Pakistan, Turkey friendship rooted in history: Ayaz

[Zarvan]

You made a claim that "In last 1400 years every Muslim kingdom, khilaafat /malukiat had constitutions with similar content", I asked you to quote a few examples here, and you have failed to provide any .... Beating around the bush now ??






I didn't miss anything. I only pointed it out to you that Misaq e Madina, unlike the Objectives Resolution, did not mention that Sovereignty over the entire Universe belonged to Allah alone...

And nowhere does it mention "Hadith" as a source of Law ... Who are you trying to deceive here ?







Let me repeat myself:

I have posted enough on this topic already. And it's there for everyone to see. So, let's leave it to the readers to decide. No point in going round in circles now.


And The Objectives Resolution was not a constitution, it was a "resolution" passed by the Constituent Assembly. It contained those objectives on which the future constitution was to be based... Unfortunately, Maududi was alive when the subsequent constitution(s) were enacted in the country. I suggest you read those constitutions (and amendments) carefully to understand that how is it "Maududi's Islamic Pakistan" (and not Jinnah's Pakistan)








You don't have to resort to lying to prove your point. What I have been advocating is there for everyone to see.

Here is what I wrote in my previous post (that you deliberately ignored):

And that is exactly what I had said in my posts (#101, #175 and then in #179). That's why I had been asking you to read carefully what had been posted on the thread alteady. Anyway, thanks for proving me right .... In your post (#183) you said "... you say Pakistan was not about Western secularism but it's own version of secularism.. seems you are confused on this one." .. Now read what you yourself have posted/pasted here (#233)... Hope that clears up YOUR confusion




In fact, I have discussed this before with those posters here who are far more mature and knowledgeable on this subject than you, and who possess a level of erudition about the birth and development of Pakistan You can't hope to match . And even they had failed to "refute" my position ... You are just a beginner .. Here is one such post (from 2014) where I referred to Misaq e Medina as the basis of Jinnah's Islamic-Secular Pakistan:

https://defence.pk/threads/best-way-to-implement-sharia-in-pakistan.321881/page-29#post-5879009

And here is another one (from 2014):



https://defence.pk/threads/best-way-to-implement-sharia-in-pakistan.321881/page-33#post-5900325


Adios ...

Jinah speeches again and again show that he wanted a Pakistan based on Quran and Sunnah so any constitution based on Quran and Sunnah or close to Quran and Sunnah is Jonah's constitution and his wish. But main thing always and always will be what Quran and Sunnah demands from Muslims not what Jonah or Iqbal or Madudi had in mind. Secondly Madudi Sahab after creation of Pakistan not only vigorously defended Pakistan at all fronts but JI as a whole even fought wars. Hadith and Sunnah are always source of law for Muslims no need to mention because for Muslims it's more obvious than the fact that person needs oxygen to live. This obvious fact is only denied by the group known as Khawarij who are known retards in Islamic history and still have few dumb followers who always get busted every time they try to attack Sunnah and Hadith.

 

[T-123456]

You made a claim that "In last 1400 years every Muslim kingdom, khilaafat /malukiat had constitutions with similar content", I asked you to quote a few examples here, and you have failed to provide any .... Beating around the bush now ??






I didn't miss anything. I only pointed it out to you that Misaq e Madina, unlike the Objectives Resolution, did not mention that Sovereignty over the entire Universe belonged to Allah alone...

And nowhere does it mention "Hadith" as a source of Law ... Who are you trying to deceive here ?







Let me repeat myself:

I have posted enough on this topic already. And it's there for everyone to see. So, let's leave it to the readers to decide. No point in going round in circles now.


And The Objectives Resolution was not a constitution, it was a "resolution" passed by the Constituent Assembly. It contained those objectives on which the future constitution was to be based... Unfortunately, Maududi was alive when the subsequent constitution(s) were enacted in the country. I suggest you read those constitutions (and amendments) carefully to understand that how is it "Maududi's Islamic Pakistan" (and not Jinnah's Pakistan)








You don't have to resort to lying to prove your point. What I have been advocating is there for everyone to see.

Here is what I wrote in my previous post (that you deliberately ignored):

And that is exactly what I had said in my posts (#101, #175 and then in #179). That's why I had been asking you to read carefully what had been posted on the thread alteady. Anyway, thanks for proving me right .... In your post (#183) you said "... you say Pakistan was not about Western secularism but it's own version of secularism.. seems you are confused on this one." .. Now read what you yourself have posted/pasted here (#233)... Hope that clears up YOUR confusion




In fact, I have discussed this before with those posters here who are far more mature and knowledgeable on this subject than you, and who possess a level of erudition about the birth and development of Pakistan You can't hope to match . And even they had failed to "refute" my position ... You are just a beginner .. Here is one such post (from 2014) where I referred to Misaq e Medina as the basis of Jinnah's Islamic-Secular Pakistan:

https://defence.pk/threads/best-way-to-implement-sharia-in-pakistan.321881/page-29#post-5879009

And here is another one (from 2014):



https://defence.pk/threads/best-way-to-implement-sharia-in-pakistan.321881/page-33#post-5900325


Adios ...

Bro,why do you even try?

 

[ThaniOruvan]

Some Islam immigrants to India came from Turkey. Still they are living in various parts of India. I am sure Pakistan and Turkey have 'deep' rooted history.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Jinah speeches again and again show that he wanted a Pakistan based on Quran and Sunnah so any constitution based on Quran and Sunnah or close to Quran and Sunnah is Jonah's constitution and his wish. But main thing always and always will be what Quran and Sunnah demands from Muslims not what Jonah or Iqbal or Madudi had in mind. Secondly Madudi Sahab after creation of Pakistan not only vigorously defended Pakistan at all fronts but JI as a whole even fought wars. Hadith and Sunnah are always source of law for Muslims no need to mention because for Muslims it's more obvious than the fact that person needs oxygen to live. This obvious fact is only denied by the group known as Khawarij who are known retards in Islamic history and still have few dumb followers who always get busted every time they try to attack Sunnah and Hadith.

@Oscar @waz

Although this guy is funny and keeps amusing all of us here with his stupid stuff

But he uses word "Jonah" instead of Jinnah. It is not a typo as he has used this word at least 5 times in just two pages

Would you please take care of this little piece of **** ??

Bro,why do you even try?

Because I can't stand the ignorance and stupidity that is destroying my country, bro ...

 

[T-123456]

Some Islam immigrants to India came from Turkey. Still they are living in various parts of India

Which parts and who are they?

 

[ThaniOruvan]

Which parts and who are they?

For example : Ancestors to the Rowther community living in South India were turks who migrated back in the 13th century.

 

[Zarvan]

@Oscar @waz

Although this guy is funny and keeps amusing all of us here with his stupid stuff

But he uses word "Jonah" instead of Jinnah. It is not a typo as he has used this word at least 5 times in just two pages

Would you please take care of this little piece of **** ??





Because I can't stand the ignorance and stupidity that is destroying my country, bro ...

Mr my mobile doesn't recognizes word Jinah so when I write Jinah and press space it automatically turns into Jonah so know things before complaining. Now as for topic Mr Jinah speeches from 1940 till his death are clear that Jinah wanted Pakistan based on Quran and Sunnah but some liberals and followers of khawarij as Quran has stated several times that are to deaf and dumb and blind to get it and lastly for Muslim most important thing is following ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW or following Quran and Sunnah and if Jinah or Iqbal or Madudi sayings are according to that they would be accepted other wise they would be rejected.

 

[Nefarious]

No I sound like the voice which exposes west and their pets in here in Muslim world the liberals who are only good at two things one is backstabbing second is lying

Sorry to veer off here but do you agree that the Saudi royal family are also American puppets/pets?

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Which parts and who are they?

It's mostly claims with little factual evidence.

 

[T-123456]

It's mostly claims with little factual evidence.

I looked it up,

Rowther or Ravuthar is a Muslim community from the South Indian states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Together with the Kayalar, Lebbai and Maraikayar communities, they constitute the Tamil Muslims, an Islamic community spread across South India. Rowthers follow the Hanafi school of Fiqh. In Tamil Nadu, the non-muslims often refer to muslims as tulukkar - a term offensive to the muslims - probably derived from turukkiyar, meaning Turkish, owing to their Turkish ancestry and history. They are descendants of a group of Muslim soldiers, a mixture of Arabian and Turkish horse-traders and Rajputs of North India who came to South India in the 12th century as a part of the Turkish armies.

