Hubbry Logo
Allahabad AddressAllahabad AddressMain
Open search
Allahabad Address
Community hub
Allahabad Address
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Allahabad Address
Allahabad Address
Allahabad Address
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Muhammad Iqbal, then president of the Muslim League in 1930 and address deliverer

The Allahabad Address (Urdu: خطبہ الہ آباد) was a speech by scholar, Sir Muhammad Iqbal, one of the best-known in Pakistani history. It was delivered by Iqbal during the 21st annual session of the All-India Muslim League, on the afternoon of Monday, 29 December 1930, at Allahabad in United Provinces (U. P.). In this address Iqbal outlined a vision of independent states for the great Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern India, thus becoming 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.[1]

Allama Iqbal defined the Muslims of India as a nation and suggested that there could be no possibility of peace in the country unless and until they were recognised as a nation and under a federal system, the Muslim majority units were given the same privileges which were to be given to the Hindu majority units. It was the only way in which both the Muslims and the Hindus could prosper in accordance with their respective cultural values. In his speech, he 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."[2]

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. 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.[1]

History

[edit]
Main articles: Pakistan Movement and Two-Nation Theory

The Hindu-Muslim question had great importance and stood crucial to British Indian history after 1857, especially in the 20th century. But the key issue for Muslims remained "separate identity." On several occasions and addresses, the issue gets highlighted that the Muslims are a separate nation with different culture and civilisation, interests and rights. The Two-Nation Theory was not accepted by the Muslims, Hindus and the British peoples because they believed in "territorial nationalism". The Congress' perspective of the Hindu-Muslim relationship was that any perceived rift was the product of British divide and rule policy. For Muslims it was the core issue as it related to their culture, civilisation, heritage and the type of arrangement that were to be ratified in the future political and constitutional arrangements of India.[1][3]

The idea of a separate homeland was based on many issues, the first of which being a perceived decline and degeneration of Muslims. Most of the Muslim world became the colonies of European states, thus rendering the Industrial Revolution and development of science and technology a preserve of the European nations. More specific to the Muslims of South Asia was that that of being in a minority, thus lending greater impetus to the need for cultural preservation.[3]

Phases of Development

[edit]

1st Phase: Pre-1905

[edit]

The first phase pertains to the pre-1905 period, before delivering the address Iqbal addresses the factors for the decline of the Muslims and he tries to focus on Indian nationality, nationhood or Indian unity. Iqbal explained about resolving differences in his book Bang-i-Dara and writes Tarānah-i-Hindī and Naya Shawala to reunite Muslims with Hindus.[4]

2nd Phase: The Stay in Europe 1905-08

[edit]

The second phase pertains the period from 1905 to 1908. Iqbal spent these years in Europe, during his higher education and in Germany at Munich University[5] for PhD. His stay in England helps to crystallise his ideas. Iqbal appreciated certain things in the West, for example, the quest for knowledge, their efforts for innovation and change. Iqbal was critical of materialism, capitalism and competition an unrestricted and unlimited competition that was undermining the society and it is during this period that he began to think philosophically and scientifically about the Muslims and he emphasised on the importance of spiritualism in one's life.[3]

3rd Phase: Return to India 1908 and onward

[edit]

The third phase occurs when Iqbal comes back to India after his education. Here, his exclusive attention and focus were on the Muslim. He talked about the centrality of Islam, the question of submission to God, Oneness of God, He emphasised in his writings prose as well as poetry, and he discussed the Prophet Muhammad's role as the ideal leader as the leader that the Muslims should strive to follow. However, his focus was primarily on Muslims of the subcontinent when he dealt with the political or the constitutional issues of India. Iqbal was given the title of "Sir" in 1922 in recognition of his intellectual work. In 1927 Iqbal was elected to the Punjab Legislative Council, and thus served in the council for the next little over two years (from 1927 to 1930).[3]

Revival of Islamic polity

[edit]

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.[6] These lectures dwell on the role of Islam as a religion as well as a political and legal philosophy in the modern age.[6] 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.[7] 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.[6] The Muslims of subcontinent were degraded both by British people and Hindus. After the advent of 1857, British people turn against Muslims thinking that they are only culprits and similarly Hindus want complete control over Muslims and they want to change constitution where Muslims should be suppressed and by not giving Muslims any importance. It was the cause due to which Iqbal presents his idea of uniting Muslims and Muslim majority areas such as Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan and NWFP.

Address 1930

[edit]

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 30 December 1930, Iqbal outlined a vision of an independent state for Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern India.[6]

News clip reporting the landmark Allahabad session

The Address basis

[edit]

In 1930 Iqbal delivered the Presidential Address the Allahabad Address, before address Iqbal also delivered landmark lectures on Islam in 1928 and 1929 in Aligarh, Hyderabad and Madras. Because Iqbal's address eye-plot was based on Islam. Iqbal's views on Islam and introversion with the modern conditions and modern situation helps him to generate the Allahabad Address. In 1932, Iqbal also presided over All India Conference that was held at Lahore and during that conference, he repeated some of the ideas and some of the thoughts which he had presented in his Address at 1930.[3]

The Address outline

[edit]

In his address, Iqbal called for the creation of "a Muslim India within India", especially in North-western India.[8] Iqbal demanded the right of self-government for the Muslims.[9] as he said:

India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages, and professing different religions [...] Personally, I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sindh 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 Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.

Within his address, Iqbal also touched on his fear that Islam may have a similar fate as Christianity. "To Islam, matter is spirit realising itself in space and time" whereas Europe had "accepted the separation of Church and State and disliked the fact that their leaders were "indirectly forcing the world to accept it as unquestionable dogma [...] 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 before assimilated and transformed many ideas expressive of a 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."[8]

Iqbal spoke of:

The unity of an Indian nation, therefore, must be sought not in the negation, but in the mutual harmony and cooperation, of the many. True statesmanship cannot ignore facts, however unpleasant they may be [...] And it is on the discovery of Indian unity in this direction that the fate of India as well as of Asia really depends [...] If an effective principle of cooperation is discovered in India it will bring peace and mutual goodwill to this ancient land which has suffered so long [...] And it will at the same time solve the entire political problem of Asia.

