• Monday, December 11, 2017

Pandora's Box - Religious Profiteering and Faizabad Incident

Discussion in 'Pakistani Siasat' started by Kaptaan, Dec 3, 2017.

  1. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    16,504
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +101 / 26,948 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    First, I am not one of those who says automatically that Indians and Pakistanis are two same people divided by borders. Similar, yes, sharing huge sections of their culture and heritage, including military and political heritage, yes, same people, no.

    Second, the objection of the fundamentalists and of Azad was of the order of wishing that the country should stay unified, so that the rest of the kaffirs could be converted too.

    That is exactly the point. That Pakistan was never designed to be an Islamic state. It was designed to be a state for the Muslims, as a majority, to govern for the benefit of all citizens.

    No comments.

    That is the only goal that I have read about.

    Jinnah dealt with that. If he had wanted to introduce the Constitution of Madina, he could easily have done so. Instead, during a meeting of the Muslim League before independence, a member stood from the floor, and said that he had campaigned for the League for the national elections, and had had excellent responses based on the slogan "Pakistan ka matlab kya, La illaha il Allah". Jinnah's reaction was to say loudly,"Sit down, sit down. We do not need to use this slogan to catch a few votes."

    Jinnah was clearly not in favour of Islamicising the country.

    If you look at the electoral results, at the beginning, the Mullahs did keep Jinnah at bay. It was only due to his untiring efforts that the Indian Muslims slowly but surely took to him. Above all, Jinnah's charisma gave him and the Muslim League the upper hand.

    Why can't this same magic be repeated in today's Pakistan? Simple; none of your politicians is that magician; none of them is Jinnah. They are, frankly, not fit to wipe his shoes.

    And finally, what did he do to convince millions to leave their home and head for a new place, helpless and homeless? He did nothing; it was NEVER his intention to have people leave their homes for Pakistan. He even commented on it, that the people left behind in India would have to make this supreme sacrifice for the creation of Pakistan.

    That may be true of Iqbal; he flirted with heresy in earlier life. But I have read NOTHING about Jinnah that gives us those impressions. Even his 11th August (date?) speech made his intentions clear.

    That is sufficient; it will serve, and will do so in royal manner.

    No comment.

    Here I wish to suggest to you that the ends justified the means, for Jinnah; they did not, for the Khadim.

    No, you have made your point, and I am not the person to retort to it; @SoulSpokesman and I shall carry it to the appropriate person and carry his answer back to you.

    Because of Jinnah's personality and charisma. That is why we do look at him the way we look at him, with awe; he created Pakistan single-handed.

    There was no intention on my side to downplay the diabolical nature of the intolerant.

     
  2. I.R.A

    I.R.A SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,957
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Ratings:
    +11 / 8,543 / -3
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    We never had an opportunity to debate anything. I have read you, and most probably you haven't read me. Plus you come from a different background / environment / culture and I come from a different one, I must accept that you have better command over English language and vast historic subjects, I am only interested in knowing the truth about man written history and narrations that they labelled as Islamic and made them part of faith and necessary to believe as a Muslim.

    That is all I wanted to know, I have no intentions of challenging your faith, nor I have any problems with it, you are free like me to believe what you want, the question was relevant in the sense that I wanted to know which source would satisfy you and where do we stop and draw the line ..... Your referring to Quran is sufficient for me to understand ....... thank you for that.

    A milestone in shape of newly formed Pakistan was achieved but they didn't get enough time / opportunity to achieve their vision. The newly formed state with huge responsibility of looking after homeless and helpless people and so little time ...... can we blame Jinnah for departing this early? Can we blame Liauqat Ali Khan for getting killed by a bullet? Still we today accept that Pakistan as society was more open and liberal in 60s, had it been religious profiteering from start we would have seen a total conservative, intolerant Pakistan from start ... but that didn't happen ....... it only happened afterwards when Pakistan became a Fatwa state.

    I still don't agree that these people got Pakistan by using religious profiteering, Jinnah got labelled as Kafir e Azam and what not ...... we have seen how quickly our conservative society falls prey to the ignorance ..... I still believe that it was some brilliant better argument that outmatched the opposing conservative Mullah ...... that attracted people so much that they didn't mind leaving their every belonging behind and head for new place with an uncertain future.

    Allow me to quote the most favorite and repeated Phrases of Jinnah which get used by people who wish Pakistan to be a secular state in support of their argument

    “You are free; you are free to go to your temples. You are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the state.”

