IQBAL'S CONCEPT OF STATE

Iqbal ranks as one of the greatest political thinkers who have sponsored revolutions in the domains of thought and culture and under whose intellectual impact great kingdoms were carved out. Like Plato, Rousseau, Mazzini and Karl-Marx, who were the forerunners of Greek Republic, French Republic, Italian Empire and the Communist State, Iqbal is the spiritual founder of Pakistan. His contribution to political philosophy and science are valuable in as much as he revitalised the decaying civilization of the Muslims of India and raised them to a higher pedestal of vision and culture.

"Dare and Live" said Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, "is Iqbal's message. Optimism, industry, faith, self-confidence and courage are the principles on which Iqbal bases his philosophy and which he believes are the essential factors for the purification of human soul, and for the elevation of human character. The obstacles and setbacks in life, according to him make the life worth living. The sacrificees and losses made and incurred in the service of a right cause and for noble principles elevate a nation and make life more glorious and worth living.

"Iqbal never believed in failure. He believed in the superiority of mankind over all the rest that God created. In fact he was convinced that man is a collection of all that is best in God's universe. Only man does not know himself. Man has but to utilise his great potentialities and to use them in the right direction for the realization of that 'self' which finds itself so near to God; and Islam is the code which has prescribed easy ways and means for that realization.

"Iqbal was not only a philosopher but also a practical politican. He was one of the first to conceive of the feasibility of the divisior of India on national lines as the only solution of India's political problem. He was one of the most powerful thinkers, tacit precursors and heralds of modern political evolution of Muslim India."[1]

Iqbal's most significant contribution to the contemporary political thought was made in his presidential address to the All India Muslim League in 1930 at Allahabad. It is here that he propounds the Muslim philosophy of state and suggests in its light the solution to the communal problem of the sub-continent. It was this suggestion to divide India on Ideological grounds that flowered into Pakistan. In this address Iqbal said: "Part of her people have cultural affinities with nations in the East, and part with nations in the middle and west of Asia. If an effective principle of co-operation is discovered in India it will bring peace and mutual goodwill to this ancient land which has suffered so long. more because of her situation in historic space than because of any inherent incapacity of her people. And it will at the same time solve the entire political problem of Asia.

"As far as I have been able to read the Muslim minds, I have no hesitation in declaring that, if the principle that the Indian Muslim is entitled to full and free development on the lines of his own culture and tradition in his own Indian homelands is recognised as the basis of a permanent communal settlement, he will be ready to stake his all for the freedom of India.

"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 North-West Indian Muslims State appears to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.

"The idea need not alarm the Hindus or the British. India is the greatest Muslim country in the world. The life of Islam as a cultural force in this country very largely depends on its centralisation in a specified territory. This centralisation of the most living portion of the Muslims of India whose military and police service has, notwithstanding unfair treatment from the British, made the British rule possible in this country, will eventually solve the problem of India as well as of Asia. It will intensify their sense of responsibility and deepen their patriotic feeling. Thus, possessing full opportunity of development within the body politics of India, the North-West Indian Muslims will prove the bast defenders of India against a foreign invasion, be that invasion the one of ideas or of bayonets.

"I therefore, demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim State in the best interests of India and Islam. For India it means security and Peace resulting from an internal balance of power; for Islam an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilize its law, its education, its culture, and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and with the spirit of modern times."

Iqbal had filled the minds of the Muslims of this sub-continent by his powerful and penetrating politico-cum-spiritual poetry and speeches and re-awakened the lifeless and slumbering soul of Muslim India. He was the Mazzini and Rousseau of his nation to inspire confidence to carve out their own Empire — the Pakistan. Our Quaid-e-Azam received inspiration for the revival of Islamic spirit and the creation of the state from the sage of Lahore; and played the role of Cavour and Garibaldi.

In the domain of political science and constitutionalism, Muslim jurists and thinkers like Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafii, Ghazzali, Tusi, al-Mawardi Shah Waliullah Abdul Wahab have exercised a profound and far reaching influence on Iqbal, but there is originality and Ijtihad in his ideals of 'Islamic Polity'.

For a true estimate of Iqbal's polity let us have a glimpse at the evolution of Political Science.

