Failed ideology = Idiot-ology

[Bilal.]

Well said.


you are not the first one to say this bro.

But let me give you an example.


If you see a lot of accidents on a section of the road, one would easily come up with at least two reasons.


1. Drivers are bad
2. A new road with modern design needs to be added



In Pakistan we have a habit (like your post) to blame the drivers (ordinary Pakistanis). And obviously this reason has the merit.

However we must consider building new and straightened 6 lane highways and abandoning the old windy curvy 1 lane dirt roads.


Ideologies too become stale and thus rejected.


peace

Sir blame the road when it was the road on which the accident happened. It was never Islamic ideology then why blame it. Our ruling class never allowed it to really happen accept for some token ritualistic aspects...

 

[FaujHistorian]

Sir blame the road when it was the road on which the accident happened. It was never Islamic ideology then why blame it. Our ruling class never allowed it to really happen accept for some token ritualistic aspects...

Oh bhai it is as much Islamic as it can be under the MODERN Times.

If you don't accept this fact then you have to say that that Pakistani constitution today is Kafir constitution then.

And all these hdood clauses and blasphemy clauses are UN-inslamic and thus Kafir clauses.

Hope you understand.

that once you negative something, you are proving the opposite to be valid.

logic should be followed as much as possible.

You cannot say Islam is not there, it is not here, it is not there. This logic makes the whole Islamist ideology as impractical based on your OWN reasoning.


peace

 

[pak-marine]

@FaujHistorian agreed and off the same opinion that religion is not a unifying factor for a diverse and multi ethinic society , if we were to remove Islam dont you think all kinds of separatist groups will start demanding separation from Pakistan ..i am talking in legal not in military terms wouldnt they have some sort of legal standing internationally ?

 

[FaujHistorian]

@FaujHistorian agreed and off the same opinion that religion is not a unifying factor for a diverse and multi ethinic society , if we were to remove Islam dont you think all kinds of separatist groups will start demanding separation from Pakistan ..i am talking in legal not in military terms wouldnt they have some sort of legal standing internationally ?

Separatists will gain strength and popularity if pakistani state does not deliver two things.

1. Peace
2. Prosperity

Islamism fails in both of these points unless supported by free oil coming out of the ground.

But if you have free oil coming from the ground, any "-ism" will be successful.

Thank you.

 

[Bilal.]

Oh bhai it is as much Islamic as it can be under the MODERN Times.

If you don't accept this fact then you have to say that that Pakistani constitution today is Kafir constitution then.

And all these hdood clauses and blasphemy clauses are UN-inslamic and thus Kafir clauses.

Hope you understand.

that once you negative something, you are proving the opposite to be valid.

logic should be followed as much as possible.

You cannot say Islam is not there, it is not here, it is not there. This logic makes the whole Islamist ideology as impractical based on your OWN reasoning.


peace

As Islamic as it can be in modern times? Absolutely not...

Blogs - Muhammad Iqbal The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam

 

[FaujHistorian]

As Islamic as it can be in modern times? Absolutely not...

Blogs - Muhammad Iqbal The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam

I love iqbal.

we recite his poetry all the time.

You know that he gave these lectures in 1930, about 83 years ago.

Please pay attention to the words "Re" and "construct" the "religious thoughts".

That means demolishing existing structure down to the foundations and building something new on top of it.

There is no way to demolish Mullahs and Ayatullahs in 2014. No forking way.

This is why his idea about "Re-constructing" Islamism has failed in pretty much every Islamic country.


Hope you understand.




If you are serious about Iqbal Here are the 7 lectures from reconstruction. Tell me which one you will apply to Pakistan and how?


-- Knowledge and Religious Experience
-- The Philosophical Test of the Revelations of Religious Experience
-- The Conception of God and the Meaning of Prayer
-- The Human Ego – His Freedom and Immortality
-- The Spirit of Muslim Culture
-- The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam
-- Is Religion Possible?

 

[Imran Khan]

گل سمجھ لئی تے رولا کی اے - اے رام، رحیم تے مولا کیاے؟؟

 

[Bilal.]

@FaujHistorian, so what if it was done 83 years ago all your "modern" systems are actually ancient ranging from ideas 2000 years old to a century old. What Iqbal argues is we need to follow ijtahad and Islam allows for independent interpretation... Imams as revered they are, are not Devine...

 

[HRK]

So what is an ideology?

It a system of ideas and ideals, esp. one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy (google defs)

Pakistanis have claimed to follow an ideology since 1949 (objective resolution days).

my dear you rightly raised this issue as it represents general misconception in some pseudo intellectuals of this society ..... They are confused among 'Religion' and 'Ideology' ...... one thing is ever changing and accommodating the ever changing needs of masses ..... other is not ......

Don't know y these circles failed to understand the basic reason of their political or social problems and rather to resolve the issues ..... these circles put blame on religion as it has become a fashion to use religion as escape got for 'our failures and short comings' ..... 'as a whole'

dear, all the ethnic or political problems you raised in your post have their bases in our political history ..... but some are failed to realised as it required the original thought process rather then borrowed intellect ......

