Hum Hain: No one saying don't take religion first. But what are you talking first? Are you taking the spiritual message or anachronistic practices.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Khilafah, my point is not to prove falacies. What might be written in the good book, is fine...for the 7th century. Not for the 22nd. I have given a prime example many times of the abolition of trading interest bearing products such as swaps and/or writing LC's in trade finance. These instruiments are used in the modern world to gain wealth and to finance trade. Under Islamic eocnomics, these wouldn;'t be valid. So tell me...how can an ever adapting system like the Islamic Khilafah, going to keep up with the rest of the world if they are handicapped by the rules of the game because of antiquated tenets.
In the 7th century...interst/usury was looked down upon because lenders feasted on borrowers. so whoever wrote the book, said interst is not egalitarian. Now fast forward to the 22nd century. Interest is an instrument of trade, which by itself can be traded to minimize risk for the lender there by keeping the rates attractive for the borrower.
all this hogwash about muslim mindset and western mindset is goofy man. People are people. They eat, sleep, have sex, kill, maim, etc. Religion should provide guidance. Sprituality is divine....manuals on what to wear and what not to wear etc are man made.
[/QUOTE]
Hello matsui
Your statement
*Khilafah, my point is not to prove falacies. What might be written in the good book, is fine...for the 7th century. Not for the 22nd. *
and
*. People are people. They eat, sleep, have sex, kill, maim, etc. *
need to be commented upon.
Your first statement shows that you dont want to show the incorrectness of an idea but your posts show that you want to show inconsistencies of Islamic laws, you contradict yourself here.
You say, the Quran was fine for the 7th century but not the 22nd. Your statement about people being people negates your view. I'l explain how...
Throughout time people have always had instincts and organic needs which have not changed over time nor have new instincts emerged. So people have always ate, slept and excreted (organic needs) and they have had 3 instincts which are the survival instinct, the procreation instinct (preservation of the human species) and the reverance instinct (looking up to someone). Man naturally looks to satisfy these needs as some if not satisfied cause death (eating, sleeping) and others if not satisfied cause misery ie the procreation instinct has a manifestation of attracting you to the opposite sex and if this is not satisfied it will cause misery.
When Islam was revealed it came to satisfy these needs of human beings and it did not come to address time and place. So the rules regarding marriage, they came to satisfy the procreation instinct in man. Until today, man still has this instinct and the rules regarding its satisfaction still apply as man is still man. I can go on and on with examples but i wont as i hope you,ve understood my point. If for example, man developed another instinct or organic need, then i would agree with you that the scriptures are outdated and do not address human beings in our time, but that is not the case.
Your next statement says:
*So tell me...how can an ever adapting system like the Islamic Khilafah, going to keep up with the rest of the world if they are handicapped by the rules of the game because of antiquated tenets. *
Islam came not to fit into the current world order but to change it as it has its own vision of societal order. Just like capitalism, when it emerged, it had a new order for society, different from the one society was initially shaped around. Then capitalism (which was built upon secularism) managed to create public opinion for change and the society abandoned thier old system for the new system. Islam looks to do exactly the same as it is an ideology which seeks to create change in the world arena. So Islam would not need to adhere to the current rules of the game, rather it would look to change the rules. Yes, it would face difficulty, but so did capitalism, but that did not stop it from existing.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Hum Hain: *
**Matsui*: we all are human beings; we all have diff religions; some of us think we've got to live how the religion tells us to; some think live it ur way; religion as a side dish!
Muslims are meant to take religion FIRST; and live life according to it!
Our religion tells us that it needs no reformation & It is perfect for ages to come till the end of this world!
We don't need to worry about interest and how we're gonna cope by not havin it in our system by rest of the world because we believe in the religion given to us by Allah!
[/QUOTE]
There is no doubt that religion is perfect. But here a question arises if its perfect then why it was devided. Why there are so many sects. Once these sects are formed how to define who is following the true path. Holy Prophet (saw) has pridicted this long ago. He said A time will come upon my Ummah that they will be devided into 73 sects and among all these only one will be on the true path. Someone asked Ya rasoolulah (saw) and how would i konw what sect is true. He (saw) replied the one who acts upon me and my sahaba. There will be a jamaat and that jamaat will have an Imam and stik to that jamaat. If you dont find that jamaat then stay away from all the other sects even if you have to survive by eating leaves.