[10]


In regards to the army, Iqbal stated:

Punjab with 56 percent Muslim population supplies 54 percent of the total combatant troops to the Indian Army, and if the 19,000 Gurkhas recruited from the independent State of Nepal are excluded, the Punjab contingent amounts to 62 percent of the whole Indian Army. This percentage does not take into account nearly 6,000 combatants supplied to the Indian Army by the North-West Frontier Province and Baluchistan. From this, you can easily calculate the possibilities of North-West Indian Muslims in regards to the defence of India against foreign aggression. Thus processing full opportunity of development within the body politic of India, the North-West Indian Muslims will prove the best defenders of India against a foreign invasion.

Iqbal also addresses how it was "painful to observe" the failed attempts to "discover such a principle of internal harmony". However, he still felt "hopeful". He expressed great concerns that the British politicians were "cleverly exploiting Hindu-Muslim differences regarding the ultimate form of Central Government" through Princes of the Princely States. He was also critical of the Simon Report that it did great "injustice to Muslims" to not be given a statutory majority for Punjab and Bengal. Furthermore, he demanded Sindh to be united with Baluchistan and turned into a separate province as it did not have anything in common with Bombay Presidency.

Comparing the European democracy to Indian democracy, he justified the Muslim demand for a "Muslim India within India", saying:[11]

The principle of European democracy cannot be applied to India without recognizing the fact of communal groups. The Muslim demand for the creation of a Muslim India within India is, therefore, perfectly justified. The resolution of the All-Parties Muslim Conference at Delhi is, to my mind, wholly inspired by this noble ideal of a harmonious whole which, instead of stifling the respective individualities of its component wholes, affords them chances of fully working out the possibilities that may be latent in them. And I have no doubt that this House will emphatically endorse the Muslim demands embodied in this resolution.

[12]

Commenting on the Hindu fears of religious rule in the Muslim autonomous states, Iqbal said:

Muslim demand is not actuated by the kind of motive he imputes to us; it is actuated by a genuine desire for free development which is practically impossible under the type of unitary government contemplated by the nationalist Hindu politicians with a view to secure permanent command dominance in the whole of India. Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim states will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such states. I have already indicated to you the meaning of the word religion, as applied to Islam. The truth is that Islam is not a Church [...] 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.

[13]

In his concluding remarks, Iqbal said:

India demands complete organization and unity of will and purpose in the Muslim community, both in your own interest as a community and in the interest of India as a whole [...] We have a duty toward India where we are destined to live and die. We have a duty towards Asia, especially Muslim Asia. And since 70 millions of Muslims in single country constitute a far more valuable asset to Islam than all the countries of Muslim Asia put together, we must look at the Indian problem not only from the Muslim point of view but also from the standpoint of the Indian Muslim as such.

[14]

Importance

[edit]

Iqbal's address was known to have a forceful and logical presentation of the Muslim case in India. His address arises the awareness why should Muslims be treated as a political entity rather than a minority. His address highlights the following views that would prove highly beneficial in future.[3]

  • Territorial adjustments will enable the Muslims to develop themselves in accordance with their ideas and serve the cause of Ummah.
  • Redistribution of territory developed later on the concept of a Muslim homeland.
  • He further expressed these ideas in letters to Jinnah from May 1936 to November 1937. He talked of a separate federation of Muslim provinces. The North Western India and Bengal can be considered as entitled to self-determination like other nations in India and outside. Shariah's development is impossible without a free Muslim state or states. He advised the Muslims to be above self-interest and devote themselves to Islam.
  • In difficult times, Islam has saved the Muslims.
  • Faith, culture and historical traditions are more important than patriotism.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Allahabad Address

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

The Allahabad Address was the presidential speech delivered by the Muslim poet-philosopher Sir Muhammad Iqbal on 29 December 1930 to the 25th annual session of the in Allahabad, British India. In it, Iqbal outlined the distinct nationhood of Indian Muslims, rooted in their Islamic faith and culture, rejecting the notion of a composite and advocating for the consolidation of Muslim-majority provinces—, , , and Baluchistan—into a single autonomous state to enable under Islamic principles. This proposal represented the first formal articulation by a prominent Muslim leader of partitioning British along religious lines, laying the ideological groundwork for the eventual demand for . The address emphasized empirical recognition of Muslims as a separate political entity with inherent rights to territorial unity, critiquing Western democratic models as incompatible with Islamic communal solidarity and warning against Hindu-majority dominance in a federal . Its enduring significance lies in galvanizing the , influencing the trajectory of the despite Iqbal's initial framing as a demand for federation rather than outright independence.

Iqbal's Intellectual and Political Development

Early Influences and Pre-Partition Thought (Pre-1905)

