Building a new ‘Mandar’ in Riyasat-e-Madina is against the spirit of Islam: Ch Pervaiz Elahi

[Desert Fox]

Nobody here denies that Pakistan was created on the basis of a homeland for Muslims, but nowhere did Jinnah think to create a republic based on only and exactly Islamic theocracy. He envisioned a democracy. Democracies by their nature are pluralistic and their ideology if they have one are pliable and at the mercy of the demos.

Plenty of our laws and statecraft have no basis in Islam, and parts of our system are wholly based on secular style democracy if not exactly secularism. And in the case of our financial system, not only is it not Islamic, by some interpretations it’s unislamic.

An honest reading of what motivated the creation of Pakistan would lead you to find that plurality. And also you’d know that Pakistan was not created to become a theocracy.

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

Note the last part about nothing to do with the business of the state. That sounds awfully secular to me. At best you could say that quote means that our government shouldn’t build any places of worship it’s not their job etc.

I'm familiar with these quotes from Quaid's speeches and equally there are similar quotes which sound make the case for a very strong Islamic argument.

That is where the vagueness and confusion comes in. But where there is no vagueness and room for argument, ie the founding principle and notion for the creation of Pakistan which is a Muslim homeland, on this basis a strong argument can be made in favor of leaning more towards an Islamic orientation rather than a secular Liberal Anglo-Saxon one.

Also, this is where we have to decide as Muslims on a fundamental question to clear these confusions:

"Does Jinnah supersede the Prophet (SAW) for us or does the Prophet (SAW), who is the greatest creation of Allah, supersede Jinnah?"

The answer is very straightforward: Jinnah was not infallible, whereas the Prophet (SAW) was infallible because of Divine guidance from Allah (SWT). Therefore where Jinnah's actions and words are in accord with the teachings of Allah's final Prophet (SAW) we will accept Jimnah because ultimately we follow the Prophet (SAW), but where he was in the contrary position or his statements were vague and confusing or even self-contradictory then we obviously must as Muslims follow the Prophet (SAW) since no human comes before him (SAW) for us, as Muslims.

Even if we are deficient in many places in adhering to the principles of Islam, we should do our best to rectify this problem rather than give up the few principles that we still hold on to.

And also you’d know that Pakistan was not created to become a theocracy.

We should question the meaning and validity of such labels as "democracy" or "theocracy", etc because there is no truly functioning democracy in the sense of that word and never has been in history.

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

Nobody here denies that Pakistan was created on the basis of a homeland for Muslims, but nowhere did Jinnah think to create a republic based on only and exactly Islamic theocracy. He envisioned a democracy. Democracies by their nature are pluralistic and their ideology if they have one are pliable and at the mercy of the demos.

Plenty of our laws and statecraft have no basis in Islam, and parts of our system are wholly based on secular style democracy if not exactly secularism. And in the case of our financial system, not only is it not Islamic, by some interpretations it’s unislamic.

An honest reading of what motivated the creation of Pakistan would lead you to find that plurality. And also you’d know that Pakistan was not created to become a theocracy.

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

Note the last part about nothing to do with the business of the state. That sounds awfully secular to me. At best you could say that quote means that our government shouldn’t build any places of worship it’s not their job etc.

A question. Why Pakistan was created?

 

[Iltutmish]

A question. Why Pakistan was created?

According to liberals (not referring to @Jungibaaz): to have a brown England for people with mostly Arabic and Persian sounding names.

Pakistan ka matlab kya? This slogan rejects all Quaids, Kings, Peers, Gurus, Mullahs and Idols at the same time. But no, Pakistan is here to become a woke India with you know Arabic and Persian sounding names!

 

[Psychic]

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

You guys make it sound like Jinnah was born on the morning of 11th Aug 1947; made that speech; died the same evening.

Jinnah also, unambiguously, mentioned that Pakistan would be governed according to Islamic principles and teachings which in his words were applicable in modern times.

He also very clearly advised the state bank to devise a new set of economic system compatible with Islam. Also, he severely criticized the Western economic system.

So, I suggest that you drop that selective quoting of Jinnah's speeches. Because you won't win that competition as there are plenty of his sayings which not only contradict that quote but outright call for the creation of an Islamic state.

He very clearly warned about the people who created mischief by mis interpreting his 11 Aug speech. He said that we must be in no doubt that the future constitution of Pakistan will be based on Islamic principles.

create a republic based on only and exactly Islamic theocracy.

Theocracy is a legacy of the Papacy. It has got nothing to do with Islam. There is no concept of infallible priests with a divine mission in Islam. Clearly either you are ignorant about this fact or are mixing a state run on written Islamic principles with clergy's dictatorship.

Islam doesn't require a madrassa degree as a pre requisite for governance.

Plenty of our laws and statecraft have no basis in Islam, and parts of our system are wholly based on secular style democracy if not exactly secularism. And in the case of our financial system, not only is it not Islamic, by some interpretations it’s unislamic.

You are once again arguing that since we aren't 100 percent Islamic, what's wrong in kicking a few other Islamic values in the head. Seriously!!!

If one reads the biography of the Prophet SAW, he will realize that many statecraft principles that are recognized today were also employed by him(saw).

At the end of the day, I would prefer a Muslim country which follows at least some Islamic principles than none at all.

Finally, the Islamic rulings can only be bypassed if it is a question of mere survival. We, on the other hand, offer ourselves for sale very quickly and at a very cheap rate. We are too eager to abandon whatever little deen we still follow so that we might earn the title of "good boy" from our Western overlords.

That sounds awfully secular to me

Quote a speech of Jinnah where he explicitly mentions the word secular or secularism. A single example.

If he was so fond of secularism, he must have mentioned it...at least once !!!

Thing is, he never even uttered that word for Pakistan.

At least, amend the constitution which states that no law repugnant to the spirit of Islam shall be enacted before embarking on temple building quest.
@Desert Fox

 

[Surya 1]

I fully agree.

 

[denel]

Yet throughout history places or worship for non Muslims were built across the Muslim world. All these Gudwaras were built during Mughal rule. The Ottoman areas are full or churches that were built in Ottoman design. Why?

Muslims are more free to practice their faith in non muslim lands. Come this side, complete freedom and more facilities.
It is disgrace to see faith being used as a stick to subdue minorities; be better than that nazi modi.