Pakistan Islamic or Secular?

[Tasavur]

Re: Pakistan Islamic or Secular?

@Dr.LuLworth

By that you probably mean sunni shariat law right? There is no such thing. The bharelvis will not agree to a wahabi version of it, and salafis won’t follow the “infedelic” shafai version of it etc. The shia and other sunni groups will NOT be allowed to function in sunni shariat law, let alone minority “muslim” groups. We haven’t even talked about non muslim pakistanis.

Lets be clear here, there is no “true islamic system” alrighty? The Shariat law version of any group will imply it’s “superiority” over others. Secular government implies EQUALITY, if practised right. All groups can practice their own shenanigans, just don’t try to impose it on each other.

You’re saying that there is no ‘true Islamic system’ doesn’t quite make it so. If different political parties in a liberal democracy can co-exist with different opinions of how the state should be run, whilst acknowledging that the ideological foundation of the state (i.e. secularity, democracy, liberalism, free-market democracy, call it what you will) cannot change, then various Muslim school of thoughts can manage it also, as they have done so in the past.

A secular system has not worked in Pakistan (and Pakistan prior to 1973 was a secular state), nor has democracy, nor has military dictatorship. It’s because these systems are not indigenous to the geo-political realities of the Pakistani state.

I point you to this quote in the Quran:

“Say: ‘O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah.’” — Quran 3:64

The idea is to apply this ‘coming to common terms’ to Muslims and accept that the vast majority of Muslims agree on the vast majority of issues. The main issues that Muslims argue on are theological points; was the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) made out of noor, is Allah anthropomorphistic, was the Prophet (PBUH) aware of the ghaib etc, points which have little bearing on how the religion is actively practised. The idea isn’t to promote one particular ‘brand’ of Islam, or Shariah. It’s to promote a system which has can accept all of the ikhtilaf in Islam whilst remaining true to the elementary positions that all Muslims agree upon, that God is one, that Muhammad (PBUH) is His Messenger, that Islam promotes redistribution of wealth (zakat), that Islam promotes an interest-free economic system, that Islam promotes accountability and justice for all… etc

What methodology do we use? Well certainly not one of force; instead, we guide the people through education, ensure they understand that establishment of Shariat is a fard and then start from the very ground up. Agree on the commonalities between us, which incidentally are the majority of things required to run a state, the penal codes, the justice systems, the systems of governance. Where the issues are impassable, which are mainly theological points which have little bearing on practical life, agree to disagree. Where the issue is of personal law, one *madhab *says one thing,another madhab says another, you agree that a person should be judged according to the madhab he follows.

To conclude, if we don’t have Islamic law, we are left with the alternative of trying to establish a secular, liberal democracy. This isn’t ever happening in Pakistan; let’s agree on that one point. You may argue that we’ll never establish a true Islamic state either. My point is, if we’re both aiming for two ideologies which are impossible to establish in Pakistan, why not try for the one sanctioned by the God that the majority of Pakistanis believe in.