was born on November 9, 1877, in , province of British India, to Sheikh Noor Muhammad, a devout of modest means, and his wife Bibi, who instilled in him a strong religious foundation from an early age. His father's piety and emphasis on shaped Iqbal's initial worldview, fostering a sense of moral discipline and spiritual inquiry that permeated his later poetry. Family resources were limited, yet they prioritized , reflecting the cultural value placed on learning among amid colonial rule. At around age five, Iqbal began formal studies under Syed Mir Hasan, a renowned local scholar proficient in Quranic exegesis, , , and mathematics, who served as head instructor at a traditional in . Mir Hasan, a proponent of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan's —which advocated modern education for Muslims while reconciling faith with —introduced Iqbal to classical Islamic texts and reformist ideas, emphasizing rational interpretation of over rigid . This tutelage grounded Iqbal in and Persian, languages central to Muslim intellectual heritage, and sparked his early poetic compositions, including verses on themes of orphanhood and , such as "Nala-e-Yatim" around age 12. Mir Hasan's influence extended to encouraging Iqbal's enrollment at the Scotch Mission College in , where he completed intermediate studies, blending Western subjects with under his teacher's guidance. In 1895, Iqbal relocated to Lahore for higher education at Government College, earning a B.A. in philosophy and Arabic in 1897, followed by an M.A. in philosophy in 1899. His curriculum exposed him to Western thinkers like Hegel and Kant alongside , though his pre-European thought remained rooted in Indo-Persian traditions. From 1899 to 1903, he lectured in Arabic at Oriental College, Lahore, and briefly at Government College, honing his skills in and . Early works in this period, compiled later in Bang-e-Dara, reflected a patriotic , urging Hindu-Muslim unity against colonial rule and celebrating India's composite , as in poems evoking shared heritage without overt separatism. This phase showed Iqbal's optimism for communal harmony, influenced by Sir Syed's pragmatic loyalty to British administration as a means of Muslim advancement, though he critiqued superstition and stagnation in Muslim society through reformist lenses. Iqbal's pre-1905 thought prioritized cultural revival over political separatism, drawing from Shah Waliullah's emphasis on (independent reasoning) and Jamal al-Din al-Afghani's pan-Islamic awakening, mediated through Mir Hasan's teachings. Yet, unlike later , his poetry then idealized a unified Indian identity, attributing societal decline to internal decay rather than solely external . These ideas laid groundwork for his evolution, as exposure to colonial education highlighted tensions between tradition and modernity, prompting reflections on () in nascent form. By 1905, as he prepared for , Iqbal had published verses in journals, establishing a reputation as a promising addressing ethical and national renewal.

European Exposure and Philosophical Maturation (1905-1908)

In 1905, departed for to pursue advanced studies in and , enrolling at , where he focused on Western philosophical traditions alongside Arabic and . His curriculum emphasized metaphysics and ethics, under the guidance of idealist philosopher , whose Hegelian-influenced teachings encouraged Iqbal to critically engage with European rationalism while questioning its materialist underpinnings. This period marked Iqbal's initial immersion in thinkers like Hegel and Kant, though he later critiqued their static idealism for neglecting dynamic , a theme he would integrate with Islamic dynamism. By June 1907, Iqbal completed a degree in at , having submitted a dissertation on Persian metaphysics that foreshadowed his lifelong synthesis of Eastern and Western . Concurrently, he trained as a at in , qualifying in 1908, which equipped him with legal acumen for future political advocacy but deepened his disillusionment with colonial legalism's detachment from moral purpose. Extending his studies to , Iqbal enrolled at the University of , earning a PhD in March 1908 for his thesis The Development of Metaphysics in Persia, which traced Persian thought's evolution from pre-Islamic dualism to Sufi , arguing as a vital response to intellectual stagnation rather than mere escapism. Brief visits to further exposed him to German , amplifying his appreciation for process-oriented philosophies. Iqbal's European sojourn profoundly shaped his rejection of passive fatalism in favor of self-affirmation (khudi), influenced by Nietzsche's emphasis on will to power and Bergson's concept of creative evolution, which he encountered through lectures and texts during 1906–1908. Unlike Nietzsche's atheistic individualism, Iqbal reinterpreted these as compatible with Quranic activism, viewing the self not as isolated but as dynamically evolving within divine purpose—a maturation evident in his early Persian poetry composed abroad, such as verses praising Rumi's dynamic spirituality over Western mechanicism. This phase transitioned Iqbal from orientalist scholarship to a reconstructive worldview, critiquing Europe's cultural decay while affirming Islam's potential for renewal, setting the groundwork for his later nationalist ideas.

Return to India and Shift Toward Muslim Nationalism (1908-1920s)

Upon completing his doctoral studies in and qualifying as a in , returned to in 1908, where he established a legal practice at the while pursuing part-time lecturing in . Financial necessities prompted him to prioritize advocacy over academia, though he continued to engage with intellectual circles at Government College, . Iqbal's formal entry into politics occurred through his affiliation with the ; he served as an executive member of its British branch in 1908 before actively joining the Provincial Muslim League upon his return, participating in debates on Muslim representation and rights. This involvement reflected his growing concern over the political marginalization of Indian Muslims amid rising Hindu-majority nationalism, particularly following the 1909 Morley-Minto Reforms that introduced separate electorates yet fell short of safeguarding minority interests. Through his , Iqbal began articulating a vision of Muslim selfhood () and communal unity, diverging from his earlier patriotic verses like "Tarana-e-Hind" (1904) toward pan-Islamic solidarity. His 1910 poem "" exalted the global Muslim as a transcendent brotherhood unbound by , urging awakening from stagnation: "Muslim hain hum, watan hai sara jahan hamara" (We are Muslims, the whole world is our homeland). This shift critiqued Western materialism and Hindu-dominated Indian unity as threats to Islamic vitality, emphasizing dynamic self-assertion over passive assimilation. By the 1920s, Iqbal's advocacy intensified; knighted in 1922 as , he published collections like Bang-e-Dara (1924), reinforcing themes of Muslim revival and opposition to and colonial dependency. Elected to the Legislative Council in 1926, he championed reforms for Muslim education, agrarian rights, and political , arguing that India's constituted a distinct requiring territorial consolidation to preserve their cultural and religious identity against numerical inferiority. This evolution laid the groundwork for his later articulation of a separate Muslim state, rooted in empirical observations of inter-communal tensions and the failure of to ensure equitable power-sharing.

