So you basically dont know their dalail, (remember we are discussing how the first point of ghamdi is similar to congressi ulema). Secondly half of deobandi ulema supported pakistan including Moulana ashraf ali thanvi. Islamization of india was not a question if india remained un divided, so your point of them trying to impose islam is also not valid for undivided india.
I hope we will not see islamo alregic type posters using this lame logic of ulema opposed pakistan any more.
^ This is somewhat similar to what congressi ulema said during opposition of pakistan movement. So do you guys agree with them ?
Pakistan movement was a political movement. Ghamdi is discussing Sharia. This is exactly what he is trying to say that we are confusing politics with Sharia.
Seventy years ago, there was no Pakistan. It was only India. The decision was either to break it on the basis of religion or not. There were two opinions about it. One, in favor of the breakup; the other, against it. Nothing wrong in having an opinion about a political decision. Nothing to do with Sharia in my opinion.
well people have not moved on from his first point and are having a heart attack
they dont know the other bomb ghamdi ha thrown that ahamdies canot be declared non muslim by state or by ulema.......and he has full explanation for it.
This full explanation is not valid,rather laughable in front of some one who knows basics of our religion. kindly post his logics here then we will discuss them as well.
Pakistan wasn't about an islamic state but much more than that.
G acha.
Array baat itni see hay jis baat per aap log khush ho rahay hain usi baat per ulema ko taanay daitay thay. samjhay?
Pakistan movement was a political movement. Ghamdi is discussing Sharia. This is exactly what he is trying to say that we are confusing politics with Sharia.
Seventy years ago, there was no Pakistan. It was only India. The decision was either to break it on the basis of religion or not. There were two opinions about it. One, in favor of the breakup; the other, against it. Nothing wrong in having an opinion about a political decision. Nothing to do with Sharia in my opinion.
why you all blame/taunt ulema for opposing pakistan? either you consider them dishonest/or dont give them right to differ from what you all htink as correct or you consider their dalail as not correct ?
why you all blame/taunt ulema for opposing pakistan? either you consider them dishonest/or dont give them right to differ from what you all htink as correct or you consider their dalail as not correct ?
I am not blaming any alim or ulema. I am saying Alim or not, everyone is entitled to have an opinion about a political matter. Having said this, I also believe when an Alim makes a political decision, it doesn't become part of Sharia.
I am not blaming any alim or ulema. I am saying Alim or not, everyone is entitled to have an opinion about a political matter. Having said this, I also believe when an Alim makes a political decision, it doesn't become part of Sharia.
Agreed.
So ulema will not be blamed@GS now for opposing pakistan. *theek *Lets discuss point 2
This full explanation is not valid,rather laughable in front of some one who knows basics of our religion. kindly post his logics here then we will discuss them as well.
G acha.
Array baat itni see hay jis baat per aap log khush ho rahay hain usi baat per ulema ko taanay daitay thay. samjhay?
wah jee wah...lol..why shd i post his logic? his logic is right there in the article for everyone to read. If you dont like it, you need to counter it and post your viewpoint. thx
on your second point..theek hai sir jee, samigh gaya :)..i have a very low IQ and I am not a very intelligent person, so pls bear with me.
Now just to make my point clear, i am not giving any taana to congressi ulema. As a matter of fact, after so many experiences in pakistan, i would agree with congressi ulema that the religion shd not be the basis for a country division and there is no practical concept for a muslim nation to be in existence and ghamdi sahib is saying the same thing (but we still needed pakistan for political and economic reasons) but these congressi ulema and JI becase thekadar of pakistan...
I wanted to you to give full perspective of congressi ulema...that is all. thx
bhai sahib, a vast majority of deobandi ulema opposed Pakistan. Plus sheikh ul islam hazrat Hussain ahmad Madni sahib was the cornerstone of deobandi uleams and he opposed Pakistan till the last day…case closed. If you dont know the standing of madni sahib, you kindly need to revisit deobandi history.
and yes i understand your point about congressi ulema and i responded to it in my other post…i am not debating congressi ulema’s rationale in 40s that the religion shd not be the basis for a country division and that there is no practical concept for a “muslim nation” to be in existence and yes ghamdi sahib is saying the same thing (but we still needed pakistan for political and economic reasons)
but the issue is that very same congressi ulema became thekadar of pakistan and started to islaimze the new country. pls go read who brought qaradae maqasad. what was the role of jamat islami ? if anything congreesi ulema shd have focused on making Pakistan a secular country at the govt level and tried to improve muslims at a personal level. that is exactly what ghamdi sabhib is saying.
I have made my point and i dont want to keep repeating it. I know you disagree and that is fine. for all other points, pls dont ask me to post the other side. You are the other side, so please provide your counter viewpoint to ghamdi’s viewpoint. thx
Thank you for participating in the discussion in a very mature way, i like the way you have avoided labeling others.
and
and this was for other poster not you. *samjhay
*
I know madni sahibs stance , infact i was looking for an online link of *naqsh e hayat(*His autobiography) to support my point about the same stance. Khayr lets move on to point #2](http://www.paklinks.com/gs/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=2) . kindly post ghamdi stance and i will reply inshallah
So ulema will not be blamed@GS now for opposing pakistan. *theek *Lets discuss point 2
Bihari saab, I do not blame Ulema for opposing the idea of the division of India in 1947. I think just like every other person, they also had the right to express their political opinion. I am not aware of the specifics of that time, but I think if they were not trying to portray their decision as a religious decree, then nothing wrong with it. What I would have a problem with was if they were trying to portray that GOD is FOR or AGAINST the division of India.
On the other hand, I think if somebody thinks they were TRAITORS for opposing the division of India and thus the creation of Pakistan, I would disagree with that. I think people should be free to decide the political fates of their regions. Scotland had a referendum last year and I did not hear any shouts of TRAITORS TRAITORS for those who were in favor of separation from the UK. I think traitors are those, who looted and harmed the interests of Pakistan, after it was established.
Pakistan movement was a political movement. Ghamdi is discussing Sharia. This is exactly what he is trying to say that we are confusing politics with Sharia.
Seventy years ago, there was no Pakistan. It was only India. The decision was either to break it on the basis of religion or not. There were two opinions about it. One, in favor of the breakup; the other, against it. Nothing wrong in having an opinion about a political decision. Nothing to do with Sharia in my opinion.
Correction, 70 years ago there was no India either. India became a country one day AFTER Pakistan. The subcontinent was a region, ruled by different empires.
