There is no need to get angry. The purpose of these questions is to determine exactly what you are demanding. I am not condemning nor condoning your view point for the time being. First of all we must understand what you are actually asking.
Am i getting angry?
So you are demanding a sharia system based on more or less American democratic system. This system has no example in the history and therefore must me invented. Or you may be demanding a western democratic system and call it sharia system for namesake. Your argument that the concept of Khalifa is closest to American democratic system is far from reality. Although Khulfa e Rashideen were nominated after some sort of collective consultation, but this consultation was amongst a few pious men only. Women, minorities, and common population had not been a part of that consultation process. While American democratic system is based on one man one vote, irrespective of gender, religion, faith, intelligence, piety etc. May be you should consider communist party system adopted by communist Russia being closer to Islamic sharia system as only members of communist party who were certified members of a certain philosophy could become part of the consultation process.
what if i say that western democratic system is an extract from Shariah, like you said, western societies never had any electorate of board/institute.. it was pure monarchy, where as Islamic System ( Shariah) had all flavors in it...
Now one need to understand Islam first and then look into one-man one vote scenario, Islam have strongly emphasized on the education/awareness and have told all the Muslims to not to abuse power no matter how big or small the responsibility is... having understood this, a society comprised of majority with awareness on issues and are sensitive and are always dominated by Allah All- Mighty's fear, would select the right people, infact the right people will grow like crops, which will honor and respect others..
Communist Russian also have some resemblance with Islamic Shariah...
Both the western democratic and Russian communist system were the reaction of people deprived of their rights, people tired of monarchies.. Earlier in your western democracy no one but few were eligible to vote, it is only until now that women and others ( blacks) have got the right to vote... isn't it... Same should have been the case in Islam, in early days the closest and most pious among the men were chosen to head the state, ofcourse this might have evolved in a complete modern democracy where the people ( regardless their gender and ethinicity) would might have voted for the Khalifa...
Monarchy was the saddest part of Islamic history, the dynasties/family rules is against the teaching of Islam ( sadly almost all the islamic countries have same system and there are plenty of darbari ulema who have given them their acceptance against the wordly gains).
By Islamic Shariah most of people look forward to monarchy system where King is called Khalifah... which i strongly condemn...
If you think American democratic system is the closest to Islamic system, please give one single example from the history.
There is no example from history for this, niether did i said that it evident from history, you want to learn how it is closest to Islamic System, you need to learn both... for instance, Islamic system is based on equallity of all, race, gender, ethinicity does not play any role for any title, he whoever is pious and competent have more right to be in power. ( i think you will understand that i am not saying these are the requirement of American system)
My specific question was "what exactly Mullah Omar govt. was doing against sharia as explained in Quran and Sunnah. Afghani taliban were highly educated in Quran and Sunnah from some of the renowned religious leadrs of our times." Here you failed to answer my question specifically and accused them of selectively adopting sharia from Quran. Now I will put a supplementary question to you and hope you will care to answer my original question also.
Thats why i asked you, Mullah Omer, had mixed the religion with his traditions, where the religion to tradition ratio was 20:80, First thing he did, he closed the doors of education on women by force, secondly in forcefully imposed many rules considering them essential part of shariah, which is again against Islam itself..
for instance, Pakistani football went to play a match, now the team was from Pakistan, they didn't belong their, and the Mulla Omer Regime shaved their heads for not having beard!!! forcing men to cover their heads, ban of photography and list goes on.
Being an Islamic govt, how can one have the control on the othes live!!! yes there should be laws to protect people but not to make them slaves.. this is strictly against Islamic System...
Who will determine in a sharia system if the Khalifa is acting according to sharia?
The people of the state, will determine that if Khalifa is acting according or against Sharia..
The system of Holy Prophet PBUH cannot be adopted today as he had the luxury of divine guidance whenever required which is certainly not available today.
The Prophet (SAAW) was never meant to live in the world infintly nor any other human will live forever, but does that mean we should not follow the good things they taught us through divine guidance? or we should call it off-dated and look for new divne laws, hence creating another religion/system???
The system of Khulfa e Rashideen could also not be adopted after the demise of the immediate companions of the Holy Prophet PBUH as that calibre of human resource was simply not available.
Agree, but the source to develop such humans are available, i still say that no man can match the qualites Those had, but least they can do is to try to follow their path..
Afghani Taliban with all sincerity wanted to adopt sharia system and choose a Khalifa Mullah Omar, and I have no doubt on their intentions. Now you say their Khalifa was not sharia compliant. Under these circumstances who is going to determine if the Khalifa is sharia compliant or not? [/qoute]
They might be sincere in it, and they might have learned from their mistakes and might have evolved in one of the best system, but they were never allowed to do that...
[quote="Mindstorm, post:10, topic:211465"]
These are typical blackmail tactics when so called religious scholars who cannot explain anything logically they start accusing people of denying Quran, Sunnah, and Holy Prophet PBUH. What I understand from these sources can be different from your understanding.
Where did is said/accused you for denying quran or hadith, i think it typical of so-called intellects who gets angry the moment anyone ask them basic and simple question and they instead of providing simple and fair answer try to avoid the question.. why i don't know, but these very individuals never shy toa ask question..
There is no unity of leadership in the Islamic world and I am sure you cannot deny this fact. Under these circusmstances who will determine which understanding is correct?
I will one step back, therei is no leadership in Islamic world, yes there are some symbolic icons, acting as viceroy of western/foriegn powers...
You have to answer these specific questions to understand your stance better. Right now your post is full of contradictions and confusions.
The post will still felt full of contradiction as you may not have understanding of Islamic system unless and untill you clear you mind and then start looking for Islamic, then you might be able to ask the right question... unless you do this, you will be confused...
Just for your info, Islam nor does Islamic System support or appreciate any cult, may it be wahabi, shia aur sunni. Anyone claiming to implement Islamic system and at sametime having believe on Wahabi, Sunni or Shia sect is just playing aroung and/or selling relgion to get power...
Islam is one religion nor does the Prophet (SAAW) neither His Companions (RZA) belonged to any sect.