Context of the 1930 Muslim League Session

Political Landscape in British India

In the late 1920s, British India operated under the , which introduced limited dyarchy in provincial governments but retained central authority with the British viceroy, fostering resentment among Indian nationalists who sought greater self-rule. The all-British , appointed in November 1927 to review constitutional progress, faced widespread boycotts from Indian leaders due to its lack of Indian members, culminating in protests and the death of in on October 30, 1928. In response, the convened an all-parties conference, leading to the of August 1928, drafted by a committee under , which proposed dominion status, joint electorates, and rejection of separate electorates for , prioritizing a unified over minority safeguards. Muslim leaders, viewing the Nehru Report as favoring Hindu-majority interests, articulated counter-demands through Muhammad Ali Jinnah's , presented in March 1929 at the Muslim League's session, which called for , provincial , separate electorates, and one-third representation for in the central legislature to protect against perceived domination. The All-India Muslim League, weakened by internal divisions and declining influence after the Khilafat Movement's collapse in 1924, struggled to mobilize mass support amid growing communal tensions, as increasingly distrusted Congress's assurances of equitable treatment in a post-British order. Concurrently, the Congress escalated demands for complete independence, adopting the resolution on January 26, 1930, at its session under Jawaharlal Nehru's , rejecting status and intensifying anti-British agitation. By mid-1930, Mahatma Gandhi's Civil Disobedience Movement, launched with the from Sabarmati to Dandi on March 12 and concluding on April 6 with the symbolic breaking of the salt law, mobilized millions against British economic controls, resulting in over 60,000 arrests by year's end and paralyzing parts of the administration. The British convened the First Round Table Conference in from November 12 to January 19, 1931, without participation due to the , featuring delegates from princely states, , and other minorities who debated federal structures and safeguards, highlighting fractures in Indian unity. These developments underscored deepening Hindu-Muslim divides, with the Muslim League advocating territorial consolidation in Muslim-majority areas to counter 's unitary vision, setting the stage for ideological shifts toward political separation.

Selection of Iqbal as President and Preparatory Factors

The All-India Muslim League's working committee selected to preside over its 25th annual session in Allahabad, held December 29–30, 1930, recognizing his prominence as a philosopher-poet and emerging political voice for Indian Muslims. By 1930, had established himself through poetry like Bang-e-Dara (1924) and Zabur-e-Ajam (1927), which emphasized Muslim spiritual revival and self-assertion, alongside his election to the Legislative Council in 1927, where he advocated for provincial autonomy and Muslim safeguards. His selection aimed to inject intellectual vigor into a League weakened by factionalism and Jinnah's temporary absence in following the 1928 Nehru Report's dismissal of key Muslim demands, such as and separate electorates. Iqbal accepted the invitation conditionally, insisting on freedom to articulate his unfiltered views without League interference, a stipulation that reflected his independent streak and prior frustrations with compromising political platforms. This autonomy allowed him to prepare a address grounded in his evolving thought, drawing from European philosophy imbibed during his 1905–1908 studies in England and Germany, and his critique of Western nationalism's incompatibility with Islamic principles of community (ummah). Preparatory correspondence, including letters to figures like Muhammad Yaqub in August 1930, underscored his strategic intent to reposition the League toward assertive Muslim nationalism amid British constitutional reforms. Broader factors included the post-World War I disillusionment with pan-Islamic unity under Ottoman collapse, redirecting Iqbal's focus to subcontinental as a distinct facing Hindu-majority dominance in any unitary . The Simon Commission's 1930 report and the impending First Round Table Conference heightened urgency for a consolidated Muslim stance, with Iqbal's base providing grassroots credibility amid regional autonomy debates. His preparatory reflections critiqued Congress-led non-cooperation as marginalizing , fostering a causal view that territorial consolidation in northwest Muslim provinces was essential for preserving Islamic against assimilation. These elements converged to frame the session as a pivot from defensive minority politics to proactive .

Delivery and Structure of the Address

Event Details and Iqbal's Presentation

The 25th annual session of the convened in (present-day ), from December 29 to 30, 1930. had been selected as president for the session, a choice influenced by his growing stature as a Muslim and poet amid rising communal tensions following the of 1928 and the Simon Commission's findings. Iqbal delivered his presidential address orally in English on the afternoon of Monday, December 29, to an assembly of approximately 600 attendees, including league delegates, local Muslim leaders, and some government officials, though the majority comprised regional participants rather than national figures. The event took place in a formal setting typical of league gatherings, with Iqbal speaking from the podium after customary proceedings, emphasizing themes of and political autonomy without prior circulation of the full text to delegates. In his presentation, Iqbal opened with expressions of gratitude to for the presidency and invoked Islamic principles to frame the address as a for Indian facing assimilationist pressures under British rule and Hindu-majority dominance. He structured the speech as an extended philosophical and political exposition, diverging from standard organizational reports by integrating critiques of Western democracy, analyses of Islamic history, and forward-looking territorial proposals, which he argued were essential for preserving Muslim identity. The address, transcribed and later published, marked a pivotal moment in league proceedings, though its full implications were not immediately formalized into resolutions during the session.

Core Philosophical Underpinnings


Muhammad Iqbal's Allahabad Address was grounded in his philosophy of khudi, or selfhood, which posits the human ego as a dynamic, creative force striving for realization through spiritual and intellectual effort, drawing from Islamic mysticism while critiquing passive Sufism. In the address, Iqbal extended this individual selfhood to the collective Muslim community in India, arguing that true self-affirmation required political consolidation to counter assimilation into a Hindu-dominated culture, thereby enabling Muslims to enact their distinct spiritual destiny. Iqbal integrated Western influences, particularly Henri Bergson's concept of creative evolution and Friedrich Nietzsche's emphasis on the , to advocate a vitalist reinterpretation of that rejected mechanistic and emphasized perpetual becoming over static being. This synthesis underpinned his call for —independent reasoning—to reconstruct Islamic thought for modernity, positioning the proposed Muslim state as a for dynamic faith where spiritual and temporal realms unite, unlike the European which he viewed as a source of cultural decay. Central to the address's underpinnings was Iqbal's vision of Islam as an action-oriented religion fostering and autonomy, warning against the perils of Western-style that reduces nations to territorial accidents while affirming a supra-national ummah realized through territorial in India's northwest. He critiqued pan-Islamism's impracticality in the Indian context, prioritizing realistic to prevent the erosion of Muslim identity under unitary . This philosophical framework transformed abstract into a demand for autonomous Muslim polity, laying the ideological groundwork for later partition advocacy.

