of community as a whole”. He adds, this means in communities, which act by voting, that rule belongs to the majority, as no other method has been found for determining peaceably and legally, what is to be declared the will of the community, which is not unanimous?[7] The Oxford Dictionary defines democracy as a government in which the sovereign power resides in the people as a whole and is exercised either directly by them---or by officers elected by them. In modern use often more vaguely denoting a social state in which all have equal rights without hereditary or arbitrary differences of rank of privilege.[8] Democracy signifies “a government in which majority of whole nation or community partake of the sovereign power.” It is also used to signify “a government, in which either a majority or a large portion of the people have by means of the right of election, an influence on the appointment of the members of the supreme power”.[9] Democracy, today is, a political system, which supplies regular constitutional opportunities for changing the government officials a social mechanism, which permit: the largest possible part of the population to influence major: decisions by choosing among contenders for political office.[10] Bettelheim has also defined democracy as Characteristic of democratic ideology is its affirmation of the social importance of the principle of liberty and equality, the participation of whole population (or a large part of it) ii important social decisions, free access of all members o society to seat at public offices and the availability to al members of society (or fairly large portion of them) of the means necessary to their full physical and intellectual developments.‟‟[11] The mere consent of the people is not sufficient ti make a government democratic. The people ought to be their own “watch dogs”. The consent of the people must be real, active and effective in order to make it a genuine democracy. Eternal vigilance is the very life of democracy, if democracy can really claim in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, “to be “a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Government is of course always o the people, but it needs to be government by the people where the will of the people remain supreme in all questions of social direction and policy of government. Corry and Abraham have explained democracy in these words: “From the view point of popular understanding the word “democracy” provides a fascinating paradox. Few terms so ideally and favorably used by the people of free world and at the same time mean so many different thing to them. Lip-service to the democracy is almost universal even when, it is being misunderstood and often betrayed in practice.[12] Prof. Laski, an eminent political thinker, has also gave his views about democracy, No definition of democracy can adequately compromise the vast history, which the concept connotes. To some, it is a form of a government, to other, it is a way of social life. Men have found its essence in the character of electorate the relation between the government and people, the absence of wide economic differences between citizens the refusal to recognise privilages built on birth or wealth, race or creed. Inevitably, it has changed its substance in terms of time and place.[13] In short, the essence of democracy can be summerised by paying that a democratic state is based on the will of the people, which operates through an electoral machinery, run by the continuous interaction and free play of informed and enlightened public opinion. It is an effort to reconcile freedom with the requirements of law and its enforcement or a political method by which citizens are provided with an opportunity to participate through debate and discussion in an attempt to arrive at certain agreements, by which the common good of the community can be ensured.[14] Keeping in view, the above definitions and explanations of democracy many questions arise in a mind, and many clarifications are needed for the criteria of democracy. Whether elections are tree and held frequently and periodically and electors and electorates are freely allowed to participate? Whether such elections provides an effective choice and majority vote against the government, leads to a change? Whether elected bodies have the rights of legislation, taxation and budgeting effectively? If the answer of all these questions is “yes” then we can say that the democracy is operating properly. Lastly, it can also be said that the democracy is based on a belief in the value of individual human being and a further criterion is, therefore, the extent to which certain basic rights are guaranteed to every citizen. These are, the security against arbitrary arrest and imprisonment; freedom of speech, of press and of assembly, freedom of petition and of association; freedom of movement; freedom of religion and of teaching. As a corollary, democracy is held to require the establishment of an independent judiciary, and courts of an independent judiciary, to which every one have access.[15] The spirit of democracy had become a sort of faith for Europeans during the 19th century, but with the turn of 20th century, a scepticism arose in respect of suitability of democracy, and as to whether it could meet the challenge of modern times. Epithets like “cult of incompetence” and “internal infant” became common to scholarly and political debate of the day. It was severely criticized for its show and cumbersome procedures and its inability to meet emergencies.[16] Iqbal also entered in the debate and showed his disliking against the democracy, as his outlook was based on Quranic teachings; which are against the western democracy and its basic principles. DEMOCRACY V/S ISLAM The Western democracy is based on the belief in value of individuals and their participation in the working of governmental machinery. It guarantees certain basic rights to the individuals; the freedom of speech, opinion, assembly, association, movement, religion and security against arbitrary arrest and imprisonment. Historically speaking all the democratic ideals were derived from the principles of Islam and first Islamic state of Madina. The first Islamic state was founded by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and cemented by his four right-guided successors. Many democratic ideals and institutions were established in the Islamic state. The election of head of state, the shura, the provision of equal justice to all citizens, and the promotion of individual and public welfare, were the examples of democratic ideals in the first Islamic state. The Prophet of Islam died without providing for an immediate succession to the office of his vicegerent. The election of Abu Bakr, as Caliph, has obviously introduced for the first time in the world history the “popular factor”, in the selection of chief executive of the state.[17] Later on the „principle of election‟ was followed by the other Right guided caliphs. To describe the election the Islamic Holy constitution uses the word Shura, or the right of Muslims to participate in the choice of their leader. The primary purposes of the first Islamic state were the ensurance of freedom from outside invasion, the provision of justice equality, liberty, and personal as well as material security for its people. These goals were the subject matter of the „Declaration of Madina”[18] the first written constitution of first Islamic state attained the highest degree or order consistent with the liberty and equality of individuals and groups, in Islamic society. The major aim of the Islamic state was to fuse all existing divergences into one homogenous nation, and the promotion of individual interest and the public welfare. The same version was declared in the Holy Quran for many times. The first Islamic state also proposed a comprehensive law for the guidance of the human beings.[19] This law, actually and dominantly, has been controlling and guiding the civilized life on the earth,[20] since its birth. This rule of Law, is known in the western world, as supremacy of Law. The Islamic state also granted many other rights along with the freedom of speech to its subjects. A Bedouin, in Friday-congregation, stands and asks the second caliph for the clothings, he wore. The caliph politely satisfied him, by addressing his son, to give the answer. The modern world does not experience such a freedom and liberty. Here, I like to revise my stand that all the democratic ideals were derived, from the principles of Islam and the first Islamic state, headed by the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The following lines are reserved for the comparative study of the ideals of Islam and the basic principles of democracy. Again coming towards democracy, there is no consensus on the exact meaning of democracy, as a political system, and no one can adopt a single definition for reference,[21] but the term stands for the some principles; a recognition of value of individual irrespective of race, creed and quality; acceptance of law, which regulates all social and political relationships the equality of all citizens, regardless of their racial, ethnic and class distinction; justifiability of state decisions on the bases of popular consent of people and a high degree of tolerance.[22] Islam contains many basic principles; which are prerequisites for democracy. To start with the Quranic verse which declares: “And seek, in what ever God has bestowed upon you, the next world, but do not forget you participation and share in this world, and be nice as God has been kind to you, and never seek doing corruption in the earth verily God does not love corruptors”.[23] The Holy Quran again declare as under:- “God commands you to render back trusts to those who deserve them. And when you judge or rule the people, you should judge or rule with justice. Verily how excellent is the teaching, which has given to you, for God is He, Who hears and sees all things. O! you, who believe, obey God and obey the Prophet (PBUH) and those charged with authority among you, if you differ in any thing (if any dispute arises among you on any matter) refer it to God and His Prophet. If you believe in God and the Last Day, that is the best and the most suitable for final reckoning.”[24] In the above mentioned verses of the Holy Quran, the basic principles of an Islamic state are laid down, to be followed by the Believers. All these principles are compatible with principles of western democracy. The concept of equality in Islam is comparable with the concept of modern democracy. The Islamic equality means all individuals (Insan) are equal irrespective of believe, race, creed, nationality and political standing. The only valid ground, on which an individual may be superior to another is his fear of God or piety (Taqwa). It is true that in Islam all men are equal as member of ummah, bound together in community by ties, not of kinship or race but of religious acknowledgement of one God and apostolic mission of His Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). There is, of course, differentiation of functions of individual in society but before God all are equal without reference to rank class or race. The only nobility in Islam is that of pious and Godly (Quran).[25] The Islamic state would grant equal freedom of conscience to all citizens and respect their mode of life, if they do not violate the fundamentals of social justice.[26] This shows that the concept of equality in Islam is more comprehensive than in western democracy. Likewise, if by democracy is meant a system of government which is opposite to dictatorship. Islam can be compatible with democracy, because there is no room in Islam, for tyranny or arbitrary rule by one man or a group of men. Islam does not recognise monarchical government and it strucks at the root of feudalism by prohibition of primogeniture, which creates and preserves feudal estates.[27] The Islamic state follows a body of regulations i.e. Sharia, drawn from Quran and tradition Sunnah. Thus the function of Islamic state is reduced to a mere sub-servience to, and a smooth enforcement of, The Divine orders. A state in this sense is transformed into a political organisation that represents the will of God Almighty alone and of no other worldly authority irrespective of its influence of any nature.[28] In this regard, Islam satisfies another prerequisite of democracy, which is rule of law,[29] as any kind “of prerogative to the ruler is denied and both ruler and ruled are required to obey the laws of “Sharia”. Islam can pass yet another moral test of democracy, when it is said that all the decisions in Islamic state is made with wishes of the ruled.[30] This requirement is met by the principle of “Shura” (consultation) and “Ijma” (consensus); which are drawn from both “Quran” and “Sunnah”. In enumerating the qualities of a good Muslim the Holy Quran mentions consultation on the same footing as compliance with God‟s order; saying the prayer and payment of alms-tax. The Holy Prophet (PBUH) and his four pious caliphs also made consultation, on the important issues, with the mass of the people. If the democracy means the election of head of state or head of executive for a fixed term, whereafter a new election is to be organized.[31] The Islamic state organises the same and gives the individuals the chance to participate in the choice of their leadership. Similarly, it gives majority, the right to remove the head from the post as the contract of appointment is revocable. None of the four Right-guided caliphs came to power through intimidation or coercion, but they assumed the office through the free choice of the majority of ummah.[32] There is a wide scope of legislation in the western democracy, while in Islam, essentials of legislation shall be derived from the basic principles of Quran and the practice followed by the Holy Prophet (PBUH): Otherwise almost the entire field of legislation shall be left unhampered, to be moulded as circumstances demand by men of knowledge, who know and can evaluate the actualities of a situation.[33] This mode of legislation is popularly known as Ijtihad (systematic reasoning) and Ijma (consensus), but the revelation and the Holy Prophet‟s traditions always play the decisive role.[34] The Muslims are entitled to make laws which are of public interest, keeping in view the fact that such laws do not conflict with basic laws of Sharia.[35] Islam, again can complete the western democracy, in this aspect. On the other hand, Islamic democracy remains different from western democracy in some important aspects. In Islam Sovereignty really and ultimately vests in God, where as representatively and manipulatively vests in His Holy Prophet (PBUH),[36] and rules of Sharia act as eternal moral forces to keep the Believers on the right path; while in democracy, sovereignty rests with the masses and they play the absolute role in the political affairs of the country. Islamic state is an ideological state. It is the creation of an ideal and is sustained by a steady and sincere adherence to the dictates of the ideals.[37] The Islamic state has to play two-fold role. It creates relation of man to God, and relation of man to men or humanity. While the western democratic state has no such ideals, having no goal of the welfare of whole human- beings. In western democracy elections are held on the basis of adult franchise irrespective of all conditions and pre requisites. Therefore, it is possible that undesirable and incompetent people are elected to various public offices, who are unable to run the affairs to the state. Islam imposed certain restrictions on suitability of the persons who are candidates for different offices of the state. Islam also prevents any individual from nominating himself for the state office or asking to be nominated in any official position.