Dialogue With A Giant - Q1

My teacher Khurram Ali Shafique sahab recommended me a book, "Verdict On India". There was a chapter in which the writer, Beverly Nichols interviewed Jinnah in 1943. Though Jinnah promised to give him just half an hour but they actually talked for three hours, concerning matters of wide range. This post is part of a series where I am going to break down this interview into smaller posts for effective reading. 

What I found profound about this interview is the stature of Quaid-e-Azam. The power in his answers is almost tangible. You can feel the strength of his argument and relive the faith which the Muslims of that time felt when they were in Quaid's presence. 

Its also amusing (for me) that this interview is sort of an elder is admonishing a child of stupid behavior. Or may be Pakistan has been so much a reality for us that we almost (mentally) accuse different nations of not seeing it so. May be every national feels the same for their country which we feel for Pakistan.

Anyway, here's the first question from Nichols to Jinnah. 

Beverly Nichols: The most common accusation of your critics is that you
have not defined Pakistan with sufficient precision that there
aren't any details of defense, economics, minorities, etc., which you
have left deliberately vague. Do you think that is a just criticism?

JINNAH: It is neither just nor intelligent, particularly if it is made
by an Englishman with any knowledge of his own history. When
Ireland was separated from Britain, the document embodying the
terms of separation was approximately ten lines. Ten lines of print
to settle a dispute of incredible complexity which has poisoned
British politics for* centuries! All the details were left to the
Future and the Future is often an admirable arbitrator. Well,
I've already given the world a good deal more than ten lines to
indicate the principles and practice of Pakistan, but it is beyond
the power of any man to provide, in advance, a blue-print in
which every detail is settled. Besides, Indian history proves that
such a blue-print is totally unnecessary. Where was the blue-print
when the question of Burmah's separation was decided at the
Round Table Conference? Where was the blue-print when Sind
was separated from Bombay? The answer, of course, is 'nowhere'.
It didn't exist. It didn't need to exist. The vital point was that
the principle of separation was accepted; the rest followed
automatically.



Jinnah had always emphasized that the system of Pakistan will be according to the jurisprudence taken from the Quran and Sunnah. He talked about rights of poor people, strong character, education, equal laws for rich and poor. He envisioned a just society where there will be nobody deprived of all the good God has bestowed upon this world. He entrusted this land to its people and he was sure that they will carve out their way as the need will be. 

I will post the next question in a few days. Please provide your feedback on this part.