Key Proposals and Arguments

In his address, Iqbal proposed the amalgamation of , , , and Baluchistan into a single consolidated Muslim state in north-western , arguing this formation represented the "final destiny of the , at least of North-West ." He envisioned self-government for this entity either within the or independent thereof, emphasizing that such autonomy would enable to preserve their distinct cultural, religious, and amid India's communal diversity. This proposal stemmed from Iqbal's rejection of , which he deemed incompatible with Islamic principles that unify believers across geographic boundaries into a homogeneous . Iqbal argued that Indian Muslims, numbering approximately 70 million, constituted a separate from due to irreconcilable differences in religion, , and social organization, rendering composite Indian untenable. He critiqued the Nehru Report's advocacy for a unitary and joint electorates, warning that these would subordinate Muslim minorities to Hindu majorities, eroding their rights and leading to . Instead, he advocated separate electorates and in any federal legislature—such as one-third seats for Muslims in a central body—to safeguard communal interests. Iqbal further highlighted Muslims' disproportionate military contributions, noting alone supplied 54 percent of British India's combatant troops, as evidence of their strategic importance warranting political autonomy. Central to his arguments was the conception of Islam not merely as a faith but as a comprehensive ethical and demanding through independent . Iqbal urged to foster collective will and unity, drawing on Islamic history's emphasis on contractual states oriented toward ethical ideals rather than territorial expansion. He dismissed pan-Islamic revival as impractical for Indian , prioritizing local to counter the failures of prior unity efforts like the . These proposals positioned Muslim political organization as essential for survival in a federal , where provincial autonomy alone insufficiently addressed national aspirations.

Immediate Reception and Short-Term Effects

Reactions from Muslim League Delegates

Iqbal's presidential address, delivered on December 29, 1930, during the 21st annual session of the in Allahabad, dominated proceedings despite an attendance of only 400-600 delegates, mostly local participants. Many delegates, more familiar with Iqbal's poetry than his , struggled to fully comprehend the address's emphasis on Muslim and the proposal for consolidating , , , and Baluchistan into a single autonomous Muslim state. The speech was translated into by Muhammad Yakub for non-English speakers, facilitating broader engagement, but discussions centered on its alignment with existing League priorities like separate electorates and safeguards against Hindu-majority dominance rather than explicit endorsement of the territorial consolidation. No resolution was passed directly addressing or endorsing Iqbal's visionary proposal for a Muslim state, reportedly to avoid undermining Muhammad Ali Jinnah's ongoing negotiations at the First Round Table Conference in London and his Fourteen Points agenda. The session instead approved seven resolutions on December 30, focusing on constitutional critiques, demands for Muslim representation in legislatures and services (including 33% in the central legislature), provincial autonomy, separation of Sindh from Bombay, and support for Muslim positions at the Round Table Conference. Internal debates, such as Dr. M.U.S. Jung's unsuccessful amendment opposing certain conference representations, reflected delegate support for communal safeguards but highlighted divisions over tactics, with figures like Abdullah Haroon and Hafizur Rehman defending unified Muslim action. Iqbal departed early on the second day, leaving Nawab Muhammad Ismail Khan to chair amid issues and low attendance, which contributed to the session's premature end. While lacking formal action, the resonated as a philosophical reinforcement of Muslim distinctiveness, influencing delegate on resolving communal issues before advancing federal structures, though its radical territorial implications awaited later League evolution.

Responses from Contemporary Muslim and Hindu Leaders

Among Muslim leaders, reactions to Iqbal's address were divided, reflecting tensions between autonomist and nationalist visions. Traditionalist ulema criticized Iqbal immediately for his modernist reinterpretations of Islamic polity, accusing him of in promoting a dynamic, consolidated Muslim territorial unit over rigid orthodoxy. Jinnah, absent from the session and residing in , initially rejected the push for separation, adhering to hopes of Hindu-Muslim federation under joint electorates; Iqbal's subsequent letters from 1936 onward gradually convinced him of the necessity for distinct Muslim self-governance. Nationalist Muslims like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, aligned with , opposed the territorial proposal as it undermined , advocating instead for safeguards within a unified to avert fragmentation. Hindu leaders and Congress figures viewed the address as a direct assault on united , exacerbating communal rifts amid the push for . The proposal's critique of the 1928 —framed by Iqbal as embodying a false secular assimilation—was met with dismissal, as it clashed with the emphasis on territorial electorates and federal unity preserving minority protections under a single dominion. While specific rebuttals from Gandhi or Nehru targeting the speech are undocumented in immediate aftermath—given concurrent focus on —the Hindu press propagated concerns of , interpreting the demand for northwestern Muslim consolidation as a to indivisible and demographic balance. This apprehension reinforced 's strategy of non-communal mobilization, sidelining League overtures.

Long-Term Significance

Foundation for the Two-Nation Theory


Muhammad Iqbal's Allahabad Address on December 29, 1930, laid the groundwork for the by positing Indian Muslims as a distinct defined by their Islamic worldview, which he described as a complete code encompassing individual and collective life, incompatible with Hindu-majority dominance in a unified . Iqbal contended that India's societal units were not territorial like European nations but grouped by religious affiliations, with Muslims forming a separate ethical and cultural entity whose interests could not be safeguarded through mere constitutional protections within a democratic framework favoring numerical majorities. This reasoning stemmed from empirical observations of historical Muslim rule and contemporary communal tensions, emphasizing causal realities of demographic distribution and irreconcilable legal systems—Islamic versus Hindu customs—that precluded assimilation. Central to Iqbal's argument was the proposal for consolidating Muslim-majority regions—, , , and Baluchistan—into a single state, enabling self-government either within or outside the to preserve Muslim political agency and cultural . He envisioned this entity as a for Islamic principles in governance, free from the homogenizing pressures of , which he viewed as inherently Hindu-centric. This territorial prescription highlighted the practical necessity of separation based on geographic concentrations of , numbering around 70 million at the time, whose aspirations for self-rule were undermined by their minority status in a united . Iqbal's address marked a pivotal shift in Muslim League ideology from passive minority safeguards to proactive nation-building, seeding the Two-Nation Theory's core tenet that Hindus and Muslims constituted two mutually exclusive nations by virtue of , , and , rather than shared alone. Subsequent articulations, such as the 1940 , built directly on this foundation, transforming Iqbal's philosophical rationale into a concrete demand for partition, though he framed it initially as to address immediate colonial constraints. Scholarly assessments affirm its foundational role, attributing the theory's endurance to Iqbal's integration of first-principles Islamic revivalism with realist appraisals of British India's pluralistic fractures.