[38] Islam has not barred any citizen for casting vote on the basis of literacy or illiteracy or sex. This has been explained in the sunnah verse: Abu Musa one of the Prophet‟s companions said, “I entered the Prophet‟s house with men of my clan; both of them asked the Prophet, saying: 0, Messenger of God, would you please appoint us in one of the public offices, which God has put in your hands? The Prophet (PUBH) said, “We, by God‟s name, do not appoint to the public offices (in our state) those who ask for them, nor any one, who is covetous for such a thing.”[39] There is clear distinction between the Islamic system of Shura and the defective and imbalanced system of western democracy. Islam has imposed four conditions for the candidature of Shura. He should possess a firm and profound belief in tenents of Islam. He should possess integrity of character. He should have reasonable knowledge and necessary understanding of the job and responsibility, which is being entrusted to him. He should have not only a good intellectual personality but an impressive physical personality.[40] The rules of western democracy are insensitive to these aesthetic considerations. The member of Islamic Majlis-e-Shura always speaks and acts on behalf of entire Muslim Nation. He plays dual role performing the dual responsibility. His dual responsibility makes representation more difficult than in western democracy. He has the responsibility to his electorate to present and to look after their interests in accordance to the Holy Islamic constitution. His second burden is as a representative of a government office, which acts for the Islamic nation as a whole Simply, he is responsible to his electorates as well as to the “Divine Law”[41] or the will of Allah Almightly, While in western democracy, the member of Assembly or Congress or Parliament has single responsibility, which is to electorates only. IQBAL ON DIFFERENT BASIC PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY i) Sovereignty of People: Iqbal criticizes western principles of democracy in the strongest possible terms. In his opinion, the west, by evolving perverted democratic principles has unchained a monster, therefore a barren land is better than the garden of west. Iqbal has opposed the western democracy as it is a methodology rather than an ideology or philosophy.[42] The methodology should be treated as methodology and not as ideology. Iqbal believes, as it is not qualitative and the decisions made on the basis of quantity are not correct. Iqbal criticises the aspect of “sovereignty of people” of the western democracy; which rests with the masses, who have no capacity and capability of the same. In one of his poems, under the caption Jumhurriat in Payam-i-Mushriq. Iqbal says that you seek the treasures of our alien philosophy from the common, poor of mind and low grade people, as the crawling ants on the ground, can not attain the heights of wisdom of Hazrat Sulayman (The Prophet of God). You should avoid democracy and become within the bond of perfect man (the Holy Prophet), as two hundred donkeys can not have combined the brain of a man. حه یئوج ںبجططك ںوز ظا ہًبگیث ئٌؼه عب سیآ یوً ےًبویلؼ غجط یذوـ ىاضوهظ وـ ےضبک ہحرپ ملؿ یضوہوج ظطط ظا عیطگ یوً ےًبؽًا طکك طذ سص وز عـه ظا ہک سیآ [43] Explaining the quantitative aspect of the western democracy, Iqbal adds, a European gentleman has disclosed this secret, that men of wisdom do not disclose what they have in their mind; and democracy is a kind of government, in which individuals are counted and not weighed. ؾضبك بیک ےً يگًطك زطه کا وک ظاض غا ےجطک ںیہً لوھک ےؼا بًاز ہک سٌچ طہ ںیه ػج ہک ےہ ثهوکح ظطط کا ثیضوہوج ےجطک ںیہً لوج ںیہ ےجطک بٌگ وک ںوسٌث [44] Iqbal believes that a common man has not wisdom, as well as his own opinion, but he is generally influenced by the opinion of capitalists and industrialists, through the propaganda tactics. Thus the other‟s opinion was imposed on a common man, as such he is exploited in democracy; likewise, he is exploited in dictatorship, monarchy, aristocracy and fascism. Therefore, in Iqbal‟s views, there is no difference between democracy and other forms of government. In Bang-i-Dara, he points out that western democratic institutions are old wines in new bottles, which contain no tunes other then the imperial one. It is the demon of despotism, dancing in the garb of democracy; and you think it is a fairy of freedom. مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه يہک ظبؼ یہو ےہ ےک ػج یطصیه ےئاوً ظا طیؿ ںیہً ںیه ںوزطپ ةوک ےئبپ ںیه بجه یضوہوج زاسجحؼا ویز !یطپ نلیً ےہ یک یزاظآ ہی ،ےہ بحھجوؼ وج [45] Iqbal adds that the common people hope that they will enjoy their rights and privileges in democracy; but they can not enjoy their rights in this system, as the so-called law-making assemblies, rights and duties are only narcotics, Debates in the parliaments and assemblies are nothing, but warfare of capitalists to make more money. You have taken this mirage of color and smell for a garden, I am so, sorry for you, as you have understood the cage, as your nest, due to your foolishness. مووح و تبیبػض و حلصا و يیئآ ػلجه طثا ،ےھٹیه ےعه ںیه ةطـه تط یضوآ ةاوذ !ںبهلا ػلبجه ےئبضػا ضبحلگ یهطگ یطگضظ گٌج ےہ یک ںوضاز ہیبهطؼ کا یھث ہی وج ےہ بھجوؼ ىبحؽلگ وک وث و گًض ةاطؼ غا وج ےہ بھجوؼ ںبیـآ وک ػله !ںازبً ےا ٍآ [46] Iqbal is not all alone in criticism of western democracy, but many European political philosophers i.e. Laski, Spengler, Steandal, and Nietzsche, also joined his hands. - These philosophers were against the western democracy due to the persecution and harassment of the common man, by the capitalists. ii) Secularism: Secularism is another basic characteristic of the western democracy; due to which Iqbal hates the democracy. The secularism means the separation of religion from politics. In other words, the religion has no public status, but has been reduced to a private affair. According to Iqbal, the politics, in which religion is made a separate and private entity, is a defective one, and it is shame for humanity. The nations, which believe in secularism can not exist longer. Iqbal firmly persuaded that in the name of secular democracy, thousand of atrocities have been committed in the world. In the hands of infidels, this method perpetuates infidelity and has failed to mitigate the miseries and black spots of the world.[47] In this regard, Iqbal reports the “Satan” as saying: “There is no need of my presence in the world as there are enough devils in the shape of politicians in western democracy”. ثؼبیؼ ةبثضا ںیہ ػیلثا ےک ضوہوج ہج تضوطض یطیه ةا ںیہً یهبث کلكا [48] Iqbal again, condemns the western democracy, which is divorced from religion. According to him, the secular politics and democracy is pestered with many ills, and it evolved itself as unchained monster, as the state has been separated from church. ںیز ل ثؼبیؼ ہی ےہ ںیه ٍبگً یطه طیوض ٍزطه و زبہً ںوز و يهطہا عیٌک زاظآ یوکبح ےؼ بؽیلک کطج ےہ یئوہ طیجًظ ےث ویز ےہ ثؼبیؼ یک ںویگًطك [49] Iqbal further says that the western democracy is not only irreligious and faithless, but it is wrought by the capitalists for their own sinister designs. God has created one devil, while Europe has created numberless devils in the shape of democrates. گًطكا ثؼبیؼ ةض بی ےہ قیطح یطج !ػیئض و طیها ظوك یضبجپ ےک غا ںیہ طگه ےً وج ےؼ گآ ػیلثا یہ کیا بیبٌث ضاعہ سص ےً غا ےؼ کبذ ےئبٌث ػیلثا [50] Activities, which destroyed the social life of the human-beings. According to Iqbal, the unemployment, immorality, alcoholism and poverty are the great victories of the western civilization. غلكا و یضاوذ ےئه و یًبیطػ و یضبکیث تبحوحك یک ثّیًسه یگًطك ںیہ نک بیک [51] Iqbal has severely criticized the western democracy as it is based on the liberalism. The complete liberty of thoughts, led the thoughtless populace, to the destruction. If thinking is misguided, the freedom of thought can easily transformed a human being into a beast. یہبجج یک ىا ےہ ےؼ ضبکكا ئزاظآ طکك وج ںیہً ےحھکض ہویلؼ بک طّثسج و ضبکكا ئزاظآ وج مبذ طگا طکك وہ !ہویطط بک ےًبٌث ىاویح وک ىبؽًا [52] In Bal-i-Jibrael, Iqbal explains the concept, in detail and says; If individuals of a nation, have unlimited liberty and freedom of thought that can prove dangerous for the nation. He adds that man‟s God-given liberty of thought has illuminated the world, but the unrestricted freedom of thought is an annovation of the Devil. کبًططذ ہفیسًا ئذوـ ےہ ںیه موه غا زاظآ ےؼ سٌث طہ ںوہ زاطكا ےک موه ػج ہًبهظ ےہ يـوض ےؼ زاز اسذ طکك وگ زبجیا یک ػیلثا ےہ ضبکكا ئزاظآ [53] Iqbal has faith that the western democracy and civilization can not save the Islamic world. It neither can solve their problems nor can give them a new start in life. How the western civilization can save the others? When it has been died in itself. According to Iqbal these facts should be revealed to those, who have shut their eyes in following the western civilization. وک ىا نئبوح ٍزطپ ےث ںیہً ےجآ طظً ضوک ےؼ سیلوج و یهوکحه یئوہ یک يج ھکًآ طکًویک وک ةطػ و ىاطیا ےہ یحکؼ طک ٍسًظ !ضوگ تل ےہ وج ہک ثّیًسه یگًطك ہی [54] Moreover, it was the fear of the adverse effects of western liberalism, which compelled Iqbal to give a warning to the Muslims. he has the belief that indiscriminate importance of liberal ideas could be ruinous to the stability of the Muslim faith. It could sow seeds of discord and hate and thus deprive the community of its basic unity, which is so vital to the Islamic ideology.[55] He explained this point of view in one of his lecture in the following words. We heartily welcome the liberal movement in Modern Islam; but it must also admitted that the appearance of liberal ideas in Islam constitutes also the most critical moment in the history of Islam. Liberalism has tendency to act as a free of disintegration Further our religious and political reforms in their zeal for liberalism may over step the proper limit of reform in the absence of a check on their youthful fervour.[56] Iqbal has the faith that western democracy and „Satan‟ are closely related with each others, having the same designs. He explains the western democracy in the words of „Satan‟. We have camouflaged the kingship, as democracy, and the man became aware of this fact. Therefore, the western democracy is as hateful as the old kingship. غبجل یضووہج ےہ بیبٌہپ وک یہبـ زوذ ےً نہ زوذ و غبٌـ زوذ ،ےہ اوہ مزآ اضش تج طگً [57] Iqbal advises the Muslims to avoid the western democracy, as it is religiouless and faithless, He adds that the religion is the thing; which provides the atmosphere of love, with each other, sacrifices for others and welfare for poors and have notes; therefore you should follow religion, instead of secular western democracy. This is the right path, which is the path of modernization and development. Therefore, Iqbal invites all the Muslims of the world to adopt this right path, leaving the western politics, as your country and wealth are depending upon it. As he says in the following couplet. iii) Liberalism: The sovereignty of people and the divorce of religion from politics resulted in the too much liberalism, which is the basic principle of western democracy. This individual liberty led in many unethical and inhuman acts. The young generation involves itself in the sexual and such other iv) Capitalism Capitalism is another characteristic of western democracy, which means that all sources of income of state, are in the hands of individuals. Individuals are independent in earning money and having unlimite property, using what so ever means, they like. In simple words, capitalism is a decentralization of wealth an exploitation of it, by the capitalists. Iqbal has felt this situation, and has been deeply influenced by the miserablw condition of the poors and workers; which was stigma for humanity and the fact made him critical of the relationship of capital and labour, and capitalism and democracy. Iqbal wrote several poems on the subject, which manifest concern and anxiety of million of workers and labourers.[58] In hi poem Khizr-i-Rah, he presents the picture of the miserable conditions of the workers and labourers. He says that the. have been victimized by the deceitful capitalists for the last many centuries. Their hard earned wages are distributed among them by the capitalists, as if they are alms. The, capitalists have been victorious but to their deceitful tactics; while the workers have been ruined completely due to their simplicity. Iqbal advises the workers, to realise the situation of the world, which has been changed in their favour, a new era has been started both in East and West. از ہیبهطؼ بیگ بھک وک ھجج ہک ےا طگ ہلیح ض تاطث یطج کلج ںویسص یہض طپ وہآ خبـ یہض یحیز ںویزعه وک يیطكآ ثلوز ثؼز تبکظ وک ںوجیطؿ ںیہ ےحیز ےؽیج توطث لہا ضاز ہیبهطؼ بیگ ےل یظبث ےؼ ںولبچ یک طکه تبه ضوزعه بیگ بھک ےؼ یگزبؼ ےئبہحًا ےہ ظاسًا یہ ضوا بک ںبہج معث ةا ہک ھٹا بک ضوز ےطیج ںیه ةطـه و مطفه ظبؿآ ےہ[59] Another fact which pains Iqbal is that the industrialists are leading luxurious life at the cost of workers. He says, that the industrialists do not know the name of “labour and work”, but they are luxuriating because they are owner of the industries. He gives initiative to workers according to God‟s order “The man receives for what he struggles”. He adds that why capitalists enjoy at the cost of workers? ضبک ٍزطکبً کزطه کلبه ےہ بک ےًبذضبک ضبگظبؼبً ےہ ثٌحه ےہ لحپ بک ؿیػ یؼؼبه لا ىبؽًلل ػیل ےہ نح نکح ہیبهطؼ لھپ بک ثٌحه یک ضوزعه ںویک ےئبھک ضاز In Payam-i-Mushriq, Iqbal also conveyed this message to the working class and points out that the riches are garbed in the costly cloths; while the workers have to wear the tattered rages. The riches are becoming healthy by the blood of poors and their wealth is the product of the sweat of workers. ؿک ثٌحه و ؾوپ غبپ طک ۂسٌث زعهظ ،ضبک ٍزطک ہً ۂجاوذ تیصً طیطح ثذض اضبیلک یہثطك ول ظوچ يه ىوذ ظ طیگ ہوہ ثٌطلؼ ثؼز يه ےئوظبث ضزعث Iqbal, being a Muslim, could not approve the capitalism and the capital gained by the capitalists, because Islam is the greatest opponent of the social and economic evils, which stem from capitalism.[60] Therefore, he hates democracy; which is based on capitalism. Iqbal was aware of the backwardness and bankruptcy of the peasants also, as the workers were victims of industrialist and capitalist, like was the peasants were living a helpless life under the faudalism.[61] He believes that faudalism is equivalent to capitalism. Iqbal, in a poem entitled, Punjab Kai Dehkan Sai, has expressed his idea on the subject. He addresses the peasants and says that what is the secret of your life? that you have been leading a helpless life for centuries, and spark of life has been quenched in it; Now the dawn is near at hand, the time to rise. ظاض ،ےہ بک يگسًظ یطیج بیک بحث ظبث کبذ وج ےہ غطث ںوضاعہ گآ یطیج يئگ ةز ںیه کبذ یؼا وج ةا يئگوہ ىاشا یک طحؼ گبج [62] In another poem Iqbal forcefully directs poors to shake the domination of aristocratic masters, as if a peasant, who can not get his due share or earning from the field, he has the right to burn it down. Likewise, if masses have no share in government, they must destroy it. !