    Irrespective of whether this statement is fake or genuine and without going into debate on that I will request you to ......... please give a reading to this verse of Quran

    (2:62) "Whether they are the ones who believe (in the Arabian Prophet), or whether they are Jews, Christians or Sabians – all who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and do righteous deeds – their reward is surely secure with their Lord; they need have no fear, nor shall they grieve."


    At another place Quran holds it responsibility of an Islamic state's army to protect not only the mosques, but temples, monasteries, synagogues, and churches as well .......

    For me the words of Jinnah (if true) listed above came from a man who understood and strictly believed in the concept of an Islamic state based on Quranic principles and ideas.

    Many people may not agree .... but you know the person who was appointed to counter propaganda of Molvis was G.A. Parwez ......... and this is what he thought, ......

    "Before the creation of Pakistan, Parwez was recruited by Muhammad Ali Jinnah in order to help popularize the need for a separate homeland for the Muslims in South Asia.[9] Parwez's thesis was that the organizational model of the state is the basic engine which drives the implementation of the Quran, and like Muhammad in Medina, those who wish to practice Islam, as it is defined in the Quran, are required to live in a state which submits to the laws of God, and not the laws of man."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulam_Ahmed_Perwez


    and he is said to be the person who didn't require permission to meet Jinnah in private. Also he is said to be the person who played of mentor and had influence on Jinnah's idea of what Pakistan should be

    And this same guy latter in his life ........ post partition wrote a book on "Did Quaid e Azam want to Make Pakistan a secular state" a rebuttal to Justice Munir's work "From Jinnah To Zia" ......... anyhow consistent with their attitude and behavior .... it is needless to mention this person was labelled Qadiyani, Infidel, Murtad by Clergy.

    You can search for his work and read yourself ......... many Westerners have translated his work and research on Quran. But beware if you tend to agree with most of his work you will be labelled Parwezi etc etc. Even though when you start believing that I am Muslim only and no Sunni, Shia etc.

    Lets leave that aside for now ...... its irrelevant.

    Now this all boils down to our own individual views and understanding, I am all supportive of Pakistan being an Islamic state (a state that derives its laws based on immutable guidance given in Quran) as opposed to a Theocracy (that it is right now) and a borrowed concept of Secular state (because I believe Islamic state is more better and stable and affords more freedom to the humans). So you shouldn't be shocked when I base my argument on Quran's verses ...... I think divine message would be considered lot better than a certificate?

    I am sure I don't need to post verses to confirm our belief that It is only ALLAH to whom the Earth and heavens belong .... this is said multiple times in Quran "Whatever is in the Earth and skies belongs to ALLAH, and they all obey HIM, HE is capable of everything"

    If we agree that the sovereignty belongs to ALLAH and ALLAH only then per Quran it is HIM only who gives and takes sovereignty away from us mortals

    "Say, "O Allah, Owner of Sovereignty, You give sovereignty to whom You will and You take sovereignty away from whom You will. You honor whom You will and You humble whom You will. In Your hand is [all] good. Indeed, You are over all things competent." 3:26

    And when did HE vest this authority in humans

    "And [mention, O Muhammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know." 2:30


    Now what I don't understand is that ...... when Pakistan was sought to be state where we will implement Quranic principles and form a Quranic society (you may disagree), so what is the big hue and cry if government of Pakistan accepts the Quran's word and reaffirm that belief in writing? ........ was there really a need for an angel to descend down and tell them to confirm this in writing so he could award them a certificate to that effect? Plus considering they were a Muslim majority ........ who believed that no more divine guidance and Messengers are going to follow Muhammad Peace be upon him and Quran is the final divine guidance. Why is it so hard to accept this?

    "Sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Allah Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the state of Pakistan, through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust."

    The statement nowhere is in contradiction with Quran .......... so what exactly is the problem?
     
  3. SoulSpokesman

    SoulSpokesman FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    746
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 408 / -3
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    @IRA @Kaptaan @Joe Shearer

    I guess we will never come to a definitive conclusion about whether Pakistan was created purely as a non denominational state for Muslims of India (predominantly from NW and NE part) or as an Islamic state for Muslims.