Influence on Jinnah and the Pakistan Demand

Iqbal's 1930 Allahabad Address provided an early intellectual framework for Muslim political autonomy in the , articulating the need for a consolidated Muslim-majority state in the northwest regions, which later resonated with Muhammad Ali Jinnah's evolving strategy for safeguarding Muslim interests. Jinnah, who had been sidelined in amid disillusionment with the Indian National Congress's dominance following events like the 1928 , received direct encouragement from Iqbal through personal correspondence starting in the mid-1930s, where Iqbal emphasized the existential threats to Muslim identity under Hindu-majority rule and urged Jinnah's return to lead the . In a letter dated May 23, 1936, Iqbal warned Jinnah of the "Hindu Raj" emerging from constitutional reforms, arguing that Muslims required a separate political entity to preserve their cultural and religious distinctiveness, echoing the address's call for rather than mere federal safeguards. Jinnah, initially an advocate of Hindu-Muslim unity via pacts like the 1916 Lucknow Agreement, underwent a pragmatic shift influenced by Iqbal's philosophical insistence on the two-nation reality—Muslims as a distinct warranting territorial consolidation—coupled with electoral failures and intransigence in the 1937 provincial elections. By 1934, upon his return to , Jinnah revitalized the Muslim League, adopting elements of Iqbal's vision by prioritizing Muslim communal organization over ; this culminated in the March 1940 , which demanded "independent states" for Muslim-majority provinces, directly paralleling the address's delineation of , , the , and Baluchistan as a unified . Historians attribute this evolution partly to Iqbal's posthumous (Iqbal died on April 21, 1938) ideological legacy, with Jinnah publicly honoring him as a guide whose ideas clarified the path to Muslim self-rule amid irreconcilable communal differences. The address's influence extended causally by framing partition not as mere division but as a realistic response to demographic and cultural incompatibilities, compelling Jinnah to operationalize politically; without Iqbal's articulation of Muslim nationhood as territorially , Jinnah's demand might have remained confined to minority protections within a unitary . However, Jinnah's implementation diverged in emphasizing pragmatic initially, adapting Iqbal's idealism to and negotiations with the British, leading to the 1947 partition—evidenced by the resolution's adoption just seven years after Iqbal's proposal and Jinnah's explicit invocation of communal self-preservation in League platforms thereafter. This synergy transformed Iqbal's theoretical demand into the concrete , though Jinnah's leadership credits stem from executing it amid wartime opportunities and Congress-British frictions.

Causal Role in Partition Outcomes

Iqbal's Allahabad Address on December 29, 1930, proposed the consolidation of Muslim-majority provinces—Punjab, Sindh, North-West Frontier Province, and Baluchistan—into a single autonomous state, framing it as essential for Muslim self-determination amid perceived Hindu dominance in a unified India. This territorial vision marked the first explicit advocacy for partitioning British India along religious lines, establishing an ideological foundation for the two-nation theory that underpinned the demand for Pakistan. While not immediately triggering political action, the address shifted Muslim League discourse from mere safeguards to territorial nationalism, influencing the Lahore Resolution of March 23, 1940, which formalized the Pakistan demand. The address's influence extended to , who corresponded with Iqbal between 1936 and 1937, during which Iqbal urged him to lead the Muslim separatist cause, accelerating Jinnah's transformation from an advocate of Hindu-Muslim unity to the architect of partition. Jinnah later credited Iqbal as the "spiritual father" of , reflecting how the address's ideas permeated League strategy post-Iqbal's death in 1938. This intellectual lineage contributed causally by providing a philosophical rationale that mobilized Muslim elites and masses, evidenced by the League's electoral gains in 1946 and the subsequent Mountbatten Plan's acceptance of partition on August 14-15, 1947. Causality, however, was indirect and contingent on intervening events, including the 1937 elections' exposure of majoritarianism, World War II's disruption of constitutional talks, and 1946 communal riots that rendered coexistence untenable. Scholarly analyses affirm the address as a rather than determinant, infusing a "sense of separate destiny" that Jinnah operationalized amid escalating violence and British withdrawal. Empirical support includes the address's echoes in the 1940 resolution's geography, aligning precisely with Iqbal's outlined regions, though partition's demographics—displacing 14-18 million and causing 1-2 million deaths—arose from broader failures of negotiation, not solely ideological origins.