وز بگج وک ںوجیطؿ ےک بیًز یطه وھٹا وز لہ ضاویز و وز ےک اطها خبک یظوض وہ ہً طؽیه وک ںبوہز ےؼ ثیھک ػج وز لج وک مسٌگ ۂـوذ طہ ےک ثیھک غا [63] Iqbal in a poem entitled Lenin Khuda Kai „Hazur Main provides a vivid picture of capitalist society. According to him, in beauty of architecture, cleanliness and rush of people, the banks have super passed the churches. Unemployment, immorality, drinking and poverty are the great triumphs of the western civilization. O! God, you are just and all powerful; then why? the life of workers is extremely miserable. He also prays to bring to end the lust of the capitalists and industrialists, as the whole world is waiting for this. ںیه بلص ،ںیه نًوض ،ںیه طیوؼج یئبٌػض یک ںوکٌث ںیہ ےک ھڑث ںیہک ےؼ ںوجطگ تاضبوػ غلكا و یضاوذ ےئه و یًبیطػ و یضبکیث حك ےک ثیًسه یگًطك ںیہ نک بیک تبحو ںیه ںبہج ےطیج طگه ےہ لزبػ و ضزبه وج تبهوا ےک ضوزعه ۂسٌث ثہث دلج ںیہ ہٌیلؼ بک یحؼطپ ہیبهطؼ بگ ےثوڈ تک تبكبکه ظوض ،طظحٌه یطج ےہ بیًز [64] Iqbal was keen interested in the betterment of the workers and he was convinced that a political system based on justice and corruption would disappear with the realisation that there is something higher in human value than the naked lust for political and material gains.[65] As such the Muslims must lend their maximum support to every effort, which is directed towards the betterment of the working class.[66] In his another poem, Iqbal points out that the old traditional politics has become disgraceful and the world is sick of monarchs and aristocrates. The age of capitalism is near to an end like a jugler, whose play is off. ےہ ضاوذ یطگ ثؼبیؼ یًاطپ ےہ ضاعیث ےؼ ںبطلؼ و طیه يیهظ بیگ یضاز ہیبهطؼ ضوز بیگ بیگ یضاسه طک بھکز بـبوج [67] v) Nationalism The fifth important principle of westren democracy is nationalism; which means a condition of mind, feelings or sentiments of a group of people living in a well defined geographic area; speaking a common language, possessing a literatue in which their aspirations are expressed, attached to common traditions and customs, venerating their own heroes, and some cases having the same religion.[68] Thus the bases of western nationalism are; Geography, race, language, traditions, customs, common ideals etc. The western nationalism evolved itself as a code of life for European; which opened the way of hostility to others and prepared nations for territorial expansion. In this method, the nationalism proves itself fatal to the interests of humanity and becomes a source of endless conflict and aggression. Keeping in view, the characteristics of nationalism, Iqbal condemns the nationalism as well as the western democracy. Iqbal expresses his hate for nationalism, as it is against the spirit of Islam. He further says that Islam and nationalism can not go hand in hand. He elaborates the concepts, that the attachment to a place leads to ruin and live like a fish in ocean, free from all attachments. Migration from homeland, is a „sunnah‟ of the Holy prophet (PBUH); and be a witness to the truth of the prophethood. یہبجج ےہ ہجیحً وج یهبوه سیه وہ یہبه تضوص يطو زاظآ ںیه طحث ٍض ةوجحه ثٌؼ يطو کطج ےہ یہلا ہپ ثهاسص یک توجً یھث وج ےز یہاوگ[69] Iqbal again condemns the concept of territorial nationalism. He says that nationalism is a devil of the present time, nationalism and the religion are against each other and these can not go together. In the view point of politicians, nationalism is different thing from the practice of the Holy prophet. ےہ يطو ےؼ تؼ اڑث ںیه ںؤاسذ ٍظبج ىا تہصه ٍو ،ےہ بک غا يہطیپ وج ےہ يلک بک ےہ ھچک یہ ضوا يطو ںیه ثؼبیؼ ضبحلگ ھچک یہ ضوا يطو ںیه توجً زبـضا ےہ [70] Iqbal believes that nationalism is the main hurdle in the establishment of Muslim universalism or Muslim Ummah. Iqbal wrote a letter to prof. Nichlson in which he said: Nationalism is a belief based on race and colour, which is hostile to the world and humanity. The people who love the humanity, should start a war against the annovation of „Satan‟.[71] Iqbal has the faith that the nationalism has many demerits and disadvantages and the nationalism preaches for the hostility and aggression in the world; which results” in the distranquillity. He adds that all the antions of the world are at war for territory and trade, due to nationalism. Moreover, nationalism is the cause for unethical politics and destruction of the weeks. ماوها ےؼ یؼا وج ثثبهض ےہ ںیه ںبہج ےؼ یؼا وج تضبجج زوصوه ےہ طیرؽج ےؼ یؼا وج ثؼبیؼ ےؼ ثهاسص ےہ یلبذ ےؼ یؼا وج تضبؿ ےہ بجوہ طھگ بک ضوعوک [72] In an article, Iqbal again condemns nationalism and exposes the designs of the western world against the Muslims. He says: “Very early from the writings of European scholars, I had come know that the basic scheme of western Imperialism was to dismember the unity of Muslim World by popularising territorial nationalism among its various components.”[73] Iqbal believes that by the concept of territorial nationalism, imperialism arises and the birth of imperialism results in the world wars. Numberless people lose their lives and billion dollars money is spent in the wars; which could be utilized for the welfare of humanity.[74] vi) Party System The Party system is another corner stone of the philosophy of western‟ democracy. According to the system, like minded people come together, with the objective to be victorious at national polls, to get the political power of the state. This grouping of the people constitutes the political party. The party system is considered a part and parcel of western democracy. In the western democracy, whole nation is divided in to two parties i.e. rulers and ruled, mainly due to the existence of political parties. The ruling group tries to stick with the power. While the opponent group tries to oust and replace the ruling group; which results in conflict and tussle. The conflict and tussle further divide the nation in the two warring parties or groups. Party discipline is another phenomenon, which restricts the individual‟s liberty, and the choice of the leadership. One has to cast vote in favour of the candidate nominated by one‟s party, like wise one can not differ the policy of the party. Whenever, such a party comes in power, it rules according to party discipline, ignoring the wishes of the people; which results in the dictatorship of the party. Thus, under the party system and legislative regimentation, the ideals of democracy have been considerably damaged. Individual responsibility converts into collective responsibility. Iqbal opposes democracy for the reasons also and says, that there is no difference between democracy and dictatorship. The dictator, the monarch, and the aristocrate guise themselves in the shape of democrates. Thus the democracy, dictatorship and kingship are the same thing. He points out in Bang-i-Dara that the westren democracy is the old wine in new bottle, which contains no tunes other than imperial one. It is devil of despotims, dancing in the shape of democracy and you take it as a fairy of freedom. مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه يہک ظبؼ یہو ےہ ےئاوً ظا طیؿ ںیہً ںیه ںوزطپ ےک ػج يطصیه ةوک ےئبپ ںیه بجه یضوہج زاسجحؼا ویز حھجوؼ وج نلیً ےہ یک یزاظآ ہی ،ےہ ب !یطپ [75] Iqbal very rightly says that democracy, being a methodology, is in it self neither good nor bad. The democracy usually operates through party system; which makes democracy a bad one. Iqbal believes that „Democracy has a tendency to foster the spirit of legality. It is not in itself bad; but unfortunately it tends to displace the purely moral stand point and make the illegal and wrong identical in meaning.[76] Iqbal adds, whether democracy is good or bad? But you do not know about the new methodologies of the world. Iqbal has also the faith, that there is no rule of democracy, but the old systems are prevailing. Either kings or politicians, are ruling the world; both are the same, only faces are different. نیسه سہػ یہو ںیه ثویوح ےہ طضبح وضز مبها ںیہ ثؼبیؼ لہا بی ںیہ ٍزبجّ ؼ لہا [78] According to Iqbal, the politicians, who come in power through party system, never allow the people, to share the power, with them like the kings. Thus the politicians and kings are defacto rulers of the world.[79] ےحکؼ طک ںیہً طک وک ںوهلؿ نکح کیطـ کاضزا طہوج ےک ىا ظوك ںیہ ےجسیطذ سٌه بضض ہپ یهلؿ وک ںوهلؿ ںیہ ےجطک ہًبہث ںیہ ےجبٌث بک لئبؽه لیوبج [80] Iqbal analyses his discussion on the western democracy in these words: “The idealism of Europe never becomes a living factor in the life and the result is perverted ego seeking itself through mutually intolerate democracies, whose sole function is to exploit the poor in the interest of rich”.[81] Iqbal concludes the discussion and says that on the surface, western democracy appears radiant but its inside is darker than the despotism of Changiz Khan. مبظً یضوہوج بک ةطـه ںیہً بھکیز بیک ےً وج ےہ طیذ طـ ہک بؿوؿ بک ضوہوج یًبطلؼ ےہ ںیہً ےؼ ںوٌحك ٍظبج ےک ںبہج وج !طجذبث [77] کیضبج ےؼ عیگٌچ ںوضسًا ،يـوض ٍطہچ !طج [82] IQBAL’S CONCEPT OF POLITY Iqbal was deeply convinced by Khilafat and wanted to see it in force. In one of his couplet he says that the age of Khilafat i.e. polity is near to hand and all the signs of the governments other than polity should be abolished. ہًبهظ ےہ بجآ بک ضوہوج یًبطلؼ بٹه ےئآ طظً وک نج يہک ؿوً وج !وز [83] Iqbal also calls polity by the name of spiritual democracy. He has derived the idea of polity from the fallible like other Muslims and subject to the same impersonal authority of Divine Law.[84] 5. Although, the caliph is head of state and he can be directly sued in the ordinary law courts. 6. The caliph can indicate his successor, but the nomination is not valid without confirmation by the people.[85] 7. The electors have rights to demand the deposition of the caliph or dismissal of his officials if their behavour is in contravention to the Laws of Sharia”.[86] Iqbal describes his concept of polity or spiritual democracy, with qualitative approach. Which is possible only in a society, practicing Islamic principles. Such a system Iqbal calls the Kingdom of God on the earth. In a letter to R.A. Nicholson, he writes: “The Kingdom of God on earth means the democracy or more or less unique individuals, presided over by the most unique individuals, possible on the earth”87] Iqbal throws further light on the God‟s kingdom on earth: “It is here and now that men and women must learn to live justly, decently, sincerely; It is here that they must ceaselessly cultivate their manifold inner powers and try to control the tremendous forces of Nature: It is here that they must learn to utilise them not for domination, but for service nor for repression and destruction but for creation and enrichment; it is here that by. devotion to the highest ideals, they can become co-partners in God‟s creative activity and can help in establishment of God‟s kingdom on earth”.[88] Iqbal also explains the Islamic institution of election i.e. election of unique individual or ideal person as caliph by quoting the words of Hazrat Umar, the second Caliph. “Although Abu Bakr‟s immediate election from the point of view of the need of the time and the consequences was extremely appropriate and opportune, this method of election can not be decreed to be established principle in the religion of Islam that election, which is based on a partial vote of people should be considered null and void”.[89] He further, explains that, “The electorates by casting their votes or united and independent act of electing best political government in a determinate and reliable person, whom they consider worthy of „trust‟.[90] Iqbal in his book entitled, “The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam”, has explained the term Ijtihad (re-orientation, in which law can be effected by the Believers). Iqbal says that “according to spirit of Islam, „Imamat‟ can be vested in body of persons or elected assembly.[91] The Republican form of government is not only thoroughly consistent with spirit of Islam, but it has also become a necessity in view of the new forces, that are set free in the world of Islam.”[92] By it means, that the political sovereignty is vested in Muslim individual, and Imamat is an elected institution. Iqbal considers that liberty and equality are important principles of the Muslim polity. He makes an exposition in this regard, as under: “The basis of Islamic polity in eyes of Law of religion is absolute and uncontained freedom in fact the act of election is a kind of contract between the caliph and Muslim. Muslim reign of the Holy Prophet and his four Right-guided successors. This was the period in Islamic history, when the polity was actually practiced. Therefore, Iqbal advises the Muslims to come in bond of the Holy Prophet and to submit to him. Iqbal has formed a system of government from the period enlisting these qualities; the truthfulness, the justice, the bravery, and freedom from privileges and prerogatives. He says: لؽه یھج طیطوج مز کبث ےث ثهاسص یک ن کبپ ےؼ تبػاطه خول ،یوه بھج بک غا لسػ کبً نً ےؼ بیح بھج نلؽه تططك طجـ کاضزلا موك یحؽہ کا ٍو ںیه ثػبجـ بھج Iqbal further elaborating the system, enlisted additional principles of polity; which are reproduced below:- 1. Election is the only way to express the will of the people, and partial expression of people will is considered null and void. 2. De facto political sovereignty resides with the people. 3. The Muslim commonwealth is based on the absolute equality of all Muslims. 4. The caliph is not necessarily the high priest of Islam. He is not the representative of God on earth. He is populace, according to which the caliph is duty round to perform particular functions for which he is to be held entirely responsible.[93] He adds that all the Muslims have absolute equal rights and uncontained freedom in the Muslim State. Moreover the caliph is not above the Muslim populace, but he is responsible for the duties and‟ functions assigned to him, if he fails to perform his duties he is removable by the people. If caliph does not rule according to Sharia his right to rule is forfeited,[94] and his electorates can demand for his dismissal or his officials accordingly. Iqbal‟s concept of „self involves a plea for respect for one-self and respect for one‟s fellowmen too.