 

[M. Sarmad]

Please pay attention to the words "Re" and "construct" the "religious thoughts".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iqbal says :​

Unfortunately, the conservative Muslim public of this country is not yet quite ready for a critical discussion of Fiqh, which, if undertaken, is likely to displease most people, and raise sectarian controversies; yet I venture to offer a few remarks on the point before us.

1. In the first place, we should bear in mind that from the earliest times, practically up to the rise of the Abbasids, there was no written law of Islam apart from the Qur’an.
2. Secondly, it is worthy of note that from about the middle of the first century up to the beginning of the fourth not less than nineteen schools of law and legal opinion appeared in Islam. This fact alone is sufficient to show how incessantly our early doctors of law worked in order to meet the necessities of a growing civilization. With the expansion of conquest and the consequent widening of the outlook of Islam these early legists had to take a wider view of things, and to study local conditions of life and habits of new peoples that came within the fold of Islam. A careful study of the various schools of legal opinion, in the light of contemporary social and political history, reveals that they gradually passed from the deductive to the inductive attitude in their efforts at interpretation.
3. Thirdly, when we study the four accepted sources of Muhammadan Law and the controversies which they invoked, the supposed rigidity of our recognized schools evaporates and the possibility of a further evolution becomes perfectly clear.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

What most of the Muslims are unable to realize is the fact that the "Fiqahs" we follow were developed by ordinary people , centuries after the demise of Muhammad (pbuh) to meet the challenges faced in different eras and different places .

The need of the time is the development of new laws that are compatible with modern world . It is stupid to Follow the Medieval Fiqhas rigidly and then claim that Islam is a religion for all times .

 

[armchairPrivate]

Ideology can be broken up into (or consists of) parts, idea and science (or branch of learning)

Idea is nothing more than brain fart.

Does anyone really want to learn brain fart?

Jokes aside, ANY ideology suppresses a HUMAN of free thinking.

If you want to live in a lalaland, do take up an ideology.

Show me an ideology that led human to joy and happiness and I will eat my balls.

 

[KRAIT]

Well said.
Hopefully the "nation FIRST" ideology means inclusivity and tolerance in a diverse society like Pakistan. Where each group is free to practice their faith without fear of persecution.
Where a Hindu can tolerate cow slaughter, and a Muslim can tolerate the sale of pork.
Where a Christian will not be offended to see Jesus not being considered biological son of God
Where a Muslim will not be offended if an Ahmadi says Mirza is the prophet.
Peace

Actually in India I have seen opposite.
On Eid many Muslim people said no to slaughter of goats when Mahavir Jayanti occurred on same day.

We as meat eaters never brought meat in the apartment we shared with Jains and Pandits.

Its unsaid understanding and small sacrifices.

The state should understand the requirement of people and people should take it as their duty to obey the rules made by state.

Anything can be solved by peaceful way and democratic way. All it takes is some time and patience.

 

[Dubious]

Sir blame the road when it was the road on which the accident happened. It was never Islamic ideology then why blame it. Our ruling class never allowed it to really happen accept for some token ritualistic aspects...

Right on the spot!

Apparently they blame it coz they dont know the "real Islam" since they have never been shown it....

 

[Jayanta]

Well said.

Hopefully the "nation FIRST" ideology means inclusivity and tolerance in a diverse society like Pakistan. Where each group is free to practice their faith without fear of persecution.


Where a Hindu can tolerate cow slaughter, and a Muslim can tolerate the sale of pork.

Where a Christian will not be offended to see Jesus not being considered biological son of God

Where a Muslim will not be offended if an Ahmadi says Mirza is the prophet.

Peace

The word "nation first" explains everything. Don't have to drag the CON-gressi BS along with it..country first means every living being whatever his caste, creed, color, religion, sex..etc is will keep the interest of the country ahead of everything.

 

[ssethii]

Well said.

Hopefully the "nation FIRST" ideology means inclusivity and tolerance in a diverse society like Pakistan. Where each group is free to practice their faith without fear of persecution.


Where a Hindu can tolerate cow slaughter, and a Muslim can tolerate the sale of pork.

Where a Christian will not be offended to see Jesus not being considered biological son of God

Where a Muslim will not be offended if an Ahmadi says Mirza is the prophet.

Peace

- I respect hinduism as i am a sufist. I am not sure about pork meat though wine is accessible to non-muslims in Pakistan.
- Whatever a Christian thinks don't bother us at all he is Christian. It will bother us if a Muslim in our country say so.
- Muslims get offended only when Ahmadi say so and claim themselves to be Muslim otherwise they can choose any xyz as their Prophet.
The bottom line is we Muslims have no problems with other we have enough of us to sort out all the time.The contract of Madina back in the begining is the perfect example for that and the Muslims in India advocate it as rational for not leaving the country after the Independence(1947).

OT: Islam is the only binding factor for us to call ourselves a Nation. Without it there is no concept of Pakistan itself. Looks like our founders were not that dumb at all.