    As I see it there were both sets of people:

    1. Those who sought to create Pakistan purely as a non denominational state for IMs where they were in a majority. Eg Jinnah sahib
    2. Those who sought to create Pakistan as an Islamic state for Muslims. Eg Mahmudabad, Usmani etc

    Besides, is suspect there were many who would have been in their hearts in Group 1, but would have been willing to with Group 2 (post 1947) for opportunistic reasons; or simply for following the path of least resistance.

    But that is history, question is what do Pakistanis of today want- #1 or #2. As long as a broad consensus is reached on that and folks act accordingly it is OK, else as Kaptaan sahib says there will be strife.

    While my personal sympathies are with the secular lot (on both sides of the border), let us not pretend to be blind to the fact that folks on both sides of the border are religious; and that large chunks of the majority community on either side are not immune to the idea of a communal, if not theocratic state. The top leadership on both sides sides was far more heavily dominated by seculars than they were among the common lot. This was true in 1947 but gradually their dominance has faded. As the influence of the top lot declined, leaders from the lower lot (in general far less convinced about virtues of secularism) emerged. Thus we say the likes of Modi and Shah supplanting the Nehrus in India; in Pakistan where the secular top soil was even less rooted, we saw communal/theocratic elements make themselves far more influential much faster than in India.

    At the end of the day, whether Pakistan wants to be an Islamist/Muslim majoritarian communalist/Secular state/society and whether India wants to be a doctrinal Hindutvist/Hindu majoritarian communalist/Secular state/society will have to be decided largely by the majorities.

    Regards
     
  4. I.R.A

    I.R.A SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,957
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Ratings:
    +11 / 8,543 / -3
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    I don't know about other Pakistanis, but I want Pakistan to be purely an Islamic state, that takes care of its citizens (irrespective of their color, race, creed), a modern tolerant progressive society ........ truly based on principles of Quran and Quran only ...... no more fatwa shops, no more exploitation of humans.

    I don't know if we will ever be able to achieve that or not, because this requires a total revamp of governing system and change of mentality from bottom to top and from top to bottom ........ but what I can tell you is, if we continue as we are we will never be able to improve our situation as a society. And on the other hand ... if becoming a state that is purely Quranic seems so impossible (for the time being to me) what makes you think Pakistanis in their current state of mind will ever accept Secularism?

    What if the majority is wrong?
     
  5. SoulSpokesman

    SoulSpokesman FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    746
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 408 / -3
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    @IRA

    IRA bhai,

    what makes you think Pakistanis in their current state of mind will ever accept Secularism?

    To continue with my previous post, the section in India/Pak which want a secular state come overwhelmingly from the wealthier, better educated and the higher social classes (Dada can correct me if I am wrong)- the riff raff is more likely to sympathise with the idea of a communal or a religious state.

    Evidently (going by the quality of your posts and your English), you belong to that strata of society which in our subcontinent is most likely to identify with a secular state. But you dont, you actually want a strictly Islamist society. And there are many like you. Which makes me think Pakistanis are unlikely to accept a secular system anytime soon. Needless to say the aam Abdul will anyway more likely be sympathising with the Islamist cause. So there you go!!! No danger of a secular state in Pakistan and no need for you to conclude that the majority in the case of Pakistan is wrong!

    Regards
     
  6. I.R.A

    I.R.A SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,957
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Ratings:
    +11 / 8,543 / -3
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    SoulSpokesman bai,

    I am I.R.A and not IRA .......... the later is some other member.

    When you say strictly "Islamist society" I hope you have the same meaning as I have of the Islamic state. And sir I come from a backward area, my family is not that wealthy ..... we manage by the grace of ALLAH.

    My opposition to secular system is more to do with its basic definition and basis of its formation compared to how it serves the humans of the society. As I understand it, secular state frees itself of any divine guidance (compared to Islamic state) and entrusts its law making to humans based on their own capability and without looking to any divine guidance. That understanding is what makes it unacceptable for me as an individual.
     
  7. AbuzarIlyas

    AbuzarIlyas FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 95 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Faizabad Dharna will keep haunting the seculars and pro-qadyanis till decades :-D
     
  8. SoulSpokesman

    SoulSpokesman FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    746
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 408 / -3
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    @I.R.A

    I.R.A. bhai

    When you say strictly "Islamist society" I hope you have the same meaning as I have of the Islamic state.

    By Islamic state I mean a state run strictly on principles of Islam. I suspect you mean the same. In which case we are in perfect agreement, provided of course my understanding of Islam is the same as yours.

