Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Seriously?? Let the poor dude rest in peace.
Pakistan is no ones' but ours... we walk on it.. it feeds us .. It takes care of us...
With the water..air..sun...
Its our "MUQADAS" holy land..... Its us and pakistan.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Except for good education, most politicians & government officials are well fed, have money, and have the luxury to do whatever and direct access to Pakistan's treasure funds. But they are still failing..
Granted, this is a pointless discussion but we aren't the ones throwing Pakistan off cliff, it's them. It is what it is - just a discussion and last I checked that's what a public forum is used for - pointless, harmless discussions. :p
Don't kill the messenger..
And as a discussion I have the full right to call it fruitless and a waste of time.
Freedom of Speech means you have the right to say what you want. It doesn't mean I have to tolerate rampant stupidity.
Monk is right. Jinnah is dead. Pakistan is here to stay. Work on fixing the present not discussion what happened before your parents were born.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
^^^
.... I just want them to stay in their respective mosques and stay out of the governance...
I agree with this ... it's pity you haven't been listening to me.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Its because they are Jahils Enigmatic. They are argue over things that don't ****ing matter. Nobody cares what form of religious or secular government we have if they don't have food, shelter, social justice and a social welfare network. That comes first. Its Maslow's hierarchy of needs at its very basic.
Only people who are well fed, have money, have a home and a decent education have the luxury for such retarded discussions.
food, shelter, social justice and welfare are the focus ... of Shari'ah. Dealing with these issues needs a workable system to be in place.
Re: Jinnah’s Pakistan?
Okay well that is easy … First one of the things I would like to see is slander and character assassination of anybody to be a criminal offense. Media to be held accountable for what they say and have evidence for it. For it to be a rule that more than 60% of the news must be positive.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Peace Theorist
Islam is a complete way of life it is not a religion it is a Deen ... It is a World Order ... a complete framework for the humans - Muslims and non-Muslims, animals, plants and everything else. Muslims have traditionally not been secular and I believe secularism is anti-Islamic.
psyah. Agree that you think that Islam is a complete framework for humans, but we Hindus also think that our religion is a way of life and we certainly feel that the almighty has made everyone equal and once born, one is free to practise the religion that one wants to. Friends and I am talking of Hindus who have read the holy Quraan, say that it is a great book and I am sure that it doesnt say that being secular is being anti-Islamic as you claim.
Your thoughts are very noble in the way the society should be and that there should be a gradual evolution kind of a change to a perfect society, something we would call a Ram Rajya.
But this is a pure Utopian thought. Please understand that you are an educated person who is willing to criticize people whose example Yazdi has given. But there is a majority population who unfortunately are not as blessed as you are and each one would have a different perception towards religion. I feel that religion should be kept away from governance.
Your belief that secularism is anti-Islamic amuses me. Maybe you could explain it to me how. Also it makes me feel that you look down upon people of other beliefs.
Coming back to the thread, I feel that though Pakistan was created keeping in mind the Muslims, Mr. Jinnah definitely had a secular vision and wanted equality amongst people of all religions.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
There you answer it, the country for muslims, means ruled by the scripture of Muslims? or does that mean, the country of Muslims should be governed by the rule of Christianity or Judaism or Budhism or so-called secularism???
It means a Muslim majority nation ruled by a secular system, in which the govt stays clear of relgion, since it is not the business of the state... I thought that was made abundantly clear...
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Peace Med911
I agree again ... this is fundamentally the difference between our positions.
However, I believe if we create by secular means a society which is philanthropic/charitable (gain of wealth in order to employ and redistribute) in it's ethos rather than capitalistic (i.e. selfish gain) ... we can get the beginning of a good, just nation together. I have major issues with the global financial system at the moment and see that as the noose that enslaves all countries.
However, you said: "I do however believe that can we come closer to being Islamic, without being a declared Islamic country outright" ... seems to show me that you are missing my point entirely.
I am not interested in "naming Pakistan an Islamic state" it is already named an Islamic state as are many other countries in the world ... Rather your words seem to suggest that you want Pakistan to be more of an Islamic state in the way it operates.
In the attempt to avoid psuedo-Islam we need to understand what it means to create an Islamic state ... since you are basically saying a "true secular country" is "more Islamic" than "any" outright attempt to make an Islamic state. My argument is that so far recent attempts to make "Islamic states" i.e. any country formed in the "name" of Islam after mid-1800s has been of a certain zealous approach which lacks wisdom. My idea of formation is "gradual" and "subtle" and I believe Shari'ah accomodates gradualism and review to certain extents. My idea is based on orientation - i.e. we face in a direction that "improves" humanity in our moral outlook and one that is balanced with improvements to lifestyle. Consumeristic capitalism drives improvements in lifestyle without looking at moral barriers to achieve that end. It may seem that many western countries share Islamic values - because they are fair with their people, but if the same societies are allowing that praise to be directed at man and encourage godlessness and infalting of egos and desires then I feel all of the positives are in vain.
I, like you want a country that values life and wants to make people happy and live in comfort above and beyond merely being safe. However I want that country to direct all acknowledgement of that condition towards God. In terms of punishment/sentencing we need to look at the various hadith regarding for example stoning to death ... in a very different way.
Consider zina:
An Islamic state that makes Allah (SWT) so loved and being pure and cleansed so desirable then the following will happen:
a) People will avoid sin b) Those who sin will feel guilty c) Those who feel guilty will repent d) Those who repent will want to be cleansed e) Those who want to be cleansed will insist on full (hadd) sentencing be inflicted on them in this life in order to be spotless in the Hereafter ...
Then on the other hand we need a state that will not punish/sentence people quickly but shy away from it ... and only when certain conditions are clearly met - i.e. when a person insists on being sentenced after admiting fault several times ... then the sentence is given begrudgingly ...
There have been societies in the past under Islamic rule (which demonstrates that they are possible) where people take each other to court not because someone else has taken from them, but rather because the other party has not taken enough to value a given agreement ... they will insist that no overpayment is made to them (and they do this out of fear of accounting for that wealth that does not belong to them) and take offense if gestures of overpayment are made to them ... This is the Islamic state I want .. It needs to be driven by the condition of the individual hearts to create a society that drives goodness from it's elite ... I do not agree with zealous states that try to enforce obedience in to people. (That is the common perception of Islamic state, but it is not mine and the hadith seem to support my view).
I believe this condition can only enter the hearts of people through:
a) Good leadership who give people room to be living without fear of them b) That leadership instill values of ethics in to society by education and media encouragement c) That people learn to favour competing for nobility over competing for wealth d) That various organisation CEOs try hard to earn wealth for the motive of giving more in charity
As Yazdi had mentioned, you are creating a Utopian society. Such an altruistic ideal is what we all want, but reality dictates that we must work with what we have.
For example. You cited Capitalism as being greedy and selfish. I would disagree. I believe that in general, humanity is inherently selfish. Capitalism is an attempt to harness the inherent flaw in our nature, and using it for the greater good. Trying to fight what is part of human nature, trying to create this false pardigm, will only create another miserable wreck of a failure, no different then the Soviet Union.
The global financial system needs reform, not doubt. But why throw out the baby with the bath water?!?! Capitalism works, but with the right reforms in place.
Again. The problem isnt is in implementation, whether or hurried or gradual. The issue here is that we have to first understand whos version of Sharia one is to establish. Since your talking about a divine law, there is then very little flexibility in how it is to be interpreted. Those who are convinced of their version, will never allow the implementation of another law, because to them, such an interpretation would be an affront to the divine. Unlike a secular, which can be amended, implementing and amending laws based on religious doctrine is nearly impossible.
Western societies, that promote fairness and justice, do not all "praise man" or promote "ego." America for example, puts "In God we trust" right on its money!
Besides, any society that promotes Islamic virtues of justice, peace and fair play, etc, regardless of whether they praise God or praise man, are still pleasing god, because God does not need praise from humanity. God does not yearn for mans praise, he simply wants us to do what is right. It is not God who yearns for our praise and approval , it is we who should hope God praises and approves of us.
Now I would agree that a person who focuses his attention on praise of God, through namaz (a sort of meditation), and does what God has deemed pious, can lead a virtues life. However, I dont not see this happening on the level of an entire society. there are inherent flaws in all men, that will creep up regardless of how God centered the society he lives in is.
The societies you cite, that were role models, weren't always such role models either. While in general, the Islamic empires were very tolerant and progressive, they also had many flaws. We fool ourselves into believing that the golden era of Muslims was a Utopia, when even then there were many many problems. Except those issues are overshadowed by the many accomplishments of those same societies.
Good leadership who give people room to be living without fear of them: I see this in most democratic countries today. And most are non Muslim and secular.
That leadership instill values of ethics in to society by education and media encouragement: Also see this in the West.
That people learn to favour competing for nobility over competing for wealth: Good luck with that one.
That various organisation CEOs try hard to earn wealth for the motive of giving more in charity... Hmmm... There are many philanthropists... Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, both big contributors.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
First of all psyah bhai I do not believe in Mahdi/Messiah/personality worship etc etc. You know my stance against literal religionist. I believe in systems, rules, institutions, laws and their implementation, tolerance, coexistence and above all the ability of a society to use collective wisdom peacefully and for the larger benefit of the society..
Now coming to your above post.. If you remember I sent you a pm sometime ago with a link where a cleric was so conveniently slapping kafir fatwa on somebody for a difference of opinon.. and this was no ordinary cleric. He is the Amir of the largest political religious party.
Once we let this pandora box of sharia open.. then we have all sort of sole champions of ideology and morality with guns. Your kind at best can post your sharia in forums like these.. these guys are ready to kill or die for their cause. It doesn't take much intelligence to figure out whose sharia will be accepted.
It's easier for you to chant sharia from the safe havens of UK.. we live in a constant fear from these self proclaimed champions of ideology and morality. It's a serious issue in Pakistan.. people get killed for a difference of opinion.
As I said.. you have lost touch with reality specially in Pakistan.. and you live in your idealistic gagaland of sharia. Try preaching this sharia to one of the armed 175 types of militant gangsters operating in the name of sharia. I know you have fantastic reasoning skills.. I challenge you to convert only one persons from what you call criminality to your sharia.. I am sure once you are in their company in one of their dens, you would agree 100% with their sharia.. at least I would to save my neck from getting chopped..
BTW this industrialist friend of mine who was kidnapped in the name of Allah also used to pray 5 times bajmaat facing Holy Ka'aba alongwith his abductors as long as he stayed in their custody.
You said in your earlier post that Allah will judge you for your effort and not the results. The issue is not which corner of jannat you will occupy in the hereafter. The issue is to have a practical, doable, realistic system for our troubled society in this mortal world where we can provide some social justice to the people. At least where some enabling environment can be created where people can go along with their business of life. Where some essential choices can be provided to people in a tolerant environment. Where people can coexist without chopping each other's head.
A secular model where religion is separated from state may be UnIslamic as per your understanding (not mine), but is the only option available to us for this environment of coexistence..
Very well said Yazdi saab. Couldnt have said it better.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Peace hanibal
No I'm not calling Jinnah munafiq - I'm saying that he didn't seem to be too fussed with how the country was going to be run as long as "Muslims had their own state" ... However the people who have a preference of one or the other have used selected parts of his words to justify the authenticity of their claims - that Pakistan was made in this model or that model.
About Abu Kalam Azad I don't know ... you may be right.
Regarding scholars not getting involved in statecraft - there are very detailed wisdoms in this point ... you will find that scholars are often criticised when they are found at the doors of the palaces and yet kings are praised when they are found at the doors of the ulooms. The highest rung on the ladder for scholars is Grand Qadi - and we have something similar in Pakistan - with the Chief Justice ... who is often a Grand Mufti. Otherwise 'auliya are spiritual people and are there to balance the effects of materialism ... Caliphs and Viziers are involved in providing material fairness and implement justice - The awliya are there to provide the tools for people to learn tolerance, patience, mercy and charity. One serves the outward the other the inward and that is the balance of Islam.
The only position which sits on the fence is that of Qadi ... and traditionally only the Prophet and the Khulafah e Rashidoon had political and religious authority ... The reason why the Taliban model fell is because it failed to recognise this need.
Regarding not letting the scholars to run the show ... it is because the best scholars will shy away from leadership ... and they will fear the responsibility more than they will desire the honour ... Scholars also do not necessarily make pragmatic leaders - however some scholars may be multi-talented for sure ... but on the whole they will strongly refuse political leadership. Besides every king has his advisor - and if the advisor is religious then the advice will be just ... to say why not just give rule to the scholars is like saying no need for kings to have advisors just give dominion to the advisors. In order for the best results sometimes it is necessary to use people who have nothing to gain and also nothing to lose ...
Implementing Shari'ah means that decisions for law making and setting penal codes are done in the light of Islam using the methods that will best establish the way forward, through consultation of the best/experts of the areas in question. It is to understand that maximum penalty does not equate to penalty and various forms of sentencing as long as whatever transpires is passed by a shura - would be consdiered Islamic and Shari'ah ... Picking up Shari'ah law from Iraq several hundred years ago may be totally inappropriate today ... so Shari'ah does not mean following verbatim the law as set in the past - but to use the same tools to arrive at region and time specific solutions ...
Confucius said ... "Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Seek what they sought"
Ironically the Taliban (students) sought to follow in the footsteps, but you know what happens if you are walking forward whilst looking down for footsteps? You bash your head !!!
Shari'ah is a framework it is not a set of procedures or processes that prescribe and restrict.
I took my time read your post several times, although there are few points in your post which are debatable for the sake of explanation of things like i would like to see the ruler having good knowledge of Quran and Hadees and Sunnah in addition to the advisers, but overall there is nothing to oppose here. I would say in the perfect world this would be the perfect answer, we don't live in one but yes we shouldn't be giving up hope and keep trying either the life we have is done or the objective has met.
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
It means a Muslim majority nation ruled by a secular system, in which the govt stays clear of relgion, since it is not the business of the state... I thought that was made abundantly clear...
Why should muslims be ruled with secular system when they have their own system in place?
Re: Jinnah's Pakistan?
Why should muslims be ruled with secular system when they have their own system in place?
Because it will make the ABCDs happy. Why else? Who cares about the 180 million Pakistanis in Pakistan?