Khilafah, you should hang up the gloves man. I gave a clear example of how the Islamic system is not ready to tackle the modern world. You can back with rhetoric.
Of course Islam has to fit into the world. There are a lot of other people who do not adhere to islam. Let me forecast something for you.
You create a khilafah of 5 muslim countries. The result in the modern world would be outflow of capital, no advent of technology (do not give me the line about muslim scientists in the 11th century), trade would be hampered because of modern instruments like LC's would not be applicable under your system.
I would recommend you go back to the drawing board on this khilafah thingie and see what you can do about extracting the following things.
1) Governance: After you choose a khalifah, make sure someone other than an Imam can boot him out. or do the choosing of a new one every 4-6 years. Laws can be divine, but let the punishment be decided by peers. Plus, even divine laws should be looked at from a perspective of jurisprudence. God might have made the mistake in a hurry. It would be preferable if the khalifah was a woman.
2) Economics: Keep this completely separate. Do not even check the good book for guidance on this area
3) Civil Liberties: Don't worry about lipstick and short skirts. Let the people be. They are smart and have common sense. A short skirt never caused a rape to occur. A sexually deviant person did.
peace!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Hum Hain: No one saying don't take religion first. But what are you talking first? Are you taking the spiritual message or anachronistic practices.
[/QUOTE]
this is where u don't get it; its you who think's that The Quran is anachronistic! We believe that this is the final Book for all the ages to come! it was perfected centuries ago! does not mean it is outdated!
I think it is quite simple; if the religion is first, do what it tells ya! without trying to make amendments to it!
Hum Hain: That kind of thinking will keep the Khilafah a pipe dream and any implementation will resemble a disaster.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Khilafah, you should hang up the gloves man. I gave a clear example of how the Islamic system is not ready to tackle the modern world. You can back with rhetoric.
Of course Islam has to fit into the world. There are a lot of other people who do not adhere to islam. Let me forecast something for you.
You create a khilafah of 5 muslim countries. The result in the modern world would be outflow of capital, no advent of technology (do not give me the line about muslim scientists in the 11th century), trade would be hampered because of modern instruments like LC's would not be applicable under your system.
I would recommend you go back to the drawing board on this khilafah thingie and see what you can do about extracting the following things.
1) Governance: After you choose a khalifah, make sure someone other than an Imam can boot him out. or do the choosing of a new one every 4-6 years. Laws can be divine, but let the punishment be decided by peers. Plus, even divine laws should be looked at from a perspective of jurisprudence. God might have made the mistake in a hurry. It would be preferable if the khalifah was a woman.
2) Economics: Keep this completely separate. Do not even check the good book for guidance on this area
3) Civil Liberties: Don't worry about lipstick and short skirts. Let the people be. They are smart and have common sense. A short skirt never caused a rape to occur. A sexually deviant person did.
peace!
[/QUOTE]
Matsui, whats wrong, you have'nt responded in an intelectual manner!!!
My post on this page presents thoughts and you have responded by showing how they are not applicable because of the current status qou. The manner in which ideas are undermined are by destroying thier basis they are built upon. You have not presented concrete arguments for this rather you have said:
**I would recommend you go back to the drawing board on this khilafah thingie and see what you can do about extracting the following things.
1) Governance: After you choose a khalifah, make sure someone other than an Imam can boot him out. or do the choosing of a new one every 4-6 years. Laws can be divine, but let the punishment be decided by peers. Plus, even divine laws should be looked at from a perspective of jurisprudence. God might have made the mistake in a hurry. It would be preferable if the khalifah was a woman.
2) Economics: Keep this completely separate. Do not even check the good book for guidance on this area
3) Civil Liberties: Don't worry about lipstick and short skirts. Let the people be. They are smart and have common sense. A short skirt never caused a rape to occur. A sexually deviant person did. **
This is recommending me do to things without obliterating what i hold to be concrete. Come on man, lets focus on ideas and not jump to alternatives without showing the incorrectness of ideas.
It seems to me you have already hung up your gloves as your replies seem to get weeker and weeker.
I gave you a perfect example of Swaps as trading intruments that your khilafah can't handle because the quran is shorsighted in understanding interest as a trading instrument. Either rewrite it, ask your moulvi for a response or admit it that the quranic law is made for the 7th century.
Put up or shut up.....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
I gave you a perfect example of Swaps as trading intruments that your khilafah can't handle because the quran is shorsighted in understanding interest as a trading instrument. Either rewrite it, ask your moulvi for a response or admit it that the quranic law is made for the 7th century.
