'India: a spiritually diverse yet integrated nation' Ambassador Roemer

[Water Car Engineer]

every religion (except for 1) should be allowed and it's followers be let free.

I want to know your opinion...What religion is the exception?

 

[brahmastra]

Originally Posted by salman108
every religion (except for 1) should be allowed and it's followers be let free.

Totally agree with you.
every religion (except for 1) should be allowed and it's followers be let free.

 

[Sinnerman108]

huh Where the hell did you come up with that????

Show me one authentic hadees or verse where it says that if you do not struggle to force people to believe what you believe, it amounts to shirk!

Unless then refrain from branding things as shrik, that is the duty of Allah.

I did not say FORCE people to believe.
Please don't jump ahead and presume things.
and If I have ruffled your feathers, hey I shake and stir more Mullah then ordinary people.

calm down,
Let me get the answers I asked for in prior posts and then we will move forward.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

@salman108

And before you label me off an as Atheist do remember that religions like Buddhism reject the concept of a creator.




Typical holier than thou attitude

Could you explain that concept ?

 

[EjazR]

However, being Muslims the duty is to struggle and set to seek and to work to establish Islam's law and will.

Actually the concept of establish or use Islam for political purpose by creating a garb of Islamic laws is a deviant path created in the 20th century. Most notably by Maududi and Syed Qutb, this ideology of political Islam has been the bane of muslims today.

This idea came about in the era of communist revolutions where Maududi and his contempories felt that an "Islamic revolution" mimicking the maxists is the way to utopia. Iran was following on that path and Maududi fully endorsed it.
However, this ideology has no basis on Quran and Sunnah and hence as it failed and got corrupted you got Zawahiri and Bin Laden type ideology coming out of this that mandated that if this sytem does not come by peaceful means or our revolution gets supressed, it should be done my force.
The TTP afterall is trying to establish an Islamic government by force because it believes that (a) the current govt. in Pakistan is unIslamic and (b) peaceful way will not/has not suceeded in the last 60+ years.

There has been discusion about this earlier in this thread here http://www.defence.pk/forums/curren...wered-questions-case-pakistan.html#post550583


Islam is not complicated. For a muslim there are five fundamental pillars of Islam - Believe in the oneness of God and that Muhammed is his last prophet, prayers five times a day, giving in charity if you can afford it, fasting in Ramzan if you physically capable of doing it and going to Hajj once in a lifetime if you can afford and are physically capable of doing it.

Then you have basic prohibitions such as not lying, drinking alcohol, no *** outside marraige, not murdering or robbing people, e.t.c.

And the basic good deeds like speaking the truth, helping out neighbours and family, and encouraging and inviting people to do good deeds and advise them from doing wrong deeds, e.tc.

 

[Sinnerman108]

EjazR:

Thank you for proving my point.

You have illustrated the difference I was struggling to portray.

so by your rational,
White house is good,
( In the words of Dr Israr Ahmed)
they never stop you from praying 5 times a day
we went there, converted churches to Mosques, converted synagogues to mosques no problem.
Every Ramadhan they even throw an Iftari for you, no problem.
But come Islam's socio political system, they are your worst enemies.

I will wait to see if moderators are ok with this discussion before I go forward.

 

[roach]

I want to know your opinion...What religion is the exception?

Look at Salman108's signature.

 

[Sinnerman108]

Look at Salman108's signature.

:O !

It is not that.

Ahmedi / Qadyani are the ones.

But then that is my personal opinion.

 

[roach]

:O !

It is not that.

Ahmedi / Qadyani are the ones.

But then that is my personal opinion.

Oh, OK. I misunderstood.
I find that even more.......never mind.
As you said, it is your opinion and everyone is entitled to one.

 

[Ganguly]

Musalman aur Hindu hain do,
ek magar unka pyala,
ek magar unka madiralay,
ek magar unki hala,
dono rehte ek,
na jab tak mandir masjid mein jate,
bair badhate mandir masjid,
mel karati madhushala

 

[EjazR]

EjazR:

Thank you for proving my point.

You have illustrated the difference I was struggling to portray.

so by your rational,
White house is good,
( In the words of Dr Israr Ahmed)
they never stop you from praying 5 times a day
we went there, converted churches to Mosques, converted synagogues to mosques no problem.
Every Ramadhan they even throw an Iftari for you, no problem.
But come Islam's socio political system, they are your worst enemies.
I will wait to see if moderators are ok with this discussion before I go forward.

Why is the whitehouse coming into this? The US as a society is something that muslims don't have a problem with. There is freedomg to practice and preach your faith and that is minium needed.

Infact, the only reason that you would oppose a system and even fight against a country militarily is if that country was supressing you freedom to practice and preach you religion. For example the USSR under Stalin. Or ironically China under the CCP.


Islam is universal in nature and is something that is personal. The personal actions of people collectively fashion a society based on Islamic principles. It doesnt matter if the politcal system is a monarchy, democracy, or something else. As long as the people involved in the system are following Islam in the personal lives and are morally concerned of their actions, then the politcal system will be fine.

You can go through the thread that I posted earlier which I have discussed in detail about this.

 

[Sinnerman108]

huh Where the hell did you come up with that????

Show me one authentic hadees or verse where it says that if you do not struggle to force people to believe what you believe, it amounts to shirk!

Unless then refrain from branding things as shrik, that is the duty of Allah.

You asked for it, you got it.

If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your kindred, the wealth that which you have gained, the commerce in which you fear a decline, and the dwellings in which you delight are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger, and striving hard and fighting in His cause, then wait until Allah brings about His Decision (torment) (9:24)

and remember I never said "forced" the people as you have misquoted me
make up your own mind.

 

[EjazR]

@salman

what you said earlier was that you should work to establish an Islamic politcal system which this verse does not support, nor is supported in the view of many ulema.

The verse you quoted and infact most of the surah 9 is in the context when the non-muslims in makkah had broken a treaty with the muslims and attacked them. It was in this context that the verse you quote was made, i.e. to fight in self defense and not be afraid with regard to your personal wealth and be brave in that respect.

 

[Zeluvaa]

However, being Muslims the duty is to struggle and set to seek and to work to establish Islam's law and will.

If that duty is betrayed, or sent to the back seat ; or traded for worldly peace
that is Shirk.

You asked for it, you got it.


and remember I never said "forced" the people as you have misquoted me
make up your own mind.

No where in the verse is it mentioned that it is Shirk if you do not fight for establishing Islamic Will. I think you are confusing what shirk is and that is the main point of contention here. It may be more agreeable for Allah that you work for Islamic causes, but branding it shirk is just ridiculous.

And that is what I asked you proof of. Tell me where does it mention that it is Shirk!

As for the verse, see what Ejaz has to mention about it.

@salman

The verse you quoted and infact most of the surah 9 is in the context when the non-muslims in makkah had broken a treaty with the muslims and attacked them. It was in this context that the verse you quote was made, i.e. to fight in self defense and not be afraid with regard to your personal wealth and be brave in that respect.

 

[Sinnerman108]

Gentlemen,
As I have said, you are free to draw your own conclusions. it is upto you.
You asked what I base my belief on, and i told you.

and as I have previously mentioned, that I as a person do not approve of people who call them selves muslims on that side of the border.
Both of you have reciprocated the feeling with regard to my belief.

If you want further explanation and definition, we can do that. If not
So let us both wait for the day to come.