[95] The concept has constructed a society which is not compatible in the world. The society has evolved a political system and is well known as polity. ہحرپ ملؿ ،یضوہوج ظطط ظا عیطگ وـ ےضبک سیآ یوً یًبؽًا طکك طذ سص وز عـه ظا ہک As discussed above, Iqbal is deeply convinced by „polity‟. He presents it as an ideal government. In Armughan-i-Hijaz, he says, that Khilafat is the ideal of the Muslims and any system which has monarchical attributes is undesirable for them. Monarchy or democracy is nothing but deceit and treachery, while Khilafat is a protection of the will of God. But Iqbal is aware of the fact that this ideal did not last for a long time in Islamic history. Under the Umayyads, Abba sides and Ottomans the Khilafat became hereditary monarchy. It lost its original purpose and massage which had been conveyed by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) for the emancipation of mankind. ثؼا یہاوگ به مبوه طث ثكلذ ثؼا یہبـزبپ بهطث ہچًآ ثؼا ماطح کوله گًطیً و ثؼاطکه ہوہ ثی ثؼا یہلا غوهبً ظلح ثكلذ ثذوؼ یلطصه ضوً ہث اضزوذ ةطػ ثذوطكا طث مطفه ۂزطه ؽاطچ زطک نگ ٍاض ثكلذ ںآ يکیل و ثذوهآ یہبـ اض ںبٌهؤه لّ وا ہک 6] [9 Thus, according to Iqbal „polity‟ is rooted deeply in Quran and Sunnah and is completely different from the democracy of the west. He had an abiding interest in the growth and development of the human personality, which thrive and prosper only in an atmosphere where there is no fear except God. He desired that permanent spiritual values should form the cornerstone of every political system, whether it is Presidential or Parliamentary. In Pakistan, we can also implement the concept of Iqbal‟s „polity‟. by establishing Imamat based on the principles of Sharia; making head of state or executive responsible to the people as well as God; electing pious, trustworthy, and faithfully individuals to the assemblies who are mainly responsible to establish kingdom of God in the earth; protecting the rights of masses; declaring judiciary independent and making caliph sueable in the ordinary court of law and making electorate independent, so that they can demand the dismissal of caliph, if he does not perform in accordance with the Sharia. NOTES [1] Milton C, Cumming Jr. and Devid Wise; Democracy Under Pressure (H.B 1977) p 16. [2] Roger Hillsman; To Govern America - p. 21. (Harper & Row Publication 1979). [3] Ibid. p. [4] Ibid. p.30 [5] J. Roland Pennock; Democratic Political Theory (Princeton 1979) P. 3 [6] Herodotus; History of Persian War (New York 1942) p. 252 [7] Bryce J. Modern Democracies Vol. I p. 20. [8] Oxford: (Clarendon Press 1961). [9] George Cornewell Lewis; Remarks on the Use and Abuse of some Pol. terms. (Columbia 1970) P. 84. [10] Seymour M. Lipset; Political Man. p. 27 (Garden City N.Y. 1960). [11] Charles Bettelheim; Democracy in the World of Tensions. (Chicago 1951) p. 3. [12] Corry and Abraham: “Elements of Democratic Govt.” (New York 1958) p. [13] Encyclopedia of Social Sciences Vol. II. p. 76. [14] Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; The Political Philosophy of Iqbal, (Lahore 1978) p. 2G0. [15] Prof. Muhammad Manawwar; Demensions of Iqbal, (Lahore) p. 39. [16] Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; Op. Cit., p. 26. [17] Abdul Rehman Abdul Kurdi: The Islamic State, (New York 1984) P. 63 [18] Ibid: P. 64. [19] Rosenthal E. I.J: Political Thought in Medieval Islam, (Cambridge 1958) P.21 [20] Quamar-ud-Din Khan; The Political Thought of Ibn Taymiyah, (Lahore 1983) p. 99 [21] Hamid Enayat; Modern Islamic Political Thought. (London 1982) p. 12G [22] Ibid. [23] Al-Quran 28:77. [24] Al-Quran 4: 58-59. [25] Young T. Cuyler; “Shariah and Democracy”. P. 64 in International Islamic Colloquium Paper Lahore (1961). [26] Khalifa Abdul Hakim; Islamic Ideology (Lahore 1980) p. 242. [27] Ibid. p. 237. [28] Prof. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri; Quranic Basis of Constitutional theory, (Lahore) P. 14. [29] Hamid Enayat: Op, Cit., p: 128 [30] Ibid P. 129. [31] Hakim Mohammad Said (Ed.): The Islamic Concept of State, (Karachi 1983) p. 15 [32] Ibid p. 33 [33] Khalifa Abdul Hakim. Op, Cit., p. 242 [34] Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; Op, Cit; p. 262. [35] Ibid., [36] Prof. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri; Op. Cit., p. 27. [37] Hakim Muhammad Said (Ed.); Op. Cit., p. 94. [38] Abdul Rehman Abdul Kurdi; Op Cit., p. 17. [39] Muslim, Imarah; 14. [40] Prof. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri; Op. Cit; p. 20-21. [41] Abdul Rehman Abdul Kurdi; Op, Cit., pp. 80-81. [42] Dr. Waheed qureshi; Selection from Iqbal Review. (ahore 1983) P 216 [43] Iqbal : Payam-i-Mushraq, P. 135 [44] Iqbal; Zarib-i-Kalim, P.150 [45] Iqbal; Banmg-i-Dara, P. 296. [46] Ibid. [47] Dr. Waheed Qureshi; Op.Cit; P. 218 [48] Iqbal; Bal-i-Jibrael:, P. 215 [49] Zarb-i-Kalim; P. 154 [50] Ibid. P. 144. [51] Iqbal; Armughan-i-Hijaz (Urdu) P.7. [52] Iqbal; Bal-i-Jibrael. P.146. [53] Iqbal; Zarb-i-Kalim, ; P. 74. [54] Iqbal; Bal-i-Jibrael. P. 222. [55] Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; Op. Cit; P.220. [56] Iqbal; The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam; (Lahore 1959) PP. 162-63. Also quoted by Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; ) Op. Cit. P. 220. [57] Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; Op. Cit. P. 241. [58] Iqbal; Bang-i-Dara; PP. 297-98. [59] Iqbal; Payam-i-Mushriq, P. 257. [60] Bashir Ahmad Dar; Iqbal‟s Philosphy of Society; (Lahore) P. 22. [61] Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali; Op.Cit. P. 243 [62] Iqbal; Bal-i-Jibrael, P. 204 [63] Ibid; P. 149 [64] Ibid; P. 146-47. [65] Dr. Parveen Shaukat ALi; Op. Cit. P. 244. [66] Bashir Ahmed Dar; Op. Cit; P. 34 [67] Iqbal; Bal-i-Jibrael, P. 167 [68] Louis L. Suyder; Global Mini-Nationalism, (Autonomy or Independence) (London 1982) Intro: P. XV [69] Iqbal; Bang-i-Dara, P. 174. [70] Ibid. [71] Mian Mohammad Afzal; Iqbal and Global Politics, (Urdu) (Lahore 1978) P.54. [72] Iqbal; Bang-i-Dara. P. 174. [73] S.A.V. Moeeni; Maqalat-i-lqbal (Urdu) (Lahore 1963) P. 222. [74] Dr. S. M. Minhajuddin;Afqar-o-Taswarat-i-lqbal;(Mulatan 1985) P. 217. [75] Already referred. [76] Dr. Javid Iqbal (Ed) Stray Reflections (Lahore) P. 120 [77] Iqbal; Armughan-i-Hjaz, P. 216. [78] Iqbal; Zarb-i-Kalim, P. 145. [79] Ibid P. 141. [80] Ibid P. 142. [81] Iqbal; The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (Lahore 1959) P. 179. [82] Iqbal; Armughan-i-Hijaz, P. 210. [83] Iqbal; Bal-i-Jibrael, p. 110. [84] Iqbal; Bang-i-Dara, p. 223. [85] Iqbal; Bang-i-Dara, p. 226. [86] S.A. Vahid; Thought and Reflections of lqbal: (Lahore) pp. 58-66; also quoted by Dr. Parveen Shaukat Ali, op. cit. [87] A.J. Arberry Eng. Tr. Javid Hama, Intro. p. 11. [88] Prof. Muhammad Munawwar; Dimensions of lqbal, (Lahore 1986) p. 182. [89] Iqbal; Khilafat-i-Islamia; Also quoted by S. Hasan Ahmad; lqbal; his Political Ideas at Crossroad. (Aligarh 1979) p. 21. [90] Ibid. [91] Iqbal; The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam edited by Muhammad Saeed Sheikh, (Lahore 1986_) p. 124. [92] Ibid. p. 125. [93] S. Hassan Ahmad; lqbal: His Political Ideqs at Crossroads; (Aligarh 1979) p. 22. [94] Prof. Muhammad Munawwar; op. cit., p. 53. [95] Hafeez Malik; Iqbal, (Golumbia University 1971) p. 181. [96] Iqbal; Armughan-i-Hijaz, P. 126. (http://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/apr92/5.htm) Democracy in Islamic Perspective Shah Abdul Hannan Democracy is a commonly known word all over the world. Most of the political movements in the world have made it their goal to establish this system in their respective countries. Democracy is the most popular and accepted political system in the modern world. Yet, there exists some difference of opinion among the Islamic groups on democracy. Democracy and human rights have occupied very important position in the political agenda of many of the Islamic parties. However, some of the parties and people do not accept it, since democracy speaks of sovereignty of the people. In this context, we need careful and deep analysis on this issue. We need to understand the issue avoiding the minor technicalities. As we see, Islamic parties and Islamic scholars of the modern world think of a political system wherein government will run the country through Parliament. They also want freedom of expression, voting right of the people, rule of law, independent & free judiciary, free press, fundamental human rights etc. These are also the pre-requisites of the democratic system. It is therefore, apparent on a deeper analysis that the concept of state and govt. of Islamic Parties are in conformity with the principles of democracy. Theoretically speaking, Islam speaks of sovereignty of Allah, while western democracy advocates that sovereignty belongs to people. However, all political thinkers do not share the same view of sovereignty. Some political scientists even argue that there is no need of concept sovereignty at all. Even the concept of sovereignty is not highlighted in the books which discuss democracy though sovereignty is discussed in great detail as a political concept in the books of political science. In this context, we feel it necessary to quote from the writings of Allama Yousuf Al Qardawi, an eminent Islamic scholar of the present time. He wrote: ? The fear of some people here that democracy makes the people a source of power and even legislation (although legislation is Allah?s alone) should not be heeded here, because we are supposed to be speaking of a people that in its majority and has accepted Allah as its Lord, Mohammad as its Prophet and Islam as its Religion. Such a people would not be expected to pass a legislation that contradicts Islam and its incontestable principles and conclusive rules.? ?Anyway, these fears can be overcome by one article stipulating that any legislation contradicting the incontestable provisions of Islam shall be null and void because Islam is the religion of the State and the source of legitimacy of all its institutions and therefore may no be contradicted, as a branch may not run against the main stream.? ?It should be known that the acceptance of the principle that legislation or rule belong to Allah does not rob the Nation of its right to seek for itself the codes necessary to regulate its ever-changing life and earthly affairs.? ?What we seek is that legislations and codes be within the limits of the flawless texts and the over all objectives of Sharia and the Islamic Message. The binding texts are very few, while the area of ?permissibility? or legislative free space is quite wide and the texts themselves are so flexible and capacious as to accommodate more than one understanding and accept more than one interpretation, which leads to the existence of several schools and philosophies within the expansive framework of Islam.? (Quoted from ?Priorities of the Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase?, Chapter : The movement and political Freedom and Democracy) We find many Islamic scholars accepted the idea of democracy in Islam though under certain conditions. Dr. Abu Said Nuruddin has written in his book ?Mohakobi Iqbal?, ( Iqbal the Great Poet) that Allama Iqbal, was not happy with the democratic system because of its secularist stance but he suggested in his writings that there was no alternative to democracy. In his 6th speech on ?Reconstruction of religious thought in Islam?, Allama Iqbal stated that Islamic state is established on the principles of freedom, equality, and the absolute principles of stability. Therefore the principles of democratic rule is not only similar with the fundamental aspects of Islam rather the executing powers are enhanced in the Muslim world (Mohakabi Iqbal, Iqbal the Great Poet by Dr. Abu Said Nuruddin) Iqbal observed, should the foundation of democracy rests upon spiritual and moral values, it would be the best political system. He wrote in the "The New Era" on its 28th July, 1917 issue: that democracy was born in Europe from economic renaissance that took place in most of its societies??.But Islamic democracy is not developed from the idea of economic advancement rather it is a spiritual principle that comes from the principle that everybody is a source of power whose possibilities can be developed through virtue and character?. [Mohakabi Iqbal ( Iqbal the Great Poet) by Dr. Abu Said Nuruddin, page -239) That means according to Iqbal Islam prescribes democracy under the law of Allah. We see Moulana Maududi, fifty years ago from now, in his book ?Political theory of Islam? used the term ?Theo-democracy? for Islamic state. He didn?t deny the term ?democracy?. Rather he accepted democracy while this system will work under the sovereignty of Allah. We also see that in the first Islamic constitution of the present world, the term democracy was accepted with the consent of Islamic scholars (ulema). In the preamble, the term democracy was accepted in the following manner : ? Wherein the principles of democracy freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, should be fully observed?. (from the preamble of the constitution of 1956) In the 1973 constitution the same position was maintained. ?Wherein the principles of democracy freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed?. (from the preamble of the constitution of 1973) This means that democracy has been accepted within the limits of Islam so that in the name of democracy Islamic principles cannot be violated. Islamic Scholars and Islamic Politicians have come to accept the word democracy and what it means within these limits. Allama Yousuf Al Qardawi in his book ? Priorities of the Islamic Movement In the Coming Phase? has titled one of its chapters as ? The Movement and Political Freedom and Democracy?. In this book he has shown that Islam does not allow any kind of autocracy or monarchy. He also showed that Islam spreads through political freedom. He stated that Islam unlike democracy is a complete code of life, which encompasses many more vital issues of human needs. Above all, he thinks democracy is consistent with Islam and the fundamental rights of mankind prescribed in Islam can be ensured through democracy. He has advocated in favor of democratic system and political freedom. But he suggested to introduce a clause in the constitution to the effect that no law will be passed contrary to the injunctions of the Quran and Sunnah. This clause will act as guarantee against the fear of some people that anti Islamic law may be passed under the cover of democracy. Dr. Qardawi writes: ? It is the duty of the ( Islamic) Movement in the coming phase to stand firm against totalitarian and dictatorial rule, political despotism and usurpation of people?s rights. The movement should always stand by political freedom, as represented by true , not false, democracy. It should flatly declare its refusal of tyrants and steer clear of all dictators, even if some tyrant appears to have good intentions towards it for some gain and for a time that is usually short, as has been shown by experience. The Prophet (SAWS) said , ? When you see my Nation fall victim to fear and does not say to wrong-doer , ? You are wrong?, then you may lose hope in them. ? So how about a regime that forces people to say to a conceited wrongdoer, ? How just, how great you are. O our hero, our savior and our liberator!? The Quran denounces tyrants such as Nimrudh, Pharoah, Haman and others, but it also dispraises those who follow tyrants and obey their orders. This is why Allah dispraises the people of Noah by saying, ? But they follow (men) whose wealth and children give them no increase but only loss.? [Surat Nuh : 21] Allah also says of Ad, people of Hud, ? And followed the command of every powerful, obstinate transgressor?.[ Sura HUD : 59] See also what the Quran says about the people of Pharoah, ? But they followed the command of Pharaoh, and the command of Pharoah was not rightly guided.