Controversies and Critical Assessments

Debates on Intent: Autonomy Versus Full Separation

In his Allahabad Address delivered on December 29, 1930, proposed the consolidation of Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern —specifically , , , and Baluchistan—into a single "Muslim State" with self-government, explicitly stating that this could occur "within the , or without the ." This phrasing has fueled scholarly debates over whether Iqbal envisioned territorial within a federal Indian structure or a pathway to full sovereign separation from the rest of , with interpretations diverging based on contextual emphasis and later political developments. Proponents of the autonomy view argue that Iqbal's reference to self-government within the Empire and his assurances against "religious rule" in such states indicate a preference for decentralized rather than outright partition, aligning with his broader critique of centralized nationalism under the Indian National Congress's of 1928, which he saw as threatening Muslim interests. Conversely, advocates for the full separation interpretation highlight Iqbal's emphasis on a "consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State" as the "final destiny" of Muslims in that region, suggesting a distinct political entity detached from Hindu-majority areas to preserve Islamic cultural and demographic integrity amid perceived existential threats from Hindu dominance in a unified . This reading gained traction post-1947, particularly in Pakistani , where the address is credited as an intellectual precursor to the of 1940, though Iqbal himself did not use terms like "Pakistan" or explicitly advocate from British ; instead, his territorial specificity implied reconfiguration of existing provinces into a homogeneous Muslim , which some scholars contend inherently undermined pan-Indian unity. Critics of this separatist framing, however, note Iqbal's simultaneous rejection of narrow communalism and his vision of dynamic Islamic selfhood compatible with pluralistic coexistence, arguing that equating the address with partition retroactively imposes Jinnah's later demands onto Iqbal's federalist leanings. The persists due to Iqbal's evolving thought: earlier writings favored Muslim-Hindu cooperation within a loose , but by 1930, disillusionment with policies prompted a pragmatic shift toward protected Muslim , without clarifying post-Empire independence as inevitable separation. Empirical analysis of the address's immediate reception shows Muslim League delegates interpreting it variably, with some viewing it as enhanced provincial under the dyarchy reforms extended federally, while others discerned seeds of distinct nationhood amid rising communal tensions evidenced by events like the 1920s Khilafat Movement's collapse. Modern reassessments, drawing on Iqbal's correspondence and , lean toward intentional as a strategic —autonomy as immediate goal, separation as contingency—reflecting causal realities of British divide-and-rule tactics and demographic imbalances where comprised 22% of India's but held concentrated majorities only in specified northwestern areas. No definitive resolution exists, as Iqbal died in 1938 without authoring a formal constitutional , leaving the debate to hinge on whether his "Muslim State" denoted administrative or proto-sovereignty.

Criticisms of Divisiveness and Defenses Based on Demographic Realities

Critics of the Allahabad Address, particularly Indian nationalists and Hindu leaders, condemned it for exacerbating communal divisions by framing Muslims as a distinct nation requiring territorial consolidation in northwest India, thereby rejecting the viability of a composite Indian nationalism. Contemporary Hindu press outlets, such as Allahabad's Leader and the Indian Daily Mail, responded with personal attacks on Iqbal, accusing him of disloyalty and sowing seeds of separation that undermined anti-colonial unity. This perspective persisted in later analyses, with some viewing the address as inherently communal for prioritizing religious identity over geographic or cultural syncretism, potentially foreshadowing the partition's violence that displaced 14-18 million and killed up to 2 million between 1946-1948. Defenders counter that the address realistically addressed demographic imperatives, as Muslims constituted roughly 22-25% of British India's population in the 1931 census—approximately 80 million out of 353 million—yet were outnumbered in a prospective democratic union dominated by a Hindu majority exceeding 200 million, rendering minority protections illusory without autonomy. This vulnerability was compounded by uneven geographic distribution, with Muslims forming majorities or near-majorities in provinces like Punjab (55%), Bengal (54%), and the North-West Frontier Province (92%), but facing assimilation risks elsewhere. Empirical evidence of irreconcilable tensions, including the 1921 Moplah Rebellion (killing thousands in Hindu-Muslim clashes) and recurring riots in the 1920s-1930s such as those in Kohat (1924) and Calcutta (1946, with 2,000-4,000 deaths), underscored the causal likelihood of ongoing conflict under unified rule, justifying Iqbal's call for self-governing Muslim units as a safeguard against subjugation rather than gratuitous division. Such arguments, echoed in two-nation theory expositions, posit that ignoring these realities—evident in failed pacts like Lucknow (1916)—would have perpetuated instability, as demographic imbalances historically fueled dominance disputes in multi-ethnic polities.

Modern Scholarly Reinterpretations

In the decades following India's partition, scholarly interpretations of Muhammad Iqbal's 1930 Allahabad Address have shifted toward examining its ambiguities, particularly the tension between calls for Muslim autonomy and implications of territorial separation. Traditional accounts, prevalent in mid-20th-century Pakistani , framed the speech as the inaugural articulation of the , positing a Muslim state in northwestern as inevitable. Recent analyses, however, highlight Iqbal's emphasis on a consolidated Muslim —encompassing , the , , and Baluchistan—with "residuary powers" to enable , potentially within a loose British rather than immediate independence. This reading underscores Iqbal's rejection of unitary , driven by demographic realities where constituted minorities in a Hindu-majority , necessitating safeguards against assimilation. Critics of the separatist narrative argue that misinterpretations arose from selective quoting and post-partition retrospection, ignoring Iqbal's explicit phrasing of self-government "within the , or without the ," which prioritized cultural and political consolidation over . For example, scholars contend the address responded pragmatically to the Nehru Report's centralizing tendencies, advocating federal restructuring to preserve Islamic social structures amid of communal friction, such as uneven representation in legislatures. Pakistani academic works, often influenced by nation-building imperatives, have amplified the separation angle to credit Iqbal as Pakistan's ideological progenitor, yet closer textual scrutiny reveals a vision compatible with dominion status autonomy, akin to Canadian or Australian models under Britain. Conversely, constitutional scholars maintain that Iqbal's dismissal of European democratic principles as inapplicable to 's plural realities—coupled with his theological framing of Muslim unity under tauhid (divine oneness)—inherently undermined federal cohesion, presaging partition by prioritizing ijtihad-driven Muslim governance. This interpretation aligns with causal assessments linking the address to Jinnah's later , where autonomy evolved into demands for sovereignty amid escalating Hindu-Muslim tensions documented in electorates. While Western-influenced academia may underplay these religious dimensions due to secular biases, primary evidence from Iqbal's own Reconstruction of Religious Thought in (1930, published shortly after) reinforces a realist view: sustainable Muslim self-rule required territorial delimitation to avert subjugation, regardless of formal ties to .