Put up or shut up.....
[/QUOTE]
Matsaui, are you saying that a single leader cannot govern the entire muslim world? We can just have a titular head and distribute the leadership cant we? I mean if one president can run an entire continent single handedly, this might work too.
Spork, go rub Abdali's leg pal...you don't want to play here. What does my quote have to with Khalifah being a single leader? Do you have trouble reading or is your neck broken from bopping you head up and down in the madrassah?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Spork, go rub Abdali's leg pal...you don't want to play here. What does my quote have to with Khalifah being a single leader? Do you have trouble reading or is your neck broken from bopping you head up and down in the madrassah?
[/QUOTE]
hehe I love you too
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Spork, go rub Abdali's leg pal...you don't want to play here. What does my quote have to with Khalifah being a single leader? Do you have trouble reading or is your neck broken from bopping you head up and down in the madrassah?
[/QUOTE]
Matsui, easy on the kid please... :D
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Abdali: *
Matsui, easy on the kid please... :D
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, leave the kid alone and shag this lady :D Is ko amreeka ki yad sitta rahi hai
Sorry pal for rubbing it in don’t rub my leg now go back to Matsui… 
haha leg kya, tujhe tu aaj wesay hi expose kar diya hai, bare!!! hypocrite! heh
woh kya dialogue tha tera, apples aur amreeka walla LOL
Sahih Bukhari, Book 36, Number 4273: Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu'minin: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Disagreement will occur at the death of a caliph and a man of the people of Medina will come flying forth to Mecca. Some of the people of Mecca will come to him, bring him out against his will and swear allegiance to him between the Corner and the Maqam. An expeditionary force will then be sent against him from Syria but will be swallowed up in the desert between Mecca and Medina. When the people see that, the eminent saints of Syria and the best people of Iraq will come to him and swear allegiance to him between the Corner and the Maqam.
You can either agree or disagree, it’s up to you, but here is what I think could happen. The hadith says that a disagreement will occur at the death of a capliph. I am assuming that this refers to King Shah Fahd, although he is no caliph, but as the servant of the Haram-Shareef, many scholars in the Ahle-Sunnah do regard him as their leader. Anyways after his death, some confrontation will occur between heir to the throne, Prince Abdullah, who is considered an Anti-American by many people, and some prowestern sultan, as to who shall become the next King. Despite this civil unrest, the faithfuls would have decided on swearing allegiance to a person in Medina, who will run of to Mecca from the fear of responsibility. By this time, the USA would have already taken over Syria (doesn’t seem very far from now), and fearing for its vested interests in Saudi, will send forces to uproot the newly chosen Khalifah. The rest of the hadith is pretty much self-explanatory.
Another hadith, considered fabricated, relates the coming of Mehdi to the lunar and solar eclipse during Ramadan. This hadith was primarily used by ghulam qadiani for the creation of his movement, although some shias also claim that their 12th imam will appear during this period. Even if we give this hadith the benefit of doubt, the double eclipses will occur during Ramadan of 2004 as well as 2005 over the Muslim countries. You can view this for yourself by visiting the Nasa webpage.
I don’t know if either of the two events above will come true as I have speculated, but let us not lose hope. For its only the Shaitan that has lost all hope.
You exposed every reputable financial institution the world is greatful to you.. LOL… 
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Hum Hain: That kind of thinking will keep the Khilafah a pipe dream and any implementation will resemble a disaster.
[/QUOTE]
this is what ur thinking tells ya! :D
That certainly would not be the case!
wo kya hai naa ke khoobsurti to bande ki aankhon main hoti hai; jo aap nahi dekh sakte wo Hum dekh sakte Hain!
Islamic economic system can well work without the trading instrument called interest! If the west won't be able to interact with this system does not mean at all that the Khilafah won't work! OR the Quran was only for the 7th century!!!
^ Hum Hain...No it can't. Because the Islamic economic system, while having noble inentions, does not have the foresight to look at currency from a future value perspective. More over, it falls short because it attempts to control the means and costs of producion while setting the prices of goods and services produces. But the worst aspect of the ISlamic economic system is that it goes overboard in controlling what to produce. This is not based on societal will but what god prescribed. God needs to take a break from financial transactions.
u won’t understand or even if u do won’t accept it cuz u don’t believe in God! 
what diff does it make to u if it’s gonna work or not; u won’t be a part of it! :halo: