Two-nation theory is the pedestal on which Pakistan came into existence.

Though many did not agree with the rationale of the two-nation theory but few could dispute that Pakistan came into existence on its basis. However, what was the real aim of Pakistan. This is disputed and is being debated since its inception by political thinkers and researchers since the day one. In this regard there are mainly two views: One view contends that Pakistan was created for Islam. The other one argue that its purpose was to safeguard the political, religious, cultural as well as economic interests of the Muslims of India. In simple words the first view is that Pakistan meant to be Islamic state while the other insist that Pakistan was to be a Muslim state. The supporters of the first view base their arguments by referring to the thoughts and concept of Allama Iqbal and some speeches of Quaid-e-Azam and also refer to some well known slogans raised and chanted during the struggle for Pakistan. Likewise they contend that Allama Iqbal, considered as the creator of concept of Pakistan, demanded in his address a separate state for the Muslims of north India so that they could adopt a system according to Islamic laws. About Quaid-e-Azam concepts they refer some of his following like statements (1) We have to fight a double edged battle, one against the Hindu Congress and the British Imperialists, both of them being capitalists. The Muslims demand Pakistan where they could rule according to their own code of life and according to their own cultural growth, traditions and Islamic laws. (speech at the Frontier Muslim League Conference on November 21, 1945) (2) In August 1941, Quaid-e-Azam gave an interview to the students of the Osmania University to a question that What are the essential features of religion and a religious state? Quaid-e-Azam said that In other words, the Islamic state is an agency for enforcement of the Quranic principles and injunctions Similarly they also refer to the sloganPakistan Ka Matlab Kia? La Illaha Illa Allah, chanted during Pakistan movement. The contenders of the second view Muslim state have their own arguments. Besides other arguments they also quote from different speeches and statements of Quaid-eAzam to prove that he (Quaid-e-Azam) never meant Pakistan to be a theocratic state. Some of their arguments are as under: 1- If Pakistan was being created for Islam why the religious, political parties and most of the Ulema(religious scholars) opposed it. 2 Quaid-e-Azam and other League leaders were though Muslims but they were all secular regarding politics. (3) Quaid-e-Azams well known speech of 11th August, 1947, to the constituent assembly in which he declared that religion has nothing to do with the affairs of the state: You will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state. (4) The first Law Minister of Pakistan appointed by Quaid-e-Azam was Mundle ,a Hindu. If Quaid-e-Azam meant to make Pakistan a religious state he would have appointed some Muslim scholar instead of him on that very important post Besides the above arguments the supporters of this view also bring forth counter arguments in response to the arguments of the first view. Regarding Allama Iqbal concept they affirm that of course he did talk about Islamic state but he never meant it to be theocratic state if looked in proper context of his thoughts and philosophy. No doubt he dreamt and wished for such independent Muslim state in the Muslim majority areas of India where the Islamic principles and laws may be applied in such way where it should also be compatible with the modern thoughts and requirements. With it they also add, that except some random excellent views and comments, Iqbal had not sorted out a detailed and feasible plan for it at the moment (though he did urge the need for Ijtihad in this regard). As for Quaid-e-Azams views they argue that of course he too have exalted the great and high principles of Islam and its importance and efficacy in his various statements however this did not mean that he wanted a theocracy. They contend that his views are quoted without context otherwise his approach was secular and liberal. (Secular does not mean anti-religion as often wrongly understood mainly due to the propaganda of orthodox). They refer to different quotations from the speeches of Quaid-e-Azam which show that his concept of Pakistan was of modern and liberal state. Apart from the above arguments the holders of this