Aristotle had distinguished ethics from politics but had not separated the two, whereas Machiavelli brought about a complete divorce between them. Moral virtues had their own values, but he refused to assign them any place in his scheme of things. Morality was not denied but was subordinated to politics. It is because of this Erastianism[2] that we think that modern study of politics begins with^- Machiavelli and the idea of a secular 'national' and 'isolated' state gained ascendency.

Luther's revolt against the universal tradition of the Roman Church created a definite distinction between spiritual and secular authority and gave an immense impetus to the growth of Nationalism, Rousseau, Bodin and Hobbes were also the advocates of Erastian theory and were responsible for the creation of modern national States. These movements led to Royal Absolutism and the formulation of doctrine of Divine Right of Kings. But after the Industrial Revolution Democracy and Parliamentary Government came into existence. The Divine Right _of kings was replaced by 'Social Contract? principles and the foundations of the Government by the people and for the people were laid. But during all these periods the separatist tendency of the Church and the State had its firm roots in the Western Civilization.

Iqbal regarded Erastianism as a curse and an impediment to human progress and civilization and says: "It cannot be denied that Islam, regarded as an ethical ideal plus a certain kind of polity by which expression I mean a social structure, regulated by a legal system and animated by a specific ethical ideal-has been the chief formative factor in the life-history of the Muslims of India. It has furnished those basic emotions and loyalties which gradually unify scattered individuals and groups, and finally transform them into a well-defined people, possessing a moral consciousness of their own. Indeed it is no exaggeration to say that India is perhaps the only country in the world where Islam, as a people building force, has worked at its best. In India, as elsewhere, the structure of Islam as a society is almost entirely due to the working of Islam as a culture inspired by a specific ethical ideal.

What I mean to say is that Muslim society, with its remarkable homogeneity and inner unity, has grown to be what it is, under the pressure of the laws and institutions associated with the culture of Islam. The ideas set free by European political thinking, however, are now rapidly changing the outlook of the present generation of Muslims both in India and outside India. Our younger men, inspired by these ideas, are anxious to see them as living forces in their own countries, without any critical appreciation of the facts which have determined their evolution in Europe. In Europe Christianity was understood to be a purely monastic order which gradually developed into a vast church-organisation. The protest of Luther was directed against this Church-organization, not against any system of polity of a secular nature, for the obvious reason that there was no such polity associated with Christianity. And Luther was perfectly justified in rising in revolt against this organisation: though, I think, he did not realise that in the peculiar conditions which obtained in Europe his revolt would eventually mean the complete displacement of universal ethics of Jesus by the growth of a plurality of national and hence narrower systems of ethics. Thus the upshot of the intellectual movement initiated by such men as Rousseau and Luther was the break-up of the one into a mutually ill-adjusted many, the transformation of a human into a national outlook, requiring a more realistic foundation such as the nation of country and finding expression through varying systems of polity evolved on national lines i.e. on lines which recognise territory as the only principle of political solidarity.

"If you begin with the conception of religion as complete other worldliness, then what has happened to Christianity in Europe is perfectly natural. The universal ethics of Jesus is displaced by national systems and ethics and polity. The conclusion to which Europe is consequently driven is that religion is a private affair of the individual, and has nothing to do with what is called man's temporal life. Islam does not bifurcate the unity of man into an irreconcilable duality of spirit and matter. In Islam God and the universe, spirit and matter, church and state, are organic to each other. Man is not the citizen of a profane world to be renounced in the interest of a world of spirit situated elsewhere. To Islam matter is spirit realizing itself in space and time. Europe uncritically accepted the duality of spirit and matter probably from Mannichaean thought. Her best thinkers are realising this initialmistake today, but her statesmen are indirectly forcing the world to accept it as an unquestionable dogma. It is, then, this mistaken separation of spiritual and temporal which has largely influenced European religious and political thought, and has resulted practically in the total exclusion of Christianity from the life of European States. The result is a set of mutually ill adjusted States dominated by interests, not human but national. And these mutually ill-adjusted states, after trampling over the moral and religious convictions of Christianity, are today feeling the need of a federated Europe, i.e. the need of a unity which the Christian Church-organisation originally gave them, but which, instead of reconstructing in the light of Christ's vision of human brotherhood, they considered it fit to destroy under the inspiration of Luther. A Luther in the world of Islam, however, is an impossible phenomena; for here there is no Church-organisation, similar to that of Christianity in the Middle Ages, inviting a destroyer."

Expounding the unique feature of Islam, he further says: "In the world of Islam we have a universal polity whose fundamentals are believed to have been revealed' but whose structure, owing to our legists, want of contact with the modern world, stands today in need of renewed power by fresh adjustments, I do not know what will be the final fate of the national idea in the world of Islam. Whether Islam will assimilate and transform it, as it has assimilated and transformed before many ideas expressive of different spirit, or allow a radical transformation of its own structure by the force of this idea, is hard to predict. Professor Wensinck of Leiden (Holland) wrote to me the other day: 'It seems to me that Islam is entering upon a crisis through which Christianity has been passing for more than a century. The great difficulty is how to save the foundations of religion when many antiquated notions have to be given up. It seems to me scarcely possible to state what the outcome will be for Christianity, still less what it will be for Islam.' "At the present moment the national idea is racialising the outlook of Muslims, and thus materially counteracting the humanising work of Islam. And the growth of racial consciousness may moan the growth of standards different and even opposed to the standards of Islam."[3]

In Germany, the rise of the Idealist School marked a distinct reaction against the materialistic rationalism prevailing in the latter half of the 18th century with the influence of the teachings of Locke, Hume and others. This materialistic rationalism was attacked by Rousseau who valued man not according to his reason but according to his moral nature. Rousseau's ideas profoundly influenced the German Philosophers like Kant, who laid the foundations of the Idealist School in Germany.

By binding Politics to Ethics, Kant like Iqbal gave an entirely new orientation to the conception of Right, Property, Law, State etc. His system of idealism puts the absolute truth at the basis of morals, law and politics. Morality, law and politics are concerned with the co-existence and interaction of two or more rational free wills. It is morality that guides him to do that only, which is consistent with the same action of every other.

Commenting on Kant and Ghazzali Iqbal writes: "It cannot, however. he denied that Ghazzali's mission was almost apostolic like that of Kant in Germany of the eighteenth century. In Germany rationalism appeared as an ally of religion, but she soon realised that the dogmatic side of religion, was incapable of demonstration. The only course open to her was to eliminate dogma from the sacred record. With the elimination of dogma came the utilitarian view of morality and thus rationalism completed the reign of unbelief. Such was the state of theological thought in Germany when Kant appeared. His Critique of Pure Reason revealed the limitations of human reason and reduced the whole work of rationalists to a heap of ruins. And justly he has been described as God's greatest gift to his country. Ghazzali's philosophical scepticism which, however, went a little too far, virtually did the same kind of work in the world of Islam in breaking the back of that proud but shallow rationalism which moved in the same direction as a preKantian rationalism in Germany. There is, however, one important difference between Ghazzali and Kant. Kant, consistently with his principles, could not affirm the possibility of a knowledge of God. Ghazzali, finding no hope in analytic thought, moved to mystic experience, and there found an independent content for religion. In this way he succeeded in securing for religion the right to exist independently of science and metaphysics."[4]

But undoubtedly there should be a harmonious adjustment of Ethics and Politics in any system of Government. The State is no doubt a human institution for the good of mankind. Morality and State are, therefore, concomitant to each other.

Iqbal loves his country but is greatly dissatisfied with the aggressive Nationalism which is a canker eating into the very vitals of humanity and is also totally antogonistic to the principles of Islam: He writes:

"If the purpose of human society is to ensure peace and security for the nations and to transform their present social organism into a single social order, then one cannot think of any other social order than that of Islam. This is so because according to my reading of the Quran, Islam does not aim at the moral reformation of the individual alone; it also aims at a gradual but fundamental revolution in the social life of mankind, which should altogether change its national and racial view. point and create in its place a purely human consciousness. The history of religions conclusively show that in ancient times religion was national as in the case of Egyptians, Greeks and Iranians. Later on, it became racial as that of the Jews. Christianity taught that religion is an individual and private affair. Religion having become synonymous with private beliefs, Europe began to think that the State alone was responsible for the social life of man. It was Islam and Islam alone, which, for the first time, gave the message to mankind that religion was neither national and racial, nor individual and private, but purely human and that its purpose was to unite and organise mankind despite all its natural distinctions. Such a system cannot be built on beliefs alone. And this is the only way in which harmony and concord can be introduced in the sentiments and thoughts of mankind. This harmony is essential for the formation and preservation of a community. In the present day political literature, however, the idea of nation is not merely geographical: it is rather a principle of human society and as such it is a political concept. Since Islam is also a law of human society the word 'country', when used as a political concept, comes into conflict with Islam."[5]

Like Utilitarian thinkers Iqbal believed in hard realities of human life. Man is social by nature and is always moved to action by desire to obtain happiness and avoid pain, which desire involves him into relationship with other individuals, necessitating state regulation of mutual relations of men by legislation. Utilitarianism has, thus, a close touch with practical ethics and politics. To the utilitarians the State is a human necessity, for it promotes general welfare or the greatest happiness of the greatest number.

But Iqbal believes that the law of the State is only respectable when based on Truth and Righteousness; and Allah is the fountain of all power. He is the real ruler of the Universe and bestows wordly powers and positions whomsoever he pleaseth. But all are based on a regulated law.

Thus we see that God is the real ruler of the world. His law is supreme, while man is His vicegerent, and of the human species. He appoints Kings, and magistrates whose most important duty is to do justice according to the law and never to be led away by personal desires — such are the teachings of the Quran; and this is the ideal of unselfish justice which was a definite break with the past and which, in turn, is regarded as the most sacred right of the citizen, all the world over.

The poet thinks: "Islam, as a polity, is only a practical means of making this principle (Thawhid, i.e. Monotheism) a living factor in the intellectual and emotional life of mankind. It demands loyalty to God, not to thrones. And since God is the ultimate spiritual basis of all life, loyalty to God virtually amounts to man's loyalty to his own ideal nature. The ultimate spiritual basis of all life, as conceived by Islam, is enternal and reveals itself in variety and change.[6]

"But", Iqbal thinks, "eternal principles when they are understood to exclude all possiblities of change which, according to the Quran is one of the greatest 'signs' of God, tend to immobilise what is essentially mobile in its nature. The failure of Europe in political and social science illustrates the former principle, the immobility of Islam during the last 500 years illustrates the latter."

Exhorting the Muslims to "Ijtihad" which in the terminology of Islamic law means to exert with a view to form an opinion on a legal question not specifically stated in the Quran and Sunah, most in keeping with the spirit of the shariah and the needs of the society. Iqbal believes that the idea had its origin in a well-known verse of the Quran — "and to those who exert we show Our path." We find it more definitely adumbrated in a tradition of the Holy Prophet. When Ma'ad was appointed ruler of Yemen, the Prophet is reported to have asked him as to how he would decide matters coming up before him. 'I will judge matters according to the Book of Allah', said Ma'ad. 'But if the Book of Allah contains nothing to guide you ? 'Then I will act on the precedents of the Prophet of Allah: 'But if the precedents fail ?' Then I will exert to form my own judgment'.

Upholder of the doctrine of Ijtihad he was one with the 'doctors of law both of Arabian and non-Arbian descent' and believes in three degrees of Ijtihad (1) Complete authority in legislation (2) Relative authority (3) Special authority which relates to the law determining the law applicable to a particular case left undetermined by the founders." Discussing the first degree of Ijtihad only i.e. complete authority in legislation, Iqbal says, "The theoretical possibility of this degree of Ijtihad is admitted by the Sunnis, but in practice it has been denied ever since the establishment of the schools, in as much as the idea of complete Ijtihad is hedged round by conditions which are well-nigh impossible of realisation in a single individual. Such an attitude seems exceedingly strange in system of law based mainly on the ground work provided by the Quran which embodies an essentially dynamic outlook on life.

In the 13th century there arose a great reformer and preacher of Islam Ibne Taimiyya who claimed the freedom of ljtihad for himself and revolted against the rigidity of the schools and exerted himself to rethink and make a fresh start. "Like Ibn-i-Hazm — the founder of Zahiri school of law — he rejected the Hanafite principle of reasoning by analogy and Ijma as understood by older legists and he was right in doing so... In the 16th century Allama Sayuti claimed the same priviliege of Ijtihad to which he added the idea of a renovator at the begining of each century but the spirit of lbn-i-Taimiyya's teaching found a fuller expression in a movement of immense potentialities which arose in the 18th century from the sands of Najd, described by Macdonald as the cleanest spot in the decadent world of Islam. It is really the first throb of life in modern Islam. To the inspiration of this movement are traceable, directly or indirectly, nearly all the great modern movements of Muslim Asia and Africa e.g. the Sennusi movement, the Pan Islamic Movement."[7]

This movement of Ijtihad only infused a spirit of freedom, though inwardly this too was conservative in its own fashion. "While it rises in revolt" as writes Iqbal, "against the finality of the school, and vigorously asserts the right of private judgement, its vision of the past is wholly uncritical and in matters of law it mainly falls back on the traditions of Prophet".

Reviewing the history of the trends of orientation in Islamic thought, Professor H.A.R. Gibb comments thus: "The counterpart of Ijma or Consensus, is Ijtihad, "exercise of judgment, which has been called by Iqbal the 'Principle of Movement in Islam'. But it is important for us to understand exactly what Ijtihad means and the role which, it has played in the history of Muslim religious thought. To begin with, it in no way implies, as some modernists would like us to believe 'freedom of judgment'. The word literally means 'exerting oneself' in the sense of striving to discover the true application of the teachings of the Quran and the traditions to a particular situation, and it may not go against the plain sense of these teachings. The orthodox theologians fearing that to recognise the legitimacy of Ijtihad might open the door to individual reinterpretation and schism, have always done their best to limit its scope. According to the classical doctrine the range of Ijtihad was progressively narrowed down, as successive generation of doctors, supported by 'Consensus', filled up the gaps in the doctrinal and legal systems. Finally no more gaps remained to be filled and only very insignificant ones and thereupon "the gate of Ijtihad was closed", never again to be reopened.

"By this means the scholastics applied an effective brake to the principle of movement. Nevertheless, many reformers dared the ban and claimed the right of Ijtihad. Here again we are faced with a paradox. Their claim is, of course, worthless unless it is supported by Ijma. But it is precisely against Ijma that they have raised their voices, against (that is to say) the doctrine that matters of belief and practice have been irrevocably determined by the consensus of the community in past generations. They assert that later generations cannot be bound by what they regard as errors of past generations. Those modernists who claim the 'right of Ijtihad', the right to reject the theological constructions of the Middle ages and to reinterpret the sources in the light of modern thought, may have at least an arguable case. But their action remains purely individual, personal and therefore negligible unless they can secure the approval of Ijma. And it is a significant fact that only claimants to Ijtihad whose claims have been supported by some measures of consensus have been those who rejected certain of the beliefs or practices sanctioned by Ijma, not in order to modernise the doctrines of Islam, but in order to return to the practice of the primitive community.[8]

In Turkey the idea of Ijtihad in the light of modern philosophical ideas received fresh orientation in the political and religious thought of the nation. Halim Sabit's new theory of Muslim law is undoubtedly based on modern sociological concepts and the renaissance of Islam demands a revaluation of Muslim intellectual inheritance.

Iqbal disliked the idea of Turkish nationalist theory of State and called it misleading in as much as it suggests a dualism which does not exist in Islam. "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. It is the invisible mental background of the act which ultimately determines it character. An act is temporal or profane if it is done in a spirit of detachment from the infinite complexity of life hehind it; it is spiritual if it is inspired by that complexity. In Islam it is the same reality which appears as Church looked at fi am one point of view and State from another. It is not true to say that Church and State are two sides or facets of the same thing. Islam is a single unanalysable reality which is one or the other as your point of view varies. The truth, however, is that matter is spirit in space-time reference. The unity called man is body when you look at it as acting in regard to what we call the external world; it is mind or soul when you look at it as acting in regard to the ultimate aim and ideal of such acting.

Iqbal asserted that the essence of Tawhid as a working idea is equality, solidarity and freedom. The state, from the Islamic stand point, is an endeavour to transform these ideal principles into space-time forces, as an aspiration to realise them in a definite human organization. It is in this sense alone that the state in Islam is 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 critics of Islam have lost sight of this important consideration. 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 thereforce, sacred in the roots of its being. As the Prophet beautifully puts it: 'The whole earth is a Mosque'. The State, according to Islam, is only an effort to realise the spiritual in a human organisation.