[ Surat Hud : 97] ? Thus he made fools of his people, and they obeyed him : truly they were a people rebellious (against Allah) .? [ Sura Az- Zukhruf : 54] A closer look at the history of the Muslim Nation and the Islamic Movement in modern times should show clearly that the Islamic idea, the Islamic Movement and the Islamic Awakening have never flourished or borne fruit unless in an atmosphere of democracy and freedom, and have withered and become barren only at the times of oppression and tyranny that trod over the will of the people by force which clung to Islam. Such oppressive regimes imposed their Secularism, Socialism, or Communism on their people by force and coercion, using covert torture and public executions, and employing those devilish tools that tore flesh, shed blood, crushed bone and destroyed the soul. On the other hand, we saw the Islamic Movement and the Islamic Awakening bear fruit and flourish at the times of freedom and democracy, and in the wake of the collapse of imperial regimes that ruled peoples with fear and oppression. Therefore, I would not imagine that the Islamic Movement could support anything other than political freedom and democracy.? ? However, the tools and guarantees created by democracy are as close as can ever be to the realization of the political principles brought to this earth by Islam to put a leash on the ambitions and whims of rulers. These principles are: shura (consultation), good advice enjoining what is proper and forbidding what is evil, disobeying illegal orders, resisting unbelief and changing wrong by force whenever possible. It is only in democracy and political freedom that the power of Parliament is evident and that people?s deputies can withdraw confidence from any government that breaches the Constitution, and it is only in such an environment that the strength of free press, free Parliament, opposition and the masses is most felt.? It is evident from the above discussion that Islamic thinkers and Muslim people want their right to vote, rule of law, and a government that is to be elected by the people. The term democracy mean all these things. Taking everything into consideration, we can say that there is no problem to accept the term democracy under certain conditions. We see different constitutions and Islamic scholars conditionally accepted the term ?democracy?. Muslim community can accept this term. This will help to remove misunderstandings about Islam that it is for violence and dictatorships. -Shah Abdul Hannan (http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_951_1000/democracy_in_islamic_perspective.htm) Muhammad Iqbal From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For other people named Muhammad Iqbal, see Muhammad Iqbal (disambiguation). Muhammad Iqbal لابقا دمحم Born 9 November 1877 Sialkot, Punjab, British India Died 21 April 1938 (aged 60) Lahore, Punjab, British India Era 20th century philosophy Region British India Main interests Urdu poetry, Persian poetry Notable ideas Two-Nation Theory, Conception of Pakistan Influences [show] Influenced [show] Website Allama Iqbal Sir Muhammad Iqbal (Urdu: لبجها سوحه ) (November 9, 1877 – April 21, 1938), also known as Allama Iqbal (لبجها ہهلػ), was a philosopher, poet and politician [1] in British India who is widely regarded as having inspired the Pakistan Movement. He is considered one of the most important figures in Urdu literature, [2] with literary work in both the Urdu and Persian languages. [1][2] Iqbal is admired as a prominent classical poet by Pakistani, Indian, Iranian, and other international scholars of literature. [3][4] Though Iqbal is best known as an eminent poet, he is also a highly acclaimed "Muslim philosophical thinker of modern times". [1][4] His first poetry book, Asrar-e-Khudi, appeared in the Persian language in 1915, and other books of poetry include Rumuz-i-Bekhudi, Payam-i-Mashriq and Zabur-i-Ajam. Amongst these his best known Urdu works are Bang-i-Dara, Bal-i-Jibril, Zarb-i Kalim and a part of Armughan-e-Hijaz. [5] In Iran and Afghanistan, he is famous as Iqbāl-e Lāhorī (یضوھل لبجها ) (Iqbal of Lahore), and he is most appreciated for his Persian work. [6] Along with his Urdu and Persian poetry, his various Urdu and English lectures and letters have been very influential in cultural, social, religious and political disputes over the years. [5] In 1922, he was knighted by King George V, [6][7] giving him the title "Sir". [8] While studying law and philosophy in England, Iqbal became a member of the London branch of the All India Muslim League. [4][5] Later, in one of his most famous speeches, Iqbal pushed for the creation of a Muslim state in Northwest India. This took place in his presidential speech in the League's December 1930 session. [4][5] In much of Southern Asia and Urdu speaking world, Iqbal is regarded as the Shair-e-Mashriq (مطفه طػبـ, "Poet of the East"). [9][10][11] He is also called Muffakir-e-Pakistan (ىبحؽکبپ طکله, "The Thinker of Pakistan") and Hakeem-ul-Ummat (ثهلا نیکح, "The Sage of the Ummah"). The Pakistan government officially named him a "national poet". [4] His birthday Yōm-e Welādat-e Muḥammad Iqbāl ( وحه تزلو موی لبجها س ) or (Iqbal Day) is a public holiday in Pakistan. [12] In India he is also remembered as the author of the popular song Saare Jahaan Se Achcha. [13] Contents  1 Personal life o 1.1 Background o 1.2 Higher education in Europe o 1.3 Academic o 1.4 Final years and death  2 Efforts and influences o 2.1 Political o 2.2 Iqbal, Jinnah and concept of Pakistan  3 Revival of Islamic polity o 3.1 Patron of The Journal Tolu-e-Islam  4 Literary work o 4.1 Persian o 4.2 Urdu o 4.3 English  5 Iqbal known in subcontinent o 5.1 As Poet of the East  6 Iqbal and the West  7 Bibliography  8 Gallery  9 See also  10 References  11 Further reading  12 External links Personal life Background Iqbal was born in Sialkot on 9 November 1877 within the Punjab Province of British India (now in Pakistan). His grandparents were Kashmiri Pandits, the Brahmins of the Sapru clan from Kashmir who converted to Islam. [10][14] In the 19th century, when Sikhs were taking over rule of Kashmir, his grandfather's family migrated to Punjab. Iqbal often mentioned and commemorated about his Kashmiri Pandit Brahmin lineage in his writings. [10] Allama Iqbal with his son Javed Iqbal in 1930 Mother of Allama Muhammad Iqbal who died on November 9, 1914. Iqbal expressed his feeling of pathos in a poetic form on death Iqbal's father, Sheikh Noor Muhammad, was a tailor, not formally educated but a religious man. [6][15] Iqbal's mother Imam Bibi was a polite and humble woman who helped the poor and solved the problems of neighbours. She died on 9 November 1914 in Sialkot. [7][14] Iqbal loved his mother, and on her death he expressed his feelings of pathos in a poetic form elegy. [6] Who would wait for me anxiously in my native place? Who would display restlessness if my letter fails to arrive? I will visit thy grave with this complaint: Who will now think of me in midnight prayers? All thy life thy love served me with devotion— When I became fit to serve thee, thou hast departed. [6] Iqbal was four years old when he was admitted to the mosque for learning the Qur'an, he learned the Arabic language from his teacher Syed Mir Hassan, the head of the madrassa and professor of Arabic language at Scotch Mission College in Sialkot, where Iqbal completed matriculation in 1893. He received Intermediate with the Faculty of Arts diploma from Murray College Sialkot in 1895. [7][10][16] The same year he enrolled Government College Lahore where he qualified for Bachelor of Arts in philosophy, English literature and Arabic as his subjects from Government College Lahore in 1897, and won the Khan Bahadurddin F.S. Jalaluddin medal as he took higher numbers in Arabic class. [7] In 1899, he received Masters of Arts degree from the same college and had the first place in Punjab University, Lahore. [7][10][16] Iqbal had married three times, in 1895 while studying Bachelor of Arts he had his first marriage with Karim Bibi, the daughter of a Gujarati physician Khan Bahadur Ata Muhammad Khan, through an arranged marriage. They had daughter Miraj Begum and son Aftab Iqbal. Later Iqbal's second marriage was with Sardar Begum mother of Javid Iqbal and third marriage with Mukhtar Begum in December 1914. [7][9] Iqbal in Spain, 1933 Higher education in Europe Iqbal was influenced by the teachings of Sir Thomas Arnold, his philosophy teacher at Government college Lahore, Arnold's teachings determined Iqbal to pursue higher education in the West. In 1905, he traveled to England for his higher education. Iqbal qualified for a scholarship from Trinity College in Cambridge and obtained Bachelor of Arts in 1906, and in the same year he was called to the bar as a barrister from Lincoln's Inn. In 1907, Iqbal moved to Germany to study doctorate and earned PhD degree from the Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich in 1908. Working under the guidance of Friedrich Hommel, Iqbal published his doctoral thesis in 1908 entitled: The Development of Metaphysics in Persia. [10][17][18][19] During Iqbal's stay in Heidelberg, Germany in 1907 his German teacher Emma Wegenast taught him about Goethe's Faust, Heine and Nietzsche. [20] During his study in Europe, Iqbal began to write poetry in Persian. He prioritized it because he believed he had found an easy way to express his thoughts. He would write continuously in Persian throughout his life. [10] Academic Allama Iqbal as Youth in 1899 Iqbal, after completing his Master of Arts degree in 1899, initiated his career as a reader of Arabic at Oriental College and shortly was selected as a junior professor of philosophy at Government College Lahore, where he had also been a student, and worked there until he left for England in 1905. In 1908, Iqbal returned from England and joined the same college again as a professor of philosophy and English literature. [21] At the same period Iqbal began practicing law at Chief Court Lahore, but soon Iqbal quit law practice, and devoted himself in literary works and became an active member of Anjuman-e-Himayat-e- Islam. [7] In 1919, he became the general secretary of the same organisation. Iqbal's thoughts in his work primarily focus on the spiritual direction and development of human society, centered around experiences from his travels and stays in Western Europe and the Middle East. He was profoundly influenced by Western philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Henri Bergson and Goethe. [6][20] The poetry and philosophy of Mawlana Rumi bore the deepest influence on Iqbal's mind. Deeply grounded in religion since childhood, Iqbal began intensely concentrating on the study of Islam, the culture and history of Islamic civilization and its political future, while embracing Rumi as "his guide". [6] Iqbal would feature Rumi in the role of guide in many of his poems. Iqbal's works focus on reminding his readers of the past glories of Islamic civilization, and delivering the message of a pure, spiritual focus on Islam as a source for sociopolitical liberation and greatness. Iqbal denounced political divisions within and amongst Muslim nations, and frequently alluded to and spoke in terms of the global Muslim community or the Ummah. [6][22] Iqbal poetry has been translated into many European languages, at the time when his work was famous during the early part of the 20th century. [4] Iqbal's Asrar-i-Khudi and Javed Nama were translated into English by R A Nicholson and A J Arberry respectively. [4][11] Final years and death The tomb of Muhammad Iqbal at the entrance of the Badshahi Mosque in Lahore. In 1933, after returning from a trip to Spain and Afghanistan, Iqbal had suffered from a mysterious throat illness. [23] He spent his final years helping Chaudhry Niaz Ali Khan to establish the Dar ul Islam Trust Institute at Jamalpur estate near Pathankot, [24][25] where studies in classical Islam and contemporary social science were plan to be subsidised, and Iqbal also advocated the demand for an independent Muslim state. Iqbal as a Barrister-at-Law. Iqbal ceased practising law in 1934 and was granted pension by the Nawab of Bhopal. In his final years he frequently visited the Dargah of famous Sufi Hazrat Ali Hujwiri in Lahore for spiritual guidance. After suffering for months from his illness, Iqbal died in Lahore on 21 April 1938. [5][10] His tomb is located in Hazuri Bagh, the enclosed garden between the entrance of the Badshahi Mosque and the Lahore Fort, and official guards are provided by the Government of Pakistan. A night view of the tomb. Iqbal is commemorated widely in Pakistan, where he is regarded as the ideological founder of the state. His Tarana-e-Hind is a song that is widely used in India as a patriotic song speaking of communal harmony. His birthday is annually commemorated in Pakistan as Iqbal Day, a national holiday. Iqbal is the namesake of many public institutions, including the Allama Iqbal Campus Punjab University in Lahore, the Allama Iqbal Medical College in Lahore, Iqbal Stadium in Faisalabad, Allama Iqbal Open University in Pakistan, the Allama Iqbal International Airport in Lahore, the Allama Iqbal hall in Nishtar Medical College in Multan and Gulshan-e-Iqbal Town in Karachi and Allama Iqbal Hall at AMU, India. The government and public organizations have sponsored the establishment of educational institutions, colleges and schools dedicated to Iqbal, and have established the Iqbal Academy Pakistan to research, teach and preserve the works, literature and philosophy of Iqbal. Allama Iqbal Stamps Society established for the promotion of Iqbaliyat in philately and in other hobbies. His son Javid Iqbal has served as a justice on the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Javaid Manzil was the last residence of Allama Iqbal. [26] Efforts and influences Political Further information: Pakistan Movement While dividing his time between law practice and poetry, Iqbal had remained active in the Muslim League. He did not support Indian involvement in World War I and remained in close touch with Muslim political leaders such as Mohammad Ali Jouhar and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. He was a critic of the mainstream Indian National Congress, which he regarded as dominated by Hindus and was disappointed with the League when during the 1920s, it was absorbed in factional divides between the pro-British group led by Sir Muhammad Shafi and the centrist group led by Jinnah. [27][unreliable source?][citation needed] Iqbal with Muslim politicians. (L to R): M. Iqbal (third), Syed Zafarul Hasan (sixth) at Aligarh Muslim University. In November 1926, with the encouragement of friends and supporters, Iqbal contested for a seat in the Punjab Legislative Assembly from the Muslim district of Lahore, and defeated his opponent by a margin of 3,177 votes. [28] He supported the constitutional proposals presented by Jinnah with the aim of guaranteeing Muslim political rights and influence in a coalition with the Congress, and worked with the Aga Khan and other Muslim leaders to mend the factional divisions and achieve unity in the Muslim League. [27][unreliable source?][citation needed] While in Lahore he was a friend of Abdul Sattar Ranjoor. [29] Iqbal, Jinnah and concept of Pakistan Ideologically separated from Congress Muslim leaders, Iqbal had also been disillusioned with the politicians of the Muslim League owing to the factional conflict that plagued the League in the 1920s. Discontent with factional leaders like Sir Muhammad Shafi and Sir Fazl-ur-Rahman, Iqbal came to believe that only Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a political leader capable of preserving this unity and fulfilling the League's objectives on Muslim political empowerment. Building a strong, personal correspondence with Jinnah, Iqbal was an influential force in convincing Jinnah to end his self-imposed exile in London, return to India and take charge of the League. Iqbal firmly believed that Jinnah was the only leader capable of drawing Indian Muslims to the League and maintaining party unity before the British and the Congress: "I know you are a busy man but I do hope you won't mind my writing to you often, as you are the only Muslim in India today to whom the community has right to look up for safe guidance through the storm which is coming to North-West India and, perhaps, to the whole of India." [30] While Iqbal espoused the idea of Muslim-majority provinces in 1930, Jinnah would continue to hold talks with the Congress through the decade and only officially embraced the goal of Pakistan in 1940. Some historians postulate that Jinnah always remained hopeful for an agreement with the Congress and never fully desired the partition of India. [31] Iqbal's close correspondence with Jinnah is speculated by some historians as having been responsible for Jinnah's embrace of the idea of Pakistan. Iqbal elucidated to Jinnah his vision of a separate Muslim state in a letter sent on 21 June 1937: Allama Iqbal in Allahabad with other Muslim leaders "A separate federation of Muslim Provinces, reformed on the lines I have suggested above, is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of Non-Muslims. Why should not the Muslims of North-West India and Bengal be considered as nations entitled to self- determination just as other nations in India and outside India are." [28] Iqbal, serving as president of the Punjab Muslim League, criticised Jinnah's political actions, including a political agreement with Punjabi leader Sir Sikandar Hyat Khan, whom Iqbal saw as a representative of feudal classes and not committed to Islam as the core political philosophy. Nevertheless, Iqbal worked constantly to encourage Muslim leaders and masses to support Jinnah and the League. Speaking about the political future of Muslims in India, Iqbal said: "There is only one way out. Muslims should strengthen Jinnah's hands. They should join the Muslim League. Indian question, as is now being solved, can be countered by our united front against both the Hindus and the English. Without it, our demands are not going to be accepted. People say our demands smack of communalism. This is sheer propaganda. These demands relate to the defense of our national existence.... The united front can be formed under the leadership of the Muslim League. And the Muslim League can succeed only on account of Jinnah. Now none but Jinnah is capable of leading the Muslims." [30] Revival of Islamic polity Iqbal with Choudhary Rahmat Ali and other Muslim leaders Iqbal's six English lectures were published first from Lahore in 1930 and then by Oxford University press in 1934 in a book titled The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. Which were read at Madras, Hyderabad and Aligarh. [22] These lectures dwell on the role of Islam as a religion as well as a political and legal philosophy in the modern age. [22] In these lectures Iqbal firmly rejects the political attitudes and conduct of Muslim politicians, whom he saw as morally misguided, attached to power and without any standing with Muslim masses. Iqbal expressed fears that not only would secularism weaken the spiritual foundations of Islam and Muslim society, but that India's Hindu-majority population would crowd out Muslim heritage, culture and political influence. In his travels to Egypt, Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey, he promoted ideas of greater Islamic political co-operation and unity, calling for the shedding of nationalist differences. [6] He also speculated on different political arrangements to guarantee Muslim political power; in a dialogue with Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Iqbal expressed his desire to see Indian provinces as autonomous units under the direct control of the British government and with no central Indian government. He envisaged autonomous Muslim provinces in India. Under one Indian union he feared for Muslims, who would suffer in many respects especially with regard to their existentially separate entity as Muslims. [28] Sir Muhammad Iqbal was elected president of the Muslim League in 1930 at its session in Allahabad, in the United Provinces as well as for the session in Lahore in 1932. In his presidential address on 29 December 1930, Iqbal outlined a vision of an independent state for Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern India: [5] "I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single state. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated Northwest Indian Muslim state appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of Northwest India. [5] In his speech, Iqbal emphasised that unlike Christianity, Islam came with "legal concepts" with "civic significance," with its "religious ideals" considered as inseparable from social order: "therefore, the construction of a policy on national lines, if it means a displacement of the Islamic principle of solidarity, is simply unthinkable to a Muslim." [32] Iqbal thus stressed not only the need for the political unity of Muslim communities, but the undesirability of blending the Muslim population into a wider society not based on Islamic principles. He thus became the first politician to articulate what would become known as the Two-Nation Theory—that Muslims are a distinct nation and thus deserve political independence from other regions and communities of India. However, he would not elucidate or specify if his ideal Islamic state would construe a theocracy, even as he rejected secularism and nationalism. The latter part of Iqbal's life was concentrated on political activity. He would travel across Europe and West Asia to garner political and financial support for the League, and he reiterated his ideas in his 1932 address, and during the Third round-Table Conference, he opposed the Congress and proposals for transfer of power without considerable autonomy or independence for Muslim provinces. He would serve as president of the Punjab Muslim League, and would deliver speeches and publish articles in an attempt to rally Muslims across India as a single political entity. Iqbal consistently criticised feudal classes in Punjab as well as Muslim politicians averse to the League. Many unnoticed account of Iqbal's frustration toward Congress leadership were also pivotal of visioning the two nation theory. Copy of the first journal of Tolu-e-Islam. Patron of The Journal Tolu-e-Islam Iqbal was the first patron of the historical, political, religious, cultural journal of Muslims of British India. This journal played an important part in the Pakistan movement. The name of this journal is The Journal Tolu-e-Islam. In 1935, according to his instructions, Syed Nazeer Niazi initiated and edited, a journal Tolu- e-Islam [33] named after the famous poem of Iqbal, Tulu'i Islam. He also dedicated the first edition of this journal to Iqbal. For a long time Iqbal wanted a journal to propagate his ideas and the aims and objective of Muslim league. It was Syed Nazeer Niazi, a close friend of his and a regular visitor to him during his last two years, who started this journal. [27] Later on, this journal was continued [34] by Ghulam Ahmed Pervez, who had already contributed many articles in the early editions of this journal. Literary work Persian Iqbal's poetic works are written primarily in Persian rather than Urdu. Among his 12,000 verses of poetry, about 7,000 verses are in Persian. In 1915, he published his first collection of poetry, the Asrar-e-Khudi (Secrets of the Self) in Persian. The poems emphasise the spirit and self from a religious, spiritual perspective. Many critics have called this Iqbal's finest poetic work [35] In Asrar-e-Khudi, Iqbal explains his philosophy of "Khudi," or "Self." [5][6] Iqbal's use of the term "Khudi" is synonymous with the word "Rooh" mentioned in the Quran. "Rooh" is that divine spark which is present in every human being, and was present in Adam, for which God ordered all of the angels to prostrate in front of Adam. One has to make a great journey of transformation to realise that divine spark which Iqbal calls "Khudi". [5] The same concept was used by Farid ud Din Attar in his "Mantaq-ul-Tair". He proves by various means that the whole universe obeys the will of the "Self." Iqbal condemns self-destruction. For him, the aim of life is self-realization and self-knowledge. He charts the stages through which the "Self" has to pass before finally arriving at its point of perfection, enabling the knower of the "Self" to become a vice-regent of God. [22] In his Rumuz-e-Bekhudi (Hints of Selflessness), Iqbal seeks to prove the Islamic way of life is the best code of conduct for a nation's viability. A person must keep his individual characteristics intact, but once this is achieved he should sacrifice his personal ambitions for the needs of the nation. Man cannot realise the "Self" outside of society. Also in Persian and published in 1917, this group of poems has as its main themes the ideal community, [22] Islamic ethical and social principles, and the relationship between the individual and society. Although he is true throughout to Islam, Iqbal also recognises the positive analogous aspects of other religions. The Rumuz-e-Bekhudi complements the emphasis on the self in the Asrar-e-Khudi and the two collections are often put in the same volume under the title Asrar-e-Rumuz (Hinting Secrets). It is addressed to the world's Muslims. [22] Iqbal's 1924 publication, the Payam-e-Mashriq (The Message of the East) is closely connected to the West- östlicher Diwan by the famous German poet Goethe. Goethe bemoans the West having become too materialistic in outlook, and expects the East will provide a message of hope to resuscitate spiritual values. Iqbal styles his work as a reminder to the West of the importance of morality, religion and civilisation by underlining the need for cultivating feeling, ardour and dynamism. He explains that an individual can never aspire to higher dimensions unless he learns of the nature of spirituality. [22] In his first visit to Afghanistan, he presented his book "Payam-e Mashreq" to King Amanullah Khan in which he admired the liberal movements of Afghanistan against the British Empire. In 1933, he was officially invited to Afghanistan to join the meetings regarding the establishment of Kabul University. [20] The Zabur-e-Ajam (Persian Psalms), published in 1927, includes the poems Gulshan-e-Raz-e-Jadeed (Garden of New Secrets) and Bandagi Nama (Book of Slavery). In Gulshan-e-Raz-e-Jadeed, Iqbal first poses questions, then answers them with the help of ancient and modern insight, showing how it affects and concerns the world of action. Bandagi Nama denounces slavery by attempting to explain the spirit behind the fine arts of enslaved societies. Here as in other books, Iqbal insists on remembering the past, doing well in the present and preparing for the future, while emphasising love, enthusiasm and energy to fulfill the ideal life. [22] Iqbal's 1932 work, the Javed Nama (Book of Javed) is named after and in a manner addressed to his son, who is featured in the poems. It follows the examples of the works of Ibn Arabi and Dante's The Divine Comedy, through mystical and exaggerated depictions across time. Iqbal depicts himself as Zinda Rud ("A stream full of life") guided by Rumi, "the master," through various heavens and spheres, and has the honour of approaching divinity and coming in contact with divine illuminations. In a passage re-living a historical period, Iqbal condemns the Muslim who were instrumental in the defeat and death of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daula of Bengal and Tipu Sultan of Mysore respectively by betraying them for the benefit of the British colonists, and thus delivering their country to the shackles of slavery. At the end, by addressing his son Javid, he speaks to the young people at large, and provides guidance to the "new generation." [22] His love of the Persian language is evident in his works and poetry. He says in one of his poems: [36] ثؼا طکـ ثثوصػ ضز یسٌہ ہچطگ [37] garche Hindi dar uzūbat shekkar ast ثؼا طج يیطیـ يضز ضبحلگ ظطط tarz-e goftar-e Dari shirin tar ast Translation: Even though in sweetness Hindi* is sugar – (but) speech method in Dari (Persian) is sweeter * Urdu Iqbal's Bang-e-Dara (The Call of the Marching Bell), the first collection of Urdu poetry, was published in 1924. It was written in three distinct phases of his life. [22] The poems he wrote up to 1905—(the year Iqbal left for England) reflects patriotism and imagery of nature, that includes the Tarana-e-Hind (The song of India), [20] and another poem Tarana-e-Milli (The song of the Community). The second set of poems from 1905—1908; when Iqbal studied in Europe and dwell upon the nature of European society about whom he emphasised had lost spiritual and religious values, these inspired Iqbal to write poems on the historical and cultural heritage of Islam and Muslim community, with the global perspective. Iqbal urges the entire Muslim community, addressed as the Ummah to define personal, social and political existence by the values and teachings of Islam. [22] Iqbal work mainly in Persian for a predominant period of his career and after 1930, his works were mainly in Urdu. The works of this period were often specifically directed at the Muslim masses of India, with an even stronger emphasis on Islam and Muslim spiritual and political reawakening. Published in 1935, the Bal-e-Jibril (Wings of Gabriel) is considered by many critics as the finest of Iqbal's Urdu poetry, and was inspired by his visit to Spain, where he visited the monuments and legacy of the kingdom of the Moors. It consists of ghazals, poems, quatrains, epigrams and carries a strong sense of religious passion. [22] The Pas Cheh Bayed Kard ai Aqwam-e-Sharq (What are we to do, O Nations of the East?) includes the poem Musafir (Traveler). Again, Iqbal depicts Rumi as a character and an exposition of the mysteries of Islamic laws and Sufi perceptions is given. Iqbal laments the dissension and disunity among the Indian Muslims as well as Muslim nations. Musafir is an account of one of Iqbal's journeys to Afghanistan, in which the Pashtun people are counselled to learn the "secret of Islam" and to "build up the self" within themselves. [22] Iqbal's final work was the Armughan-e-Hijaz (The Gift of Hijaz), published posthumously in 1938. The first part contains quatrains in Persian, and the second part contains some poems and epigrams in Urdu. The Persian quatrains convey the impression as though the poet is travelling through the Hijaz in his imagination. Profundity of ideas and intensity of passion are the salient features of these short poems. [22] Iqbal wearing a bow tie. Iqbal's vision of mystical experience is clear in one of his Urdu ghazals which was written in London during his days of studying there. Some verses of that ghazal are: [22] At last the silent tongue of Hijaz has announced to the ardent ear the tiding That the covenant which had been given to the desert-dwelles is going to be renewed vigorously: The lion who had emerged from the desert and had toppled the Roman Empire is As I am told by the angels, about to get up again (from his slumbers.) You the dwelles of the West, should know that the world of God is not a shop (of yours). Your imagined pure gold is about to lose it standard value (as fixed by you). Your civilization will commit suicide with its own daggers. [22] English Iqbal also wrote two books on the topic of The Development of Metaphysics in Persia and The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam [22] and many letters in English language, besides his Urdu and Persian literary works. In which, he revealed his thoughts regarding Persian ideology and Islamic Sufism – in particular, his beliefs that Islamic Sufism activates the searching soul to a superior perception of life. [22] He also discussed philosophy, God and the meaning of prayer, human spirit and Muslim culture, as well as other political, social and religious problems. [22] Iqbal was invited to Cambridge to participate in the conference in 1931, where he expressed his views to students and other audience. [22] "I would like to offer a few pieces of advice