[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *In islam the history shows the different islamic schools of thought worked together for the implementation of Islam by establishing of a State. Jurists like Imam Malik, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Jaffar as-Saadiq, who were contemporaries, never accused one another of infidelity, nor did their followers ever raise swords against one another.
[/quote]
That's true - and it is indeed a pity that many Muslim today have forgotten that. Indeed, Imam Abu Hanifa was a student of Imam Jaffar As-Saadiq.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
The government is the one to blame because they are the ones with power to stop sectarianism tommorow if they wish!
[/QUOTE]
What specifically can the government do? Just about the only idea that I can think of for a short-term fix to sectarianism is to spy on madrassahs and mosques to find anyone promoting sectarianism, and then charge them with fitnah, put them on trial, and execute them if proven.
I don't buy that government cannot stop the sectarian violence. They responsible because they implement system either change it or take the blame.
Musharaff and army changed an entire Government and structure overnight, when they took Nawaz the Theif sharif out of office, they arrested sharifs whole clique in one night.
The root of the problem is the secular system itself it cannot solve sectarian violence. It does'nt have to be pakistan it can be USA where gangs kill each other over money and drugs, it can be other secular states where minorities are persecuted just take a look at india and israel.
the Government can carry on the way it is and have little or no effect but ultimatly it is the secular democracy that breeds the violence and discrimination.
I take the view that the breeding grounds of sectarianism will be there regardless of whether an Islamic or non-Islamic government is in place - these breeding grounds being men in positions of authority in masjids and madrassahs who teach to Muslims that it is a good deed to kill other Muslims because of certain beliefs that those Muslims are merely alleged to hold.
Even if the government of Pakistan was replaced overnight with an Islamic government of any of the Islamic political groups, be it the MMA, the Ikhwan-Ul-Muslimeen, the HT, Tehrik-i-Jafria, etc.... the men teaching Muslims to kill other Muslims would still be there in masjids and madrassahs, and would still be teaching those present to kill others.
What specific actions can any government, Islamic or not, take tomorrow to put an end to sectarianism?
Whilst your post above does contain several valid points, you essentially conclude by saying that non-Islamic government cannot end sectarianism, without explaining specifically how Islamic governance would be able to accomplish the elimination of sectarian violence.
The issue in pakistan is not clear cut the shia and sunni for example are neighbours it very strange that they are killing each other. Why these people who are neighnbours supposedly at war with each other, people point to time of Ali(ra) and leadership contest, or it could be goverment using issue to clamp down on islamic groups. It could be number of things Governments are not unknown to bomb and assasinate individuals and groups. Look at Russia and how they blame chechnya for crimes the Russian agents clearly commit themselves.
We find the Sunni and Shi’a alike praying in each other’s mosques, studying, working and living together. Moreover, when it comes to Pakistan’s rulers and politicians, we do not find the ummah asking whether a politician is Sunni or Shi’a, even though large elements of the political establishment are Sunni and Shi’a.
In islamic state the system will not promote or highlight the division on the basis of colour, language, geography and nationality. In contrast, the exalted Islamic State will strongly instil the concept of citizenship amongst all people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, so that they leave any sectarian or nationalistic attachments behind and have certain inalienable rights guaranteed to them by the law of Allah (swt) which the system upholds.
Yes pakistan is secular and they have not managed to promote harmony between the different people because of the violence and tensions everyone can see.
Secondly you also have a big divide between the rich and poor in pakistan!
Back to the topic, The ulema being asked to teach pro western teachings!
Islam is islam you cannot change it, so these ulema who are being asked to dilute islam or make it more pleasing to westerners will ultimatly fail because people will see through that and it not possible to change islam it is what it is!
What is wrong if some of the "everyone else is an infidel" and "America is out to get us" kind of material is removed from Islam education? That'd bring moderation wouldn't it?
dont worry AK47, soon all your heroes will be wiped out and there will be no such thing as sectarian killings Are you still ticked off cuz of the recent ban of your party?
In islamic state the system will not promote or highlight the division on the basis of colour, language, geography and nationality. In contrast, the exalted Islamic State will strongly instil the concept of citizenship amongst all people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, so that they leave any sectarian or nationalistic attachments behind and have certain inalienable rights guaranteed to them by the law of Allah (swt) which the system upholds.
[/QUOTE]
I am sure that is all true, and believe this is what I said our great President Musharraf is striving to do, and is on record as saying this.
But if you truly support these principles (and as does the party you support) then why do you defend regimes and organisations which either preach or implement sectarianism, hatred of non-Muslims and a second class status for women? Why the contradiction?
Madrassahs producing experts of Islam? That has to be a joke right. Have you ever been to a madrassah (assuming you didnt graduate from one already?). Leave out the extremism element out for a moment, there is still plenty of wrong stuff that goes on there. Molvi sahibs sleeping while his shagirds are giving him 'maulish' and not to mention the way they treat children. They treat talib-ilms badly over there. In zia-ul-aloom (made after our great Zia sahib) madrassah in SatelliteTown Rawalpindi, which is very close to where I live, three boys were sexually abused by a teacher there, who fled just because the police was incompetent and slow in nabbing him. If this is what madrassahs are about, by all means we need to modify them.
The original concept of a madrassah is great, poor children recieving free religious education and boarding, but its been badly misused. I also agree, Musharraf didnt do anything right to correct this, his 'madrassah registration' scheme was a meagre show, thats all.
[/QUOTE]
spock........???
let me make things more clear for u...
1-the madrassah u are talking about do exist .....but so does (in higher proportion) schools where these things r common......so why extrapolate a minority to infer the dsired result...
2- first name zia ul uloom is not after zia ul haque...i also lived near zia ul uloom.......yes it is typical type madrassah of brelvee sect ........and i remmeber such incident.....but do u remeber that it was also around that time when a retd captain in a private cadet college in islamabd(who was principle) was arrested doing that to students of class 4/5.....
3-go to a jail and see how many ppl convicted of murder ,rape etc are from madrassah ....i bet may be 2% at most and that too in sectarian clashes.........madrassahs have such a powerfull system of check and balance that in a proper madrassah students are not only taught but r made good muslims as well.......
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *
But if you truly support these principles (and as does the party you support) then why do you defend regimes and organisations which either preach or implement sectarianism, hatred of non-Muslims and a second class status for women? Why the contradiction?
[/QUOTE]
Malik
I think you got me mixed up with someone else if not, can you provide examples of where i said there should be second class status for women
I think you got me mixed up with someone else if not, can you provide examples of where i said there should be second class status for women
examples of where i have said i hate non muslims
and where i have supported sectarianism!
[/QUOTE]
Good, then you will have no problem condemning the so-called Islamic regimes and parties in Pakistan and on our borders that have supported and implemented these sort of policies, they say in the name of Islam?
The people who say these things need to be told what the correct way is in islam. Because islam does not support sectarianism or treating women like second class citizen.
Condemning these people that say these things is not solution educating them about what is correct is better and more practicle method.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
Condemning these people that say these things is not solution educating them about what is correct is better and more practicle method.
[/QUOTE]
So you can't condemn people who preach and carry out sectarian killings, and persecution of women and minorities?