Iqbal warns that it is the duty of the world of Islam today to understand the real meaning of what has happened in Europe, and then to move forward with self-control and a clearer insight into the ultimate aims of Islam as a social polity." [9]

A study of history will reveal that the local influences and pre-Islamic superstitions of Muslim nations have de-Islamised the moral and social ideals of Islam. Therefore Iqbal suggests that the only alternative open to us, then is to tear off from Islam the hard crust which has immobilized an essentially dynamic outlook on life, and to rediscover the original verities of freedom, equality and solidarity with a view to rebuild our moral, social and political ideals out of their original simplicity and universality.

Iqbal envisaged a world Muslim Brotherhood on the pattern of present United Nations. He says: "For the present every Muslim nation must sink into her own deeper self, temporarily focus her vision on herself alone, until all are strong and powerful to form a living family of Republics. A true and living unity, according to the nationalist thinkers, is not so easy as to be achieved by a merely symbolical over-lordship. It is truly manifested in 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 of reference only. and not for restriction of the social horizon of its members."

Quran has also laid emphasis on this aspect of life وجعلنکم شعوبا و قبائل;تعارفوi.e. we have made you in groups and tribes only for recognition, which clearly thrashes bare the idea that thenational and tribal division of humanity are for recognition and distinction and not based on Machiavellian and Lutheran theory of Nationalism which divides humanity into water-tight compartments.

In support of his argument Iqbal quoted from the Turkish nationalist poet Zia Gok Alp (1876-1924) "Whose songs, inspiredby the philosophy of Auguste Comte, have done a great deal in shaping the present thought of Turkey". Iqbal has reproduced the substance of one of his poems from Professor Fisher's German translation.

In order to create a really effective political unity of Islam, all Muslim countries must first become independent and then in their totality they should range themselves under one Caliph or President. Is such a thing possible at the present moment? If not today, one must wait. In the meantime the Caliph must reduce his own house to order and lay the foundations of a workable modern Islamic state.

In the International world the weak find no sympathy; power alone deserves respect.

1. Tawhid (Monothism) is the first and the most essential principle on which Islamic democracy is based. It lays the foundation of world-unity and demands loyalty to God and not to the thrones. In his Rumuz-i-Bekhudi Iqbal has beautifully summed up the implications of this principle: —

2. The second principle is the obedience to the Law as given to mankind by the Prophet. The extraordinary and remarkable personality of Prophet Mohammad (peace be on him) provides agreat unifying force and a focus of loyalties for the growing polity of Islam:

It creates unity in our diversity and makes us into a well-knit community, which is meant to bring a message of peace for mankind. If we let go our hold of this unifying life giving conception, it means our death as a nation; for, it is this centre which has given us a dynamic unity of outlook and purpose."

3. The third principle is freedom, social justice and human brotherhood. Islam sounded the death-knell of economic and political slavery, oppression and bondage and gave a new set of values and offered liberation to mankind: —

"Islam", says Iqbal, "is non-territorial in its character, and its aim is to furnish a model for the final combination of humanity by drawing its adherent from a variety of mutually repellent races, and then transforming this atomic aggregate into a people possessing a self-consciousness of their own."

4. The fourth principle of Islamic democracy is Tolerance. Iqbal thinks that "the principle of the ego sustaining deed, is respect for the Ego in myself as well as in others". To him tolerance of a man of strong faith who, possessing fervently cherished convictions of his own, realises that respect is due to those of other. How beautifully he puts this idea of Tolerance born of love:

5. The fifth principle of far-reaching importance is interpreting the divine' laws into action and making provision for a principle of movement in the progressive ideology of Islamic democracy. This dynamic concept has been thoroughly discussed in the foregoing pages in the principles of Ijtehad where Iqbal had tried to strike and correct balance between categories of permanence and change which is indispensable for the sound growth of Democracy.

[1] Statement issued by Quaid-i-Azam on the death anniversary of Iqbal, The "onward", Allahabad, April 1942.

[2]Note:- Erastianism: connotes the teaching that the Church should be subordinate to the State. It derives from the name of Thomas Erastus (1524-'83)' a German-Swiss theologian and physician whose surname was Luber, Lieber or Liebler. It does not imply interference with rights of conscience, but merely a control and supremacy of the state in ecclesiastical matters.

[3] Presidential address, All India Muslim League 1930.

[4] Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. P. 5.

[5] speeches and statements of Iqbal, 225-226-.

[6] Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam P 147- 148.

[7] Lectures P. 155,

[8] Modern trends in Islam by H.A.R. Gibb P. 11-12.

[9] Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. P. 154-155.