What fun! The day after tomorrow we celebrate the official birthday of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, founder and maker of Pakistan. With great foresight, the man chose the date to be the same as that celebrated worldwide as being the day of the birth of the Second in Trinity, December 25th.

Guns will be fired, flags unfurled and hoisted, the people will flock to his Mazar to listen to today's 'high-ups' tell them what was that Jinnah visualized for the country he made for them. This will, of course, conform to the narrow expedient governmental vision.

However, luckily this time around it may not be so dire, as a few of those who now lead have read and digested what Jinnah expounded on February 19 1948: "But make no mistake, Pakistan is not a theocracy or anything like it. Islam demands from us the tolerance of other creeds and we welcome in closest association with us all those who of whatever creed are themselves willing and ready to play their part as true and loyal citizens of Pakistan."

A few days later, he reiterated: "In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims - Hindus, Christians and Parsis. They are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan."

There is no one alive who can recount today Jinnah's speech to the Imperial Legislative Council in April 1912, and one can be pretty sure that few have even read it. In the collection of Jinnah's speeches and writings between the years 1912 and 1917, can be found what he said in support of Gopal Krishna Gokhale's Elementary Education Bill.

Jinnah opened up by expressing his regrets that although there were certain of his colleagues who opposed the bill, no council member could possibly deny its paramount importance, and that even those opposing it were bound to admit the fact that it had the support of the great majority of their countrymen, Hindus and Muslims alike.

He praised Gokhale for the masterly way in which he had dealt with the question of elementary education and for the services he had rendered to the country, adding: "I only pray that India may have many more sons like him." To kill the enemy of ignorance, the gradual extension of the system that had existed for 150 years - the voluntary system principle - was no answer. He reproached the British for their neglect of elementary education.

For the 150 years they had ruled, they had dealt with education at a 'jog trot pace' which, if continued, as Gokhale's figures conclusively proved, it would take a further 175 years in order to get all school-going age children to school and 600 years to get all the girls to school. There could be no salvation for the masses unless the principle of compulsory education was introduced. This has been proven time and again, for in no country has elementary education become universal without compulsion.

Admittedly, as Sir Harcourt Butler, one opponent to the bill, had stated, India could not be compared to other countries of the world as in certain respects its conditions differed radically. But its people belonged to the same species, human beings and in that respect they resembled all other nations of the world. Conditions may well have been different and that is where the statesmen and the politicians came into play. It was up to them to meet those special conditions and provide the necessary safeguards.

Elementary education had nothing to do with the fact that India had many castes, many creeds and many languages, but provision had to be made for them. There was much force in the argument that there were not sufficient school buildings, nor sufficient teachers, but if the money was there schools could be built, and teachers trained and paid. The opponents who insisted that the money was not there were merely repeating the very, very old story. Jinnah's answer to them: "All I can say is this, find money! Find money!! Find money !!! I appeal to the president, not as president but as the finance minister. I say, find money. If you say you have not got enough money, discover and tap new sources....."

The people were already taxed, yes, he admitted. And if the government imposed further taxes to fund the purpose and provisions of the bill, the government would be faced with a good deal of unpopularity. But so what? What they would be doing is benefiting the masses of the country to whom the government owed a greater duty than to anybody else. He appealed to the British to remove the reproach justly levelled against their rule - the neglect of elementary education. "It is the duty of every civilized government to educate the masses, and if you have to face unpopularity, if you have to face a certain amount of danger, face it boldly in the name of duty ..... You will have the whole educated public with you in the struggle on the battlefield."

Having dealt with the issue of the voluntary system versus compulsion, he moved on to the dangers cited - the political danger and the social danger. Others, Nawab Majid and Muhammad Shafi amongst them, had opposed the bill on the ground that were the people to be given education, it would breed socialism and agitators who would organize strikes. Ridiculous, said Jinnah, to equate education with sedition. Frank and independent criticism of the government was the duty of every member of the state and fair, free and independent criticisms of the acts of government could in no way constitute sedition. Was it in any way logical to say that a boy who could read and write would automatically become a political agitator?

Jinnah reminded the council members that it was they who knew the blessings of education which the British government had given them - for the British were the first to open the eyes of the Indians to the importance of education. It was the British government which had brought them up to the level where they were able to stand and deliberate upon the affairs of the nation and the country. He asked them, where would they all be but for education?

As for another fear of the feudals - that the people would become 'too big for their boots', that they would not follow the occupations of their parents, that they would demand more rights, that they would agitate, that they would become socialists, was it the intention to keep millions and millions of people downtrodden merely out of fear that they may demand more rights? Were they to be kept in darkness and ignorance for all ages to come in case they stand up, after realizing that they do have certain rights, and ask for those rights? It was only those who were influenced by selfish reasons who were urging that universal elementary education was a mistake.

Jinnah was firm - there was neither a social nor a political danger. In fact, those in government would have more friends, and more intelligent friends, who would understand them better so that their work would be made easier. They would have fewer unscrupulous people to deal with - those who were then in a position to impose upon the ignorant and provoke them. Compulsory universal elementary education was not only in the greater interests of the country, he told his fellow members, it was imperative.

Now, let us think. Does Gokhale's bill and Jinnah's support still hold good today, particularly in the context of illiteracy in Pakistan? The answer: a glaring 'yes'. But how does one tackle the problem?

On December 8, 2001, in this newspaper of record was printed a news item. The good news is that contraception in Pakistan has increased from 5.5 per cent to 23.9 per cent. The bad news is that despite this, 5.3 million babies are born in the country each year. Of these, 270,000 die at birth. This works out to a birth rate of approximately 10 babies per minute who live and, if they are lucky, reach the school-going age. Can one of our pundits elaborate how we can educate all these children? Should the mullahs and maulvis not be told to preach the benefits of birth control and education in their mosques rather than bigotry and the furtherance of violence?

On a related plane, some more good news: Dr Syed Hussain Jafri, a secular progressive professor at the Aga Khan University, who holds the Chair of Islamic and Pakistan Studies of the Faculty of Health Sciences, has invited Professor Stanley Wolpert of UCLA, the historian and author of the best book yet written on Jinnah, to come to Karachi and address the growing and the grown at the Aga Khan University Auditorium on December 26. His subject: 'Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah's Vision of Pakistan'.