Two-Nation Theory -Debunking The Debunkers


What is so special about the genesis of Pakistan which has imposed an everlasting influence in the minds and hearts of foes in capes, and the friends in the masks with such an unending obsession to stab the vary soul of this ideal from every possible angle in an effort to prove it wrong? What is so special? Is it fear or despair? It just might be little bit of both. They can’t just comprehend the inkling behind the creation of Pakistan. In an age where nations were getting defined on the basis of linguistic boundaries and corrupted tribal history, this man-made gulf saw the rise of something honest, something elemental, dawn of an idea which was uniting a group of people rather than dividing them.

Consider the pretext as a preface of the books which we never read and jumped directly to the Chapter One. The topic in consideration is an article published in the Pakistan Today on 28th January 2016, titled as Debunking the ‘founders’ of Two-Nation Theory. Quite intriguing, right? Heavy references and compiling opinions of people in one page and naming it a “debunking story” is a leap of faith to say the least, and evidently this leap seems a gigantic one which in a mere glance seems crossing most boundaries of rationale and logic while flying around the skies of utopia by defying rules of academia and finally attempting a crash landing in land of the lost to draw a fateful conclusion.

Discussing the origin of two-nation theory the whole write up revolves around a peculiar narrative, it doesn’t say why on the basis of logic two-nation-theory is imperfect or why it’s an outdated version of political intellect?  Instead it targets its first known preachers in a spiteful manner by giving some excretal examples from some books written by the early Muslim leaders of subcontinent emphasizing on a self-created point to hone on gullible minds that because the “founders” of two-nation theory (most of which were social activists, political figures and in some cases religious philosophers) came up with diverse ideas at different stages of their respective life spans, therefore something which they advocated with a reasoned approach and orated in a resounding manner must also be inconsistent, politically incorrect, and should be subjected to ridicule. It is like judging the patent of Light bulb by Thomas Edison’s through his thousand failed attempts of inventing it, or for that instance throwing someone’s computer sciences PHD in garbage because s/he scored poorly in computer related subjects in 5th grade.

Excerpt referencing and commenting are known methods of a well-known faction, a usual naïve and atypical slant from a specific school of thought – something which could only be termed as selective amnesia – the illiberal liberal faction of Pakistani society, analyzing Pakistan from  the Indian spectacle. They would go after a portion of an account, a part of a story, a page of a book and construct an entire edifice out of it; some excerpts were quoted from lifelong works of the named figures and to the reader’s surprise an epilogue was deduced out of isolation. Similarly, they would ignore whole life and struggle of a person like the Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah; they will overlook his complete ideological commitment; his political journey; his public and private life, knowing that anything even remotely related to his ideological mind set at a given point in time is quite open for assessment, especially most significant events of his self-expressions are documented in a detailed manner by several people, yet the illiberal liberal scholars would pick just one instance of 11th August speech, take an excerpt out of it, evaluate it in total isolation and blow it completely out of proportion and perspective to carve out a desired narrative. They will never quote what the great man meant, what he said previously said, and what he vowed afterwards.

Secondly, it needs to be cleared that the two-nation theory is not something which was founded by the Muslims of subcontinent; neither was it some import item from central Asia which Muslim conquerors brought in bag packs. It’s the natural separation theory; the indicated founders in the aforementioned article in discussion were more of the preachers of an already existent idea. This theory is a natural phenomenon which still exists anywhere where people with two opposing belief sets happen to live together and is in a state of rift because of social and religious practices of their contrasting life styles. The majority here attempts to overcome the communal jolts causing by the fissure generated by difference in lifestyle vis-à-vis the minority. When put in perspective these attempts of overwhelming the minority will gradually over the time trigger further confrontation between these groups which inevitably ends up in escalating the situation to a level at time when no solution is acceptable for both parties, such as the extinction of an entire race in case of Native American vs. European settlers; extreme atrocities and marginalization of native

Dravidian culture by the hands of intruding Aryans in ancient India; expulsion of Muslims masses from Spain, and more recently the creation of separate states of East Timor and South Sudan. Two-nation theory was founded on the day when the mankind split in two entirely conflicting clusters of beliefs while sharing or neighboring same landscape. In case of Indian subcontinent, it could be traced back to the arrivals of Muslim Arabs and establishment of their local settlement in coastal areas of present day Sind which expanded over the span of time and finally because of above described attributes led up to the creation of Pakistan after almost a thousand years of ups and downs.

Only distinctive pattern in case of creation of Pakistan was the further purification of this natural separation theory when usual definitive attributes like native culture and sub-nationalism were suppressed in favor of adoption of a cleaner divine identity of Islam, when a Punjabi speaking Muslim Jaat of east Punjab, a Bengali of united Bengal and a Urdu speakers of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Dehli, who ate the same cuisine, enjoyed the same seasonal festivities and wore the same clothes, even in some cases shared the same forefathers vividly declared that he is entirely different from his similar sibling who follows Hinduism; the two-nation theory was certified with 76% of distinct Muslim votes in the polls of 1946. 76% is not a contradiction. It is a reflection of near unanimous consciousness.

Finally getting back to where it all started, the whole movement of creation of Pakistan is so captivating that the question what is so special about it becomes self-explanatory for ones who truly understand. The answer of which is manifestly imprinted in the minds and hearts of the foes in the capes, and friends in the masks still obsessively wondering for a cure of it. For those who couldn’t relate to it, it will always be a baffling fable which will force them to stand in front of mirror every now and then and re-iterate the same question over and over.


Ahsan Malik is an IT professional with a passionate & candid version of his own on national and international issues relating to Pakistan, he tweets @MohdAhsanMalik and can be reached at

Leave A Reply