References

  1. https://franpritchett.com/00islamlinks/txt_iqbal_1930.html
  2. https://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/iqbal1930.htm
  3. http://www.indiaofthepast.org/sir-muhammad-iqbal/major-events-pre-1950/idea-pakistan-1930
  4. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/oct79/6.htm
  5. https://walidiqbal.pk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Biography-Allama-Iqbal.pdf
  6. https://historyofislam.com/contents/the-modern-age/mohammed-iqbal-1877-1938-poet-philosopher/
  7. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/biography/en/illustrated_biography02.php
  8. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/jan78/3.htm
  9. https://gcu.edu.pk/philosophy.php
  10. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/oct69/2.htm
  11. https://renovatio.zaytuna.edu/article/muhammad-iqbal-nationalism-pakistan
  12. http://iqbalurdu.blogspot.com/2011/02/bang-e-dra-000-dibacha-sheikh-abdul.html
  13. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/oct90/6.htm
  14. https://iqbalreview.allamaiqbal.com/index.php/ire/article/download/100/65/147
  15. https://sryahwapublications.com/article/download/2642-8415.0201003
  16. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2315451/iqbal-a-visionary-for-all-times
  17. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/apr89/3.htm
  18. https://ojs.ahss.org.pk/journal/article/download/315/356/523
  19. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367977639_Iqbal_Nietzsche_and_Nihilism_Reconstruction_of_Sufi_Cosmology_and_Revaluation_of_Sufi_Values_in_Asrar-i-Khudi
  20. https://www.muslim-perspectives.com/Publication-Detail?publication=104/Allama-Iqbal-in-European-Studies
  21. https://users.ox.ac.uk/~worc0337/authors/iqbal.html
  22. https://www.ijfmr.com/papers/2023/5/5987.pdf
  23. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/ias/articles/umneea_ahmad.html
  24. https://irjahss.com/index.php/ir/article/view/85
  25. http://pjhc.nihcr.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/6-Allama-Muhammad-Iqbals-concept-of-Muslim-Nationalism.pdf
  26. https://www.newageislam.com/islamic-personalities/rakhshanda-jalil/iqbals-romantic-nationalism-underwent-change-light-influences-diverse-nietzsche-bergson-marx/d/120107
  27. https://journals.iium.edu.my/intdiscourse/index.php/id/article/download/439/387/957
  28. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/mohammed-iqbal
  29. https://irjahss.com/index.php/ir/article/download/17/96/271
  30. http://pjhc.nihcr.edu.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/6-The-Politics-of-Iqbal1926-1938.pdf
  31. https://www.khaama.com/allama-mohammad-iqbal/
  32. https://punjab.global.ucsb.edu/sites/secure.lsit.ucsb.edu.gisp.d7_sp/files/sitefiles/journals/volume21/no1/Ranjan.pdf
  33. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Indian-Independence-Movement
  34. https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-notes-nehru-report/
  35. https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/jinnahs-14-points/
  36. https://www.britannica.com/place/India/Muslim-separatism
  37. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/indias-independence/
  38. https://www.britannica.com/event/Salt-March
  39. https://www.britannica.com/event/Round-Table-Conference
  40. https://ia800608.us.archive.org/17/items/allindiamuslimle00nade/allindiamuslimle00nade.pdf
  41. https://www.suhaillaripakistan.com/chapters/Dawn-distorts-history-of-Sir-Muhammad-Iqbal/
  42. http://www.koranselskab.dk/profiler/iqbal/address2.htm
  43. https://speakola.com/political/muhammad-iqbal-allalahad-1930
  44. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/aproct09/7.htm
  45. https://traversingtradition.com/2025/01/20/understanding-the-self-through-muhammad-iqbals-philosophical-and-political-thought/
  46. https://historypak.com/iqbals-vision-of-pakistan-a-philosophical-and-political-study-2/
  47. https://cssprepforum.com/iqbals-muslim-nationalism-under-allahbad-address/
  48. https://www.pakistanlink.org/Opinion/2011/June11/24/06.HTM
  49. https://www.dawn.com/news/1368130
  50. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/jan78/8.htm
  51. https://cssprepforum.com/allama-iqbals-address-1930-a-way-to-pakistan/
  52. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377407197_Iqbal%27s_Allahabad_Address_and_Its_Impact_on_Muslim_Political_Struggle_in_Indian_Sub-Continent
  53. https://pwonlyias.com/upsc-notes/allahabad-address-1930/
  54. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24730580.2018.1544023
  55. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1033923
  56. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1173/1c2b7a0561a456a94d91205f3b0daca04c9c.pdf
  57. https://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/AJSSMS/article/download/1568/1482/2742
  58. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381315965_TWO_NATION_THEORY
  59. https://alamir.com.pk/index.php/ojs/article/download/85/74/218
  60. https://ia801408.us.archive.org/9/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.71796/2015.71796.Letters-Of-Eqbal-To-Jinnah.pdf
  61. https://franpritchett.com/00islamlinks/txt_iqbal_tojinnah_1937.html
  62. https://www.nihcr.edu.pk/Latest_English_Journal/Pjhc%252022-2%25202001/9-Iqbal%2520and%2520Jinnah.pdf
  63. https://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/csas/PDF/17_v32_2_17.pdf
  64. https://www.pscpesh.org.pk/PDFs/PJ/Volume_52/6_Sultan%2520Mahmood.pdf
  65. https://www.academia.edu/35987881/Iqbal_and_Jinnah_An_Amalgamation_of_Thought_and_Real_Politics
  66. https://www.allamaiqbal.com/webcont/393/AllahabadAddress.html
  67. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4412964
  68. https://www.dawn.com/news/1219465
  69. http://www.dawn.com/news/1219465
  70. https://pakistanlink.org/Opinion/2011/June11/24/06.HTM
  71. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/iqbal-never-demanded-separate-home-for-muslims-outside-india/articleshow/17093053.cms
  72. https://arupkchatterjee.com/2017/05/29/how-communal-really-were-allama-iqbal-and-the-two-nation-theory/
  73. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-62467438
  74. http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/ideologie/data/CensusIndia/CensusIndia1931/CensusIndia1931IndiaReport.pdf
  75. https://www.themaparchive.com/india-s-muslim-population-c-1930.html
  76. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/partition-of-british-india/
  77. http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/txt_iqbal_1930.html
  78. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/reconstruction-of-religious-thought-in-islam-9780199067176
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.