to the youngmen who are at present studying at Cambridge. ... I advise you to guard against atheism and materialism. The biggest blunder made by Europe was the separation of Church and State. This deprived their culture of moral soul and diverted it to the atheistic materialism. I had twenty-five years ago seen through the drawbacks of this civilization and therefore had made some prophecies. They had been delivered by my tongue although I did not quite understand them. This happened in 1907. ... After six or seven years, my prophecies came true, word by word. The European war of 1914 was an outcome of the aforesaid mistakes made by the European nations in the separation of the Church and the State". [22] Iqbal known in subcontinent As Poet of the East Allama Iqbal(In the Doctorate of Literature) after the conferment of this Degree by the University of the Punjab in 1933 Iqbal has been recognised and quoted as "Poet of the East" by academics and institutions and media. [11][38][39][40][41][42][43] The Vice Chancellor, Quaid-e-Azam University, Dr. Masoom Yasinzai described in a seminar as chief guest addressing to distinguished gathering of educationists and intellectuals,that Iqbal is not a poet of the East only, actually he is a universal poet. Moreover, Iqbal is not restricted to any specific segment of the world community but he is for the entire humanity. [44] "Yet it should also be born in mind that whilst dedicating his Eastern Divan to Goethe, the cultural icon par excellence, Iqbal's Payam-i-Mashriq constituted both a reply as well as a corrective to the Western Divan of Goethe. For by stylising himself as the representative of the East, Iqbal's endeavour was to talk on equal terms to Goethe as the representative of West." [45] Iqbal's revolutionary works through his poetry awakened the Muslims of the subcontinent. Iqbal was confident that the Muslims had long been suppressed by the colonial enlargement and growth of the West. In this concept Iqbal is recognised as the "Poet of the East". [39][46][47] So to conclude, let me cite Annemarie Schimmel in Gabriel's Wing who lauds Iqbal's 'unique way of weaving a grand tapestry of thought from eastern and western yarns' (p. xv), a creative activity which, to cite my own volume Revisioning Iqbal, endows Muhammad Iqbal with the stature of a "universalist poet" and thinker whose principal aim was to explore mitigating alternative discourses with a view to constructing a bridge between the 'East' and the 'West' . [45] Urdu world is very familiar Iqbal as the "Poet of the East". [47] Iqbal is also called Muffakir-e-Pakistan ( طکله ىبحؽکبپ, "The Thinker of Pakistan") and Hakeem-ul-Ummat ( هلا نیکح ث , "The Sage of the Ummah"). The Pakistan government officially named him a "national poet". [4] Iqbal and the West Name plate of a street Iqbal-Ufer, Heidelberg, Germany, honoured in the name of Iqbal. [48] The Iqbal Plaque was inaugurated by Naela Chohan in the Plaza de Pakistan, Buenos Aires, Argentina (2012) Iqbal's views on the Western world were applauded by men including United States Supreme Court Associate Justice William O. Douglas, who said that Iqbal's beliefs had "universal appeal". [49] In his Soviet biography N. P. Anikoy wrote: [Iqbal is] great for his passionate condemnation of weak will and passiveness, his angry protest against inequality, discrimination and oppression in all forms i.e., economic, social, political, national, racial, religious, etc., his preaching of optimism, an active attitude towards life and man's high purpose in the world, in a word, he is great for his assertion of the noble ideals and principles of humanism, democracy, peace and friendship among peoples. [49] Others, including Wilfred Cantwell Smith, stated that with Iqbal's anti-capitalist holdings he was 'anti- intellect', because "capitalism fosters intellect". [49] Professor Freeland Abbot objected to Iqbal's views saying that Iqbal's view of the West was based on the role of imperialism and Iqbal was not immersed enough in Western culture to learn about the various benefits of the modern democracies, economic practices and science. [49] Critics of Abbot's viewpoint note that Iqbal was raised and educated in European way of life, and spent enough time there to grasp the general concepts of Western civilisation. [49] Bibliography Main article: Muhammad Iqbal bibliography Prose book  Ilm ul Iqtisad (1903) [5] Poetic books in Persian  Asrar-i-Khudi (1915) [5]  Rumuz-i-Bekhudi (1917) [5]  Payam-i-Mashriq (1923) [5]  Zabur-i-Ajam (1927) [5]  Javid Nama (1932) [5]  Pas Cheh Bayed Kard ai Aqwam-e-Sharq (1936) [5]  Armughan-e-Hijaz (1938) [4][5][27] (in Persian and Urdu) Poetic books in Urdu  Bang-i-Dara (1924) [5]  Bal-i-Jibril (1935) [5]  Zarb-i Kalim (1936) [5] Books in English  The Development of Metaphysics in Persia (1908) [4][5]  The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (1930) [4][5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Iqbal) Allama Iqbal BIOGRAPHY Iqbal was an heir to a very rich literary, mystic, philosophical and religious tradition. He imbibed and assimilated all that was best in the past and present Islamic and Oriental thought and culture. His range of interests covered Religion, Philosophy, Art, Politics, Economics, the revival of Muslim life and universal brotherhood of man. His prose, not only in his national language but also in English, was powerful. His two books in English demonstrate his mastery of English. But poetry was his medium par excellence of expression. Everything he thought and felt, almost involuntarily shaped itself into verse. Iqbal's Works His first book Ilm ul Iqtisad/The knowledge of Economics was written in Urdu in 1903 . His first poetic work Asrar-i Khudi (1915) was followed by Rumuz-I Bekhudi (1917). Payam-i Mashriq appeared in 1923, Zabur-i Ajam in 1927, Javid Nama in 1932, Pas cheh bayed kard ai Aqwam-i Sharq in 1936, and Armughan-i Hijaz in 1938. All these books were in Persian. The last one, published posthumously is mainly in Persian: only a small portion comprises Urdu poems and ghazals. His first book of poetry in Urdu, Bang-i Dara (1924) was followed by Bal-i Jibril in 1935 and Zarb-i Kalim in 1936. Bang-i Dara consist of selected poems belonging to the three preliminary phases of Iqbal's poetic career. Bal-i Jibril is the peak of Iqbal's Urdu poetry. It consists of ghazals, poems, quatrains, epigrams and displays the vision and intellect necessary to foster sincerity and firm belief in the heart of the ummah and turn its members into true believers. Zarb-i Kalim was described by the poet himself "as a declaration of war against the present era". The main subjects of the book are Islam and the Muslims, education and upbringing, woman, literature and fine arts, politics of the East and the West. In Asrar-i Khudi, Iqbal has explained his philosohy of "Self". He proves by various means that the whole universe obeys the will of the "Self". Iqbal condemns self- destruction. For him the aim of life is self-relization and self-knowledge. He charts the stages through which the "Self" has to pass before finally arriving at its point of perfection, enabling the knower of the "Self" to become the viceregent of Allah on earth/Khalifat ullah fi'l ard. In Rumuz-i Bekhudi, Iqbal proves that Islamic way of life is the best code of conduct for a nation's viability. A person must keep his individual characteristics intact but once this is achieved he should sacrifice his personal ambitions for the needs of the nation. Man cannot realize the "Self" out of society. Payam-i Mashriq is an answer to West-Istlicher Divan by Goethe, the famous German peot. Goethe bemoaned that the West had become too materialistic in outlook and expected that the East would provide a message of hope that would resuscitate spiritual values. A hundred years went by and then Iqbal reminded the West of the importance of morality, religion and civilization by underlining the need for cultivating feeling, ardour and dynamism. He explained that life could, never aspire for higher dimensions unless it learnt of the nature of spirituality. Zabur-i Ajam includes the Mathnavi Gulshan-i Raz-i Jadid and Bandagi Nama. In Gulshan-i Raz-i Jadid, he follows the famous Mathnavi Gulshan-i Raz by Sayyid Mahmud Shabistri. Here like Shabistri, Iqbal first poses questions, then answers them with the help of ancient and modern insight and shows how it effects and concerns the world of action. Bandagi Nama is in fact a vigorous campaign against slavery and subjugation. He explains the spirit behind the fine arts of enslaved societies. In Zabur-i Ajam, Iqbal's Persian ghazal is at its best as his Urdu ghazal is in Bal-i Jibril. Here as in other books, Iqbal insists on remembering the past, doing well in the present and preparing for the future. His lesson is that one should be dynamic, full of zest for action and full of love and life. Implicitly, he proves that there is no form of poetry which can equal the ghazal in vigour and liveliness. In Javid Nama, Iqbal follows Ibn-Arabi, Marri and Dante. Iqbal depicts himself as Zinda Rud (a stream, full of life) guided by Rumi the master, through various heavens and spheres and has the honour of approaching Divinity and coming in contact with divine illuminations. Several problems of life are discussed and answers are provided to them. It is an exceedingly enlivening study. His hand falls heavily on the traitors to their nation like Mir Jafar from Bengal and Mir Sadiq from the Deccan, who were instrumental in the defeat and death of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daula of Bengal and Sultan Tipu of Mysore respectively by betraying them for the benefit of the British. Thus, they delivered their country to the shackles of slavery. At the end, by addressing his son Javid, he speaks to the young people at large and provides guidance to the "new generation". Pas Cheh Bay ed Kard ai Aqwam-i Sharq includes the mathnavi Musafir. Iqbal's Rumi, the master, utters this glad tiding "East awakes from its slumbers" "Khwab-i ghaflat". Inspiring detailed commentary on voluntary poverty and free man, followed by an exposition of the mysteries of Islamic laws and sufic perceptions is given. He laments the dissention among the Indian as well as Muslim nations. Mathnavi Musafir, is an account of a journey to Afghanistan. In the mathnavi the people of the Frontier (Pathans) are counseled to learn the "secret of Islam" and to "build up the self" within themselves. Armughan-i Hijaz consists of two parts. The first contains quatrains in Persian; the second contains some poems and epigrams in Urdu. The Persian quatrains convey the impression as though the poet is travelling through Hijaz in his imaginatin. Profundity of ideas and intensity of passion are the salient features of these short poems. The Urdu portion of the book contains some categorical criticism of the intellectual movements and social and political revolutions of the modern age. Iqbal's English Works Iqbal wrote two books in English. The first being The Development of Metaphysics in Persia in which continuity of Persian thought is discussed and sufism is dealt with in detail. In Iqbal's view true Islamic Sufism awakens the slumbering soul to a higher idea of life. The second book, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, is the collection of Iqbal's six lectures which he delivered at Madras, Hyderabad and Aligarh. These were first published from Lahore in 1930 and then by Oxford University Press in 1934. Some of the main subjects are "Knowledge and Religious Experience," "The Conception of God and the Meaning of Prayer," "The Human Ego," "Predestination and Free Will," "The Spirit of Muslim Culture," "The Principle of Movement in Islam (Ijtihad)." These issues are discussed pithily in a thought provoking manner in the light of Islam and the modern age. These lectures were translated into Urdu by Sayyid Nazir Niazi. Letters In addition to these books he wrote hundreds of letters in Urdu and English. Urdu letters have been published in ten different books. He issued statements pertaining to the burning topics of the day relating to various aspects of social, religious, cultural and political problems of India, Europe and the world of Islam. For a few years he served as a Professor of Philosophy and Oriental Learning at the government College, Lahore and the Punjab University Oriental College. Many of his speeches and statements have been compiled and published in book form. Except for the last four years of his life he practised at the Lahore High Court Bar. All his life he was easily accessible to all and sundry and evening sessions at his home were a common feature. In Spite of his heavy political and social commitments he had time for poetry, a poetry which made philosophy sing. A.K Brohi says: Dr. Iqbal is undoubtedly a renowned poet-philosopher of Islam and may have in his writings a never failing source of inspiration, delight and aesthetic wonder. He has made signal contribution to our understanding of the Holy Writ of Islam and offered his evaluation of the remarkable example of which the life of the Prophet of Islam (pbuh) has presented to the world at large and the high water-mark of excellence, it provides of how best our earthly lives can be lived here below. Iqbal The Visionary Iqbal joined the London branch of the All India Muslim League while he was studying Law and Philosophy in England. It was in London when he had a mystical experience. The ghazal containing those divinations is the only one whose year and month of composition is expressly mentioned. It is March 1907. No other ghazal, before or after it has been given such importance. Some verses of that ghazal are: At last the silent tongue of Hijaz has announced to the ardent ear the tiding That the covenant which had been given to the desert-dwelles is going to be renewed vigorously: The lion who had emerged from the desert and had toppled the Roman Empire is As I am told by the angels, about to get up again (from his slumbers.) You the dwelles of the West, should know that the world of God is not a shop (of yours). Your imagined pure gold is about to lose it standard value (as fixed by you). Your civilization will commit suicide with its own daggers. A nest built on a frail bough cannot be durable. The caravan of feeble ants will take the rose petal for a boat And inspite of all blasts of waves, it shall cross the river. I will take out may worn-out caravan in the pitch darkness of night. My sighs will emit sparks and my breath will produce flames. For Iqbal it was a divinely inspired insight. He disclosed this to his listeners in December 1931, when he was invited to Cambridge to address the students. Iqbal was in London, participating in the Second Round Table Conference in 1931. At Cambridge, he referred to what he had proclaimed in 1906: I would like to offer a few pieces of advice to the youngmen who are at present studying at Cambridge ...... I advise you to guard against atheism and materialism. The biggest blunder made by Europe was the separation of Church and State. This deprived their culture of moral soul and diverted it to the atheistic materialism. I had twenty-five years ago seen through the drawbacks of this civilization and therefore had made some prophecies. They had been delivered by my tongue although I did not quite understand them. This happened in 1907..... After six or seven years, my prophecies came true, word by word. The European war of 1914 was an outcome of the aforesaid mistakes