Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

You stated no religious aspects. Why are you going back on your word?

Show me where I am discussing Warlordism? In all the posts before this show me where I use the word and where I mention it.

Look Edit: Name Calling. Your problem is that you are a self-hating muslim. If you even are a Muslim. Your problem is that you wish to see everything through a prism that was established 60 to 70 years ago that has no bearing on modern day real politik.

You act like all democracies are the same. They are not. The US system is very different from the British system which is very different from the french which is very different from the Swiss. You like to clump all this bull**** together to try to make a point.

No single system is perfect. No single system does not have faults. Look at democracy in the US for an example. A President who did not win the elections was elected to office. So much for democracy.

You have already backtracked from half of this conversation. I am done for the next day or two. I am on a road mission to JEM territory to help people. You can go on stroking your e-peen.

At the end of the day those of us who actually think out of the box and value our religion and culture will stand by the systems we believe are just. You on the other hand sitting in the West can continue to kiss ass for the green card.

22

So what? Even If you are facing economic hardship you should still stay in place that is more compatible to your beliefs instead of moving to place that you hate. Or better yet, instead of blowing schools up, how about building them?

23

Re: Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

Hypocrisy is one of the deadliest evils facing Muslims in general and Pakistanis in particular.

The western civilizations adopted a lot of 'Islamic values' and we continued losing them. Unless we agree upon the notion that Islamic system means caring for fellow human beings more than a set of cosmetic rituals, we cannot start implementing it. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem a possibility as of now.

The debate always reminds me of an employee at one of the government departments in Pakistan with a tasbeeh in one hand, a 'proper' beard, discussing 'loose morality' of today's youth and asking for bribe from me to get my thing done!

24

CM, you're missing the point. They all have one thing in common. They're all secular nations with no religion in politics.

BTW, part of the problem is, as Burqa rightly pointed out, this misguided notion that Islamic world was perfect utopia once, and only if we could go back to pure days of Islam, somehow everything will be fine. When in reality there never was any Islamic utopia, and our understanding of Islamic history is distorted and based on faulty facts.

25

Re: Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

No religion in politics? You serious? What is the weekly sunday mass at the white house? I can provide you other examples from france, the Uk etc where religion plays a part in politics and government actions.

Its sheer ignorance to think that any nation is truly secular when it has...I disgress. I will use the US example. Until JFK every US president had been a protestant. So much for religion not playing a part. Look up books on JFK and how his personal religion played a part in his campaign.

No your understanding of Islam is colored by your lack of knowledge on the matter. There was no single Caliphate in the Islamic world. Different Sultanates ruled different areas. Some were very prosperous and academically inclined others were not.

Put this way. If it wasn't for Muslim inventors you would not have many of the modern breakthroughs in maths and other sciences. This was done under Islamic governments.

26

Re: Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

Someone having personal religious beliefs is not same as religion in politics. Its explicitly forbidden in the US Constitution, and there is also separation of church and the state.

Again you’re wrong.

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Presidents * Religion

I don’t want to get into argument over stuff that has been debated million times. The only thing that Arabs did, and not all of them were/are Muslim, was to translate Greek and Indian scientific work into Arabic, and made use of it.

27

Holding Church mass in a government institution is not a violation of the principle of Church and State? Seriously?

Yeah why don’t you check these resources:
United States presidential election, 1960 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Campaign of 1960 - John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum

Notice how JFKs catholic origins were issues of concern. So according to you religion doesn’t play a part in politics in a secular country.

Explain to me how it did in JFKs case?

Wow. Talk about ignorance. Lets use an independent website that has some credibility. Unlike yours created by a 10 year old.

Reviews | 1001 Inventions - That is a book that covers the discoveries. From your precious coffee to modern day Algebra.

BBC: BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | The ‘first true scientist’

28

Re: Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

shami2k, i think it will be unjust to dismiss the contributions of scientists like Ibn Sina, khawarzmi, Jabir bin hayan etc.

However, why shud scienctific discoveries by classified as muslim, christian or athiestic?

29

Yaar I am here at your service, keho kia baat hey? :D

30

No need for name-calling if you want a serious debate.

I can give you several examples from the field of astronomy where Muslims excelled 600-800 years ago.

But that will be too Math oriented and thus difficult for ordinary folks to understand.