stance also bring forth arguments by recounting the political background of Pakistan movement. Allama Iqbal had presented his well known address in 1930 while Muslim League under Jinnah for a long time continued efforts for reaching some sort of arrangement with the Congress and the British government where the political, cultural and economic rights of the Muslims could be given constitutional guarantee. For this he made many efforts encompassing a whole decade and it was after League and Jinnah become convinced that no such guarantee could be granted then in March 1940 Pakistan resolution was passed which stated that in the light of lot of experience the Muslim League has reached to the conclusion that separate state could be the only solution of Muslims political problems. Of course on that occasion Jinnah did talk of two nations and elaborated the two-nation theory. However that did not mean that the demanded state was aimed for Islam. Here it could be further said that if Congress would have not been adamant in granting what the League were demanding then League would have never passed the Lahore resolution. Supporters of this view elaborate that though Muslim League did pass Pakistan Resolution however as politics is the name of seeking different possibilities and politicians have several alternative options so Quaid-e-Azam too as a politician had several options for the protection of Indian Muslims material interests and preservation of cultural identity. Among which one was through division of India but it was not inflexible. Jinnah continued talks with both British government and Congress leaders, even after the 1940 resolution, for seeking some other constitutional ways of the Indian problem. It means that Pakistan was not the final and unnegotiable option before League and Jinnah. Similarly League and Jinnah accepted the Cabinet Mission plan in 1946 though it had rejected the demand for Pakistan and instead a sort of loose federation or say confederation was proposed. The acceptance of that plan by League and Jinnah meant that creation of separate state was not their main and ultimate demand. As in the Cabinet Mission plan Muslims could have got the safeguards of their rights for which they were demanding since long so League accepted it. The arrogant and imposing attitude of Nehru and Patel and the prejudiced policy of Congress regarding the plan compelled Jinnah to withdraw his earlier acceptance of the plan, otherwise India would not have been divided. (A prominent Indian politician Jaswant Singh has also said that in his book - Jinnah, Partition and Independence.) The positive response of Jinnah regarding the Cabinet Mission plan shows that if the establishment of Islamic state was his basic aim he would have been totally adamant for exclusively independent Muslim state and would never have shown any elasticity. About the Islamic factor in the movement they (adherents of this stance) are of the view that the slogan of Islam raised during the movement of Pakistan was, in the first place, not the official slogan of Muslim League or Quaid-e-Azam nor the top leaders of the movement raised it, rather it was being chanted by the workers at the lower level and secondly it was just for motivating the Muslim masses and mustering their support while basic end was protection of political, cultural and economic interests of the Muslims of north India. According to them if some sections of the League adopted the slogan of Islam for its movement it was justified and was a proper approach seen in the context of the situation of that time. They argue that raising of such slogan was aimed for the success of such movement which had a very great objective. Political system of Pakistan and Jinnahs observation about Islamic principles. Regarding the statements of Jinnah about the Islamic principles in the constitutional and political system of Pakistan the supporters of the later viewpoint (modern Muslim state) argue that in political affairs his approach was of course, that of secular and liberal politician while with this he was a Muslim too. Though Quaid-e-Azam never claimed nor thought himself of any saintliness or holiness, but as common and simple Muslim he was fighting for the rights of Muslims of India with all sincerity which even his worst but honest opponents cannot deny. It was due to his being Muslim that he considered Muslims as separate nation and who had different interests from those of Hindus - and because of it he was holder of the two-nation theory What Quaid-eAzam thought about the lofty principles no believing Muslim can disagree with. About the Islamic ideal and principles, in particular those related with social economic aspects, his observations were that it were not only fully compatible with the modern world but in several respects were also more better and suitable compared to western ones.

Here it need to be mentioned that his approach towards religion was different from that of the orthodox religious class, who mainly confine Islam to the petty Fiqi issues or hadood laws or insist only in its form. For Quaid-e-Azam, the spirit of Islam was of real importance. In this regard his views were in line with that of Iqbal, though he was not scholar of Iqbals caliber however the source of his Islamic insight was, besides his own personal reading, the views of Allama Iqbal and some other enlightened scholars. In line with his distinctive solemnity he sincerely believed that Islamic ideals and principles, in particular those related with the socio and economic aspects and rule of justice etc had great value and importance so he earnestly thought that these principles and ideals must be guiding source for the constitutional set up of Pakistan. In a broadcast to the people of United States of America (Feb 1948) what Quaid-e-Azam stated showed that on the one hand he was totally against the theocracy while along with it he was in favour of utilising the lofty values and principles in the constitutional set up of Pakistan. He said: There will be no type of theocracy in Pakistan in which government is handed over to clergy proclaiming to be the divine mission. Next he stated that the Constitution of Pakistan is yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this Constitution will be, but I am sure that it will be of the democratic type, embodying the essential principles of Islam. Today they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fair play to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions, and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as the framers of the future Constitution of Pakistan. In support of it his such thoughts the opinion of Fatima Jinnah is also referred. In her book Memories of Fatima Jinnah Mrs. Sorayya Khurshid quote Fatima Jinnah as follows Ms Jinnah believed Jinnah stood for Islamic socialism and wanted the Constitution framed on those lines and didnt like feudalism (p.63). Similarly at another place the author stated about her views thus: About artists she said: I feel they will not be treated well here. Some people want to colour Pakistan with Mullaism by hook or by crook although the Pakistan Movement mentioned only Islamic socialism (p125). In short the approach of Quaid-e-Azam, according to this point of view, was basically secular and was against Mullaism. However as a balanced and realistic person he did believe in the importance and utility of many Islamic ideals and values particularly in the context of Muslim culture and belief so he could never ignore or set aside them. Most of the thinkers support this stance. In their opinion the concept of both Iqbal and Jinnah was that guidance should be taken from the great values and essential principles of DEEN however its leadership should never be in the hands of clergy. It is one of misfortunes that most of Pakistan Muslims think that only the traditional religious class can be the interpreters of Islamic teachings. And another misfortune of Pakistan was that the then religious leaders did prevail when the constitution was being made and under their pressure Objective resolution was passed which in the course of time has been exploited both by the religious and the ruling junta for their own vested and short-term political interests. It is said that if Jinnah were alive at that time he could have found a way out of it In conclusion it could reasonably be supposed that Pakistan was mainly created for the rights of Muslim as last option. Religion, mainly as in its civilization status also worked as one of the motivating factors in this struggle. Though religion as understood and preached by Mullahs was never the aim of Quaid-e-Azam however in spite of all his secularism he was also not averse to the Ideals of Islam It is reasonably supposed that had he been alive for some time he would have recommended such set-up for Pakistan where both the Islamic ideals and modern thoughts essential for progress would have been fully accommodated and Pakistan would have been such a modern welfare Muslim state which would have been secular and also the bearer of moral and spiritual culture.