made by the European nations in the separation of the Church and the State. It should be stressed that Iqbal felt he had received a spiritual message in 1907 which even to him was, at that juncture, not clear. Its full import dawned on him later. The verses quoted above show that Iqbal had taken a bold decision about himself as well. Keeping in view that contemporary circumstances, he had decided to give a lead to the Muslim ummah and bring it out of the dark dungeon of slavery to the shining vasts of Independence. This theme was repeated later in poems such as "Abdul Qadir Ke Nam," "Sham-o-Sha'ir," "Javab-i Shikwa," "Khizr-i Rah," "Tulu-e Islam" etc. He never lost heart. His first and foremost concern, naturally, were the Indian Muslims. He was certain that the day of Islamic resurgence was about to dawn and the Muslims of the South Asian subcontinent were destined to play a prominent role in it. Iqbal, confident in Allah's grand scheme and His aid, created a new world and imparted a new life to our being. Building upon Sir Sayyid Ahmed's two-nation theory, absorbing the teaching of Shibli, Ameer Ali, Hasrat Mohani and other great Indian Muslim thinkers and politicians, listening to Hindu and British voices, and watching the fermenting Indian scene closely for approximately 60 years, he knew and ultimately convinced his people and their leaders, particularly Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah that: "We both are exiles in this land. Both longing for our dear home's sight!" "That dear home is Pakistan, on which he harpened like a flute-player, but whose birth he did not witness." Many verses in Iqbal's poetry are prompted by a similar impulse. A random example, a ghazal from Zabur-i Ajam published in 1927 illustrates his deepseated belief: The Guide of the Era is about to appear from a corner of the desert of Hijaz. The carvan is about to move out from this far flung valley. I have observed the kingly majesty on the faces of the slaves. Mahmud's splendour is visible in the dust of Ayaz. Life laments for ages both in the Ka'bah and the idol-house. So that a person who knows the secret may appear. The laments that burst forth from the breasts of the earnestly devoted people. Are going to initiate a new principle in the conscience of the world. Take this harp from my hand. I am done for. My laments have turned into blood and that blood is going to trickle from the strings of the harp. The five couplets quoted above are prophetic. In the first couplet Allama Iqbal indicates that the appearance of the Guide of the Era was just round the corner and the Caravan is about to start and emerge from "this" valley. Iqbal does not say that the awaited Guide has to emerge from the centre of Hijaz. He says he is going to appear from a far flung valley. For the poet the desert of Hijaz, at times, serves as a symbol for the Muslim ummah. This means that Muslims of the Indian sub-continent are about to have a man who is destined to guide them to the goal of victory and that victory is to initiate the resurgence of Islam. In the second couplet, he breaks the news of the dawn which is at hand. the slaves are turning into magnificent masters. In the third couplet he stresses the point that the Seers come to the world of man after centuries. He himself was one of those Seers. In the fourth couplet he refers to some ideology or principle quite new to the world which would effect the conscience of all humanity. And what else could it be, if it were not the right of self-determination for which the Muslims of the sub-continent were about to struggle. After the emergence of Pakistan this right became a powerful reference. It served as the advent of a new principle and continues to provide impetus to Muslims in minority in other parts of the world such as in the Philippines, Thailand and North America. In the fifth couplet Iqbal indicates that he would die before the advent of freedom. He was sure that his verses which epitomized his most earnest sentiments would stand in good stead in exhorting the Muslims of the sub-continent to the goal of freedom. Iqbal and Politics These thoughts crystallised at Allahabad Session (December, 1930) of the All India Muslim League, when Iqbal in the Presidential Address, forwarded the idea of a Muslim State in India: I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Provinces, Sind and Baluchistan into a single State. Self-Government within the British Empire or without the British Empire. The formation of the consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of the North-West India. The seed sown, the idea began to evolve and take root. It soon assumed the shape of Muslim state or states in the western and eastern Muslim majority zones as is obvious from the following lines of Iqbal's letter, of June 21, 1937, to the Quaid-i Azam, only ten months before the former's death: A separate federation of Muslim Provinces, reformed on the lines I have suggested above, is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of Non-Muslims. Why should not the Muslims of North-West India and Bengal be considered as nations entitled to self-determination just as other nations in India and outside India are. There are some critics of Allama Iqbal who assume that after delivering the Allahbad Address he had slept over the idea of a Muslim State. Nothing is farther from the truth. The idea remained always alive in his mind. It had naturally to mature and hence, had to take time. He was sure that the Muslims of sub-continent were going to achieve an independent homeland for themselves. On 21st March, 1932, Allama Iqbal delivered the Presidential address at Lahore at the annual session of the All-India Muslim Conference. In that address too he stressed his view regarding nationalism in India and commented on the plight of the Muslims under the circumstances prevailing in the sub-continent. Having attended the Second Round Table Conference in September, 1931 in London, he was keenly aware of the deep-seated Hindu and Sikh prejudice and unaccommodating attitude. He had observed the mind of the British Government. Hence he reiterated his apprehensions and suggested safeguards in respect of the Indian Muslims: In so far then as the fundamentals of our policy are concerned, I have got nothing fresh to offer. Regarding these I have already expressed my views in my address to the All India Muslim League. In the present address I propose, among other things, to help you, in the first place, in arriving at a correct view of the situation as it emerged from a rather hesitating behavior of our delegation the final stages of the Round-Table Conference. In the second place, I shall try, according to my lights to show how far it is desirable to construct a fresh policy now that the Premier's announcement at the last London Conference has again necessitated a careful survey of the whole situation. It must be kept in mind that since Maulana Muhammad Ali had died in Jan. 1931 and Quaid-i Azam had stayed behind in London, the responsibility of providing a proper lead to the Indian Muslims had fallen on him alone. He had to assume the role of a jealous guardian of his nation till Quaid-i Azam returned to the sub-continent in 1935. The League and the Muslim Conference had become the play-thing of petty leaders, who would not resign office, even after a vote of non-confidence! And, of course, they had no organization in the provinces and no influence with the masses. During the Third Round-Table Conference, Iqbal was invited by the London National League where he addressed an audience which included among others, foreign diplomats, members of the House of Commons, Members of the House of Lords and Muslim members of the R.T.C. delegation. In that gathering he dilated upon the situation of the Indian Muslims. He explained why he wanted the communal settlement first and then the constitutional reforms. He stressed the need for provincial autonomy because autonomy gave the Muslim majority provinces some power to safeguard their rights, cultural traditions and religion. Under the central Government the Muslims were bound to lose their cultural and religious entity at the hands of the overwhelming Hindu majority. He referred to what he had said at Allahabad in 1930 and reiterated his belief that before long people were bound to come round to his viewpoint based on cogent reason. In his dialogue with Dr. Ambedkar Allama Iqbal expressed his desire to see Indian provinces as autonomous units under the direct control of the British Government and with no central Indian Government. He envisaged autonomous Muslim Provinces in India. Under one Indian union he feared for Muslims, who would suffer in many respects especially with regard to their existentially separate entity as Muslims. Allama Iqbal's statement explaining the attitude of Muslim delegates to the Round-Table Conference issued in December, 1933 was a rejoinder to Jawahar Lal Nehru's statement. Nehru had said that the attitude of the Muslim delegation was based on "reactionarism." Iqbal concluded his rejoinder with: In conclusion I must put a straight question to punadi Jawhar Lal, how is India's problem to be solved if the majority community will neither concede the minimum safeguards necessary for the protection of a minority of 80 million people, nor accept the award of a third party; but continue to talk of a kind of nationalism which works out only to its own benefit? This position can admit of only two alternatives. Either the Indian majority community will have to accept for itself the permanent position of an agent of British imperialism in the East, or the country will have to be redistributed on a basis of religious, historical and cultural affinities so as to do away with the question of electorates and the communal problem in its present form. Allama Iqbal's apprehensions were borne out by the Hindu Congress ministries established in Hindu majority province under the Act of 1935. Muslims in those provinces were given dastardly treatment. This deplorable phenomenon added to Allama Iqbal's misgivings regarding the future of Indian Muslims in case India remained united. In his letters to the Quaid-i Azam written in 1936 and in 1937 he referred to an independent Muslim State comprising North-Western and Eastern Muslim majority zones. Now it was not only the North-Western zones alluded to in the Allahabad Address. There are some within Pakistan and without, who insist that Allama Iqbal never meant a sovereign Muslim country outside India. Rather he desired a Muslim State within the Indian Union. A State within a State. This is absolutely wrong. What he meant was understood very vividly by his Muslim compatriots as well as the non-Muslims. Why Nehru and others had then tried to show that the idea of Muslim nationalism had no basis at all. Nehru stated: This idea of a Muslim nation is the figment of a few imaginations only, and, but for the publicity given to it by the Press few people would have heard of it. And even if many people believed in it, it would still vanish at the touch of reality. Iqbal and the Quaid-i Azam Who could understand Allama Iqbal better than the Quaid-i Azam himself, who was his awaited "Guide of the Era"? The Quaid-i Azam in the Introduction to Allama Iqbal's lettes addressed to him, admitted that he had agreed with Allama Iqbal regarding a State for Indian Muslims before the latters death in April, 1938. The Quaid stated: His views were substantially in consonance with my own and had finally led me to the same conclusions as a result of careful examination and study of the constitutional problems facing India and found expression in due course in the united will of Muslim India as adumbrated in the Lahore Resolution of the All-India Muslim League popularly known as the "Pakistan Resolution" passed on 23rd March, 1940. Furthermore, it was Allama Iqbal who called upon Quaid-i Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah to lead the Muslims of India to their cherished goal. He preferred the Quaid to other more experienced Muslim leaders such as Sir Aga Khan, Maulana Hasrat Mohani, Nawab Muhammad Isma il Khan, Maulana Shaukat Ali, Nawab Hamid Ullah Khan of Bhopal, Sir Ali Imam, Maulvi Tameez ud- Din Khan, Maulana Abul Kalam, Allama al-Mashriqi and others. But Allama Iqbal had his own reasons. He had found his "Khizr- i Rah", the veiled guide in Quaid-i Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah who was destined to lead the Indian branch of the Muslim Ummah to their goal of freedom. Allama Iqbal stated: I know you are a busy man but I do hope you won't mind my writing to you often, as you are the only Muslim in India today to whom the community has right to look up for safe guidance through the storm which is coming to North-West India, and perhaps to the whole of India. Similar sentiments were expressed by him about three months before his death. Sayyid Nazir Niazi in his book Iqbal Ke Huzur, has stated that the future of the Indian Muslims was being discussed and a tenor of pessimism was visible from what his friends said. At this Allama Iqbal observed: There is only one way out. Muslim should strengthen Jinnah's hands. They should join the Muslim League. Indian question, as is now being solved, can be countered by our united front against both the Hindus and the English. Without it our demands are not going to be accepted. People say our demands smack of communalism. This is sheer propaganda. These demands relate to the defence of our national existence. He continued: The united front can be formed under the leadership of the Muslim League. And the Muslim League can succeed only on account of Jinnah. Now none but Jinnah is capable of leading the Muslims. Matlub ul-Hasan Sayyid stated that after the Lahore Resolution was passed on March 23, 1940, the Quaid-i Azam said to him: Iqbal is no more amongst us, but had he been alive he would have been happy to know that we did exactly what he wanted us to do. But the matter does not end here. Allama Iqbal in his letter of March 29, 1937 to the Quaid-i Azam had said: While we are ready to cooperate with other progressive parties in the country, we must not ignore the fact that the whole future of Islam as a moral and political force in Asia rests very largely on a complete organization of Indian Muslims. According to Allama Iqbal the future of Islam as a moral and political force not only in India but in the whole of Asia rested on the organization of the Muslims of India led by the Quaid-i Azam. The "Guide of the Era" Iqbal had envisaged in 1926, was found in the person of Muhammad Ali Jinnah. The "Guide" organized the Muslims of India under the banner of the Muslim League and offered determined resistance to both the Hindu and the English designs for a united Hindu-dominated India. Through their united efforts under the able guidance of Quaid-I Azam Muslims succeeded in dividing India into Pakistan and Bharat and achieving their independent homeland. As observed above, in Allama Iqbal's view, the organization of Indian Muslims which achieved Pakistan would also have to defend other Muslim societies in Asia. The carvan of the resurgence of Islam has to start and come out of this Valley, far off from the centre of the ummah. Let us see how and when, Pakistan prepares itself to shoulder this august responsibility. It is Allama Iqbal's prevision. The Holy Prophet has said: Beware of the foresight of the believer for he sees with Divine Light. (http://www.allamaiqbal.com/person/biography/biotxtread.html)