    Now since I am neither a Pakistani nor a Muslim nor a supporter of having a state based on religion (whether the one with which I am nominally affiliated (Hinduism) or any other), so mercifully it is of no concern to either of us if we dont agree on the basics of Islam. What you should be concerned is whether your understanding of Islam is the same as that of all those (Parliament certified) Muslims of Pakistan who also believe in an Islamic state.

    Regards
     
  9. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    16,504
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +101 / 26,948 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    It was startling to read these two posts, yours, SS, and that of I.R.A that follows.

    First, @SoulSpokesman, your unguarded statement above, about being personally sympathetic to 'the secular lot'; you do realise that you will have to cringe and bow and scrape on insaniyat, where you will be at risk due to
    the common feeling of outrage among members that you have sneaked in under false pretence of being a bigoted Sanghi. You can never separate liberals from tokenism.

    Second, @I.R.A, you have said something that has been uppermost in the minds of concerned people for over two years now. WHAT IF THE MAJORITY IS WRONG? It is precisely that thought that MUST school our own thoughts on democracy; it is the will of the majority that should prevail, but always, always tempered by the thought that THE MAJORITY MAY BE WRONG. And therefore, dear Sir, to me, the BJP and the Sangh Parivar are to be fought against, not merely because of the detailed political views that they hold, but also because of their vulnerability regarding majoritarian views, which is a dangerously biased set of views, which encourages them to ride rough-shod both over minorities as over individuals who hold out.

    A great discussion, gentlemen, and my sincere compliments to you.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  10. SoulSpokesman

    SoulSpokesman FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    746
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 408 / -3
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    @Joe Shearer

    Dada,

    feeling of outrage among members that you have sneaked in under false pretence of being a bigoted Sanghi.

    I am at a loss to understand this. Are you saying that I was allowed to join Insaniyat because the existing members believed me be to a bigoted Sanghi? Why did they want a bigoted Sanghi there? As a namoona perhaps?

    Regards

    PS: IRA mian reminds me a little bit of Mustafa Shaban, perhaps a tad older, on PTH
     
  11. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    16,504
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +101 / 26,948 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    No, but it gave me great satisfaction to hint at that. More on return, similarly scurrilous.

    @I.R.A has been in superb form; more on this, too, on return, this time, the opposite of scurrilous.

    Grist for the mill for at least a decade or two more, if not longer still!
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. Kaptaan

    Kaptaan PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,302
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +145 / 18,330 / -5
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    @I.R.A Great post, thank you. This thread with @Joe Shearer and @SoulSpokesman and if we can have @KediKesenFare contribution [with his immense intellect] is turning into gem of a discussion. I will post later in the evening. Today is a glorious day. We have had snow and the rays of sun are glistening amongst the frozen leaves.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  13. KapitaanAli

    KapitaanAli FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    222
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 96 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Secular Nationalism by definition is a force of equality and it must be stamped on 'majority' and 'minority' irrevocably and authoritatively.

    Majority/Minority views have no moral standing before a secular authority. This is final.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  14. Kaptaan

    Kaptaan PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,302
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +145 / 18,330 / -5
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Interesting comment by COA Gen. Bajwa on madaris. I see the dawn of change here. People at the top of the Pakistani state now realize the mess Pakistan has gotten into. Although it will take decades to change but perhaps we have seen the 'truth' finally.

    By Drazen Jorgic

    QUETTA, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistan's army chief on Thursday criticized madrassas that have mushroomed nationwide for mostly teaching only Islamic theology, saying the country needs to "revisit" the religious school concept.

    Modernizing madrassa education is a thorny issue in Pakistan, a deeply conservative Muslim nation where religious schools are often blamed for radicalization of youngsters but are the only education available to millions of poor children.

    General Qamar Javed Bajwa's remarks, apparently off-the-cuff during a prepared speech, were a rare example of an army chief criticizing madrassas, which are often built adjacent to mosques and underpin Islamisation efforts by religious hardliners.

    Bajwa said a madrassa education in Pakistan was inadequate because it did not prepare students for the modern world.


    http://www.businessinsider.com/r-ar...revisit-islamic-madrassa-schools-2017-12?IR=T
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    16,504
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +101 / 26,948 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    You must accept the burden for being responsible for much of the useful discussions that take place today. Either through direct participation, or through providing a lead that delights us all.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2