So here is more down to earth (or more like down to the road) example.

My grandfather collected cars that were antique in his time and the one that were brand new in his time are now antique.

I love those antique cars, and I polish them, keep them running. Silver ghost of 1924.

BUT I DO NOt drive them on daily basis or in storms, or in too much heat or cold.

Why?

They are antique cars. they have inherent problems with their engines. They are under powered, and highly unreliable. For cyrin out loud, they don't even have air bags :)

So if I point towards their lack of anti-lock brakes, or the low hp, or the absence of airbags, am I hating those cars?

Heck no! I am just pointing out that those antique cars are no longer suitable for 99% of the drivers heading out to the motorway (or interstate system or autobahn).

Therefore for regular driving 99% of drivers prefer to drive the more modern models from 21st century.

Khalifa system is the same way. It is antique, ancient. It lacks safety systems to avoid anarchy. it doesn't have airbags to protect from warlordism.

And thus we should love Khalifa system, cherish it, keep it polished and perhaps take it out for the weekend driving aka Jumma prayers.

But after that short drive, we should put it back in the garage, or in the basement, or the museums, where it belongs, where it is protected from the elements.

Europeans did not INVENT system of government. They took whatever was available 800 years ago and then started evolving it.

So anyone who says European systems are bad just because Hazrat Omer is not named, then he/she is gravely mistaken.

Pakistanis too have to take whatever model is AVAILABLE NOW, and then evolve it to suit the coming decades and centuries.

Hope you got the point 1-7 in a better way.

Thank you.

31

I am not talking about people who blow up schools.. my post was meant that Muslims who go to different countries (esp west) do not go for their culture, rather for economic reasons. Remember, huge population of Muslims living in Arab countries do not like those countries but still live their for betterment of their lives. I did not mean to defend any 'Islamists'.

32

Perhaps it would be a good idea to remind everyone that the philosophical concept behind modern western secularism was introduced to the west by Averroes (Ibn Rushd) in Muslim Spain. These ideas were spread to Judaism by his student Moses Mamonides and among Christians by St. Thomas Aquinas. Unfortunately, the Islamic World declared Averroes a heretic and burnt his books and writings, so modern day Muslims do not recognize his idea of secularism as a Muslim invention and wrongfully think of it as a Christian/ Jewish Western invention. However, the West still recognizes the debt owed to this Muslim scholar:

"Averroes advocated the principle of twofold truth, maintaining that religion has one sphere and philosophy another. Religion, he said, is for the unlettered multitude; philosophy for the chosen few. Religion teaches by signs and symbols; philosophy presents the truth itself. In the mind, therefore, of the truly enlightened, philosophy supersedes religion. But, though the philosopher sees that what is true in theology is false in philosophy, he should not on that account condemn religious instruction, because he would thereby deprive the multitude of the only means which it has of attaining a (symbolic) knowledge of the truth. "

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Averroes

33

Re: Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

Again your analogy has loopholes name calling. A classic car runs best when well maintained and properly managed. I would take a 1980s model of a Mercedes over a modern version any day of the year. Better cars, more sturdy, increased durability, better mileage etc etc. There is a reason some cars are classics.

Using your analogy that would make the Islamic system a better system if it was maintained properly and managed like a fine mustang.

34

[note]Interesting debate... I am making it a sticky for the time being![/note]

35

Re: Secularism vs Islamism in Pakistan

i think whatever be the system whether it is based on the concept of shoora or democracy, if we able to develop our executive , judiciary and regulation according to the principle of shariah our problem can be solved.

as far as i think we Pakistani as a nation dont want to practice shariah in a true spirit thats y we generally discuss the issue of securalism Vs Isalam. otherwise to adopt the idea of securalism, in the country with 97% muslim population, is absurd.

36

I was not dismissing the contribution, but we are no taking about past. We are comparing ourselves to western civilization, and there is no doubt they have progressed a lot because they have manged to separate religion from politics, and we haven't. They have gone through era of enlightenment, and we haven't.

37

It would be violation of law if religion was used as criteria for making public policy. That is diff. People are allowed to pray or not that is also protected by the Constitution.

[quote]
Explain to me how it did in JFKs case?
[/quote]

There is nothing to explain. He was elected, wasn't he?

38

So holding namaz at the President's office is a secular ideology? You gotta be kidding me.

[quote]
There is nothing to explain. He was elected, wasn't he?
[/QUOTE]

Bull****. You stated that in your first post to me:

[quote]
They're all secular nations with no religion in politics.
[/quote]

I have shown you a single example proving that wrong. According to his own presidential library he went out for the catholic vote and more importantly his faith was a matter of concern.

So how can you say:

[quote]
They're all secular nations with no religion in politics.
[/quote]

Explain that.

39

u r rite but this rule does not apply to human behavior and religion, in the same way.

i wud suggest u to compare like to like.

man has not become robots over a period of time. if quran ask to cut hand of the thief so should we change the requirement, as 1400 years has been passed. unfortunately we have done it and now we are suffering.

(only ismaili and few other sects have the notion to amend the principle of shariah on the authority of their imam)

however, we can change the modalities for doing things but the principle in its essence will remain the same and should be according to shariah. ok if ppl have issues with khilafat then democracy may be considered as a good alternate but the main point here is that legislation must be in conformity wid shariah.

40

Thanks for a sensible argument (unlike CM who is stuck in this like he was in the polypropylene thread).

OK.

Many Pakistanis in their minds, trivialize the very concept of ruling 200+ million people in the 21st century.

Islamic Shariah discussion in Pak has been so unfortunately relegated to hand chopping aka hadood.

And thus we now have two groups aka Islamists vs. Secularists fighting like village old women, shouting and frothing and cursing.

Oh Bhai Marv.

Running a government should be treated like a "SYSTEM" with thousands of moving parts that need constant up-gradation and evolution.

The problem with Islamists is that they think government can be run like those by Khalifa Rashideen. Nothing could be further than truth.

If any of you were transported via time machine to live in the Makkah during any Khalifa Rashid, you will choke with dust, suffocate due to trash, and die of trivial diseases if not looted on your way to another city. Or killed during civil war that would eventually follow with the death of one Khalifa or the other.

You will not have running water, nor a reliable transportation system accept perhaps a sick donkey.

You will not bathe for days, and you will be smelling like dirty animal.

To top it off, the only government revenue will be a tiny 2.5% zakat supplemented by HUGE amounts of the loot Khasoot of defeated tribes and countries.

And Mr. Mav, after 3 days (tops) of such meager existence, you will be the first one to shout, "Get me out of here, I am gonna die, I'm gonna die, please get me out of here".

Then you better pray that your time machine works, otherwise you may kiss your softy softy @rse good bye.

No wonder, the application of Sharia in the 21st century has quickly lead to the destruction of societies even the ones blessed with natural resources.

How many middle class Pakistanis want to live in Talibotic Kabul, Or Shabbab's Mogadishu, or Qaida's Yemen?

Heck no! Most of us want clean living, running water, functioning government with good revenues that are then spent on social security, health care, and education, and infrastructure.

And guess what? All these necessities are modeled and thus adapted from Europeans. No such example exist from the time of Khalifa Rashid.

Thus Khalifa Rashid system is not only unstable (inherently), but also incapable of providing modern living.

And still some Paks want to romance with the caves and tents. While wishing to have everything that Europeans have in the 21st century.

**
Oh Bhai, how can you have European style life without ADAPTING from European systems?

Hain?
**

How on earth you can change "modalities" to live like Europeans such as:

1 - healthcare,
2- social security,
3- education,
4- infrastructure, etc. etc.

Without LEARNING from and ADAPTING to their system of government?

You think Sharia is etched in stone? like the tablets given to the prophets MUCH MUCH before Mohammad pbuh?

If so, then you got the stone of stone tablets with no spirit of Islam that in itself came to rid the ideas that forced people to follow stone tablets and rituals.

Sharia's prime example was never meant for hand chopping.

In reality Sharia asked for much less dramatic but lot more fundamental things like speaking the truth, be honest, be tolerant etc.

Unfortunately Islamists in Pakistan cannot practice these fundamental requirements and instead continue harping on hand-chopping and donkey riding lifestyle all in the name Khilafah Rashideen.

And that is really really sad.

p.s. And if during your time travel to Makka of Khalifa Rashid time, you showed youtube video or digital images of modern European living, I bet many Sahaba ra would be trying to get in your time machine (no disrespect intended!).