After the fall of Chola dynasty, the newly formed Vijayanagara Empire invited the Seljuk Turks from the fractions of Hanafi (known as Rowther in South India) for trade relations in 1279 C.E.. The largest armada of Turkish traders, soldiers and missionaries settled in Tharangambadi (Nagapattinam), Karaikal, Muthupet, Koothanallur, Podakkudi and Athikkadai. Rowthers, failing to convert Hindus in the Thanjavur region, settled in that area with their armada, expanding into an Islamic community of almost one million. These new settlements were now added to the Rowther community. Hanafi factions, more closely connected with the Turkish than others in South, have fair complexions. Some Turkish Anatolian and Turkish Safavid inscriptions have been found in wide areas from Thanjavur to Thiruvarur and in many villages. Madras Museum displays the inscriptions to the public.

For example : Ancestors to the Rowther community living in South India were turks who migrated back in the 13th century.

Cool man,i didnt know this.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Mr my mobile doesn't recognizes word Jinah so when I write Jinah and press space it automatically turns into Jonah so know things before complaining. Now as for topic Mr Jinah speeches from 1940 till his death are clear that Jinah wanted Pakistan based on Quran and Sunnah but some liberals and followers of khawarij as Quran has stated several times that are to deaf and dumb and blind to get it and lastly for Muslim most important thing is following ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW or following Quran and Sunnah and if Jinah or Iqbal or Madudi sayings are according to that they would be accepted other wise they would be rejected.

You are lying as usual. Only Mullahs' Auto-correct would turn "Jinnah" into "Jonah". Your ideological forefathers used to abuse Jinnah openly. You can't do that openly while living in Pakistan, so these dirty tricks ...





As for the Holy Quran, can you quote a single verse from the Holy Quran that prescribes a worldly punishment for any religious offense ? ... Have you ever bothered to read the Holy Quran ?


Two things become absolutely clear if one reads the Holy Quran :

1) Allah says that there is no compulsion in religion [2:256], It is a matter of free choice , No one is allowed to to force anyone in religious affairs. It is only for Allah to decide the punishment for religious offences (in the after life)

2) Disorderly conduct/Crimes that cause disturbance in the society (e.g theft, robbery, rebellion etc.) are punishable offenses



In any modern Secular state ;

1) Religion is a personal matter and not the business of the state

2) Disorderly conduct/Crimes that cause disturbance in the society are punishable offenses



So, a "State" based on Quranic teachings would be "secular" (in essence) !! After all, Muslim Philosophers like Ibn e Rushd (d.1198) are considered "founding father of modern secular thought" in western Europe ... Secularism is not as "western" as Mullahs would have us believe ...


Allama Muhammad Iqbal , who was a great Muslim Philosopher of twentieth century (also "Mufakkir e Pakistan") , probably understood it quite well .. that is why he said about secularism :

The structure of Islam as a religio-political system no doubt does permit such a view.

 

[Zarvan]

You are lying as usual. Only Mullahs' Auto-correct would turn "Jinnah" into "Jonah". Your ideological forefathers used to abuse Jinnah openly. You can't do that openly while living in Pakistan, so these dirty tricks ...





As for the Holy Quran, can you quote a single verse from the Holy Quran that prescribes a worldly punishment for any religious offense ? ... Have you ever bothered to read the Holy Quran ?


Two things become absolutely clear if one reads the Holy Quran :

1) Allah says that there is no compulsion in religion [2:256], It is a matter of free choice , No one is allowed to to force anyone in religious affairs. It is only for Allah to decide the punishment for religious offences (in the after life)

2) Disorderly conduct/Crimes that cause disturbance in the society (e.g theft, robbery, rebellion etc.) are punishable offenses



In any modern Secular state ;

1) Religion is a personal matter and not the business of the state

2) Disorderly conduct/Crimes that cause disturbance in the society are punishable offenses



So, a "State" based on Quranic teachings would be "secular" (in essence) !! After all, Muslim Philosophers like Ibn e Rushd (d.1198) are considered "founding father of modern secular thought" in western Europe ... Secularism is not as "western" as Mullahs would have us believe ...


Allama Muhammad Iqbal , who was a great Muslim Philosopher of twentieth century (also "Mufakkir e Pakistan") , probably understood it quite well .. that is why he said about secularism :

The structure of Islam as a religio-political system no doubt does permit such a view.

No religion is not a private matter those who say this have worst knowledge of Islam far worse than that of Abu Juhal and Abdullah bin Ubai. As for ayat this shows when you have no clue about ayat background How you can end up misquoting it. This ayat is for that no one can be forced to convert to Islam. In Islamic state government has to enforce Islamic laws and have to do it with full power. Ibn Rushd doesn't matter in Islam it's Quran and Sunnah which does. Finally secular and Quran are art odds and no society based on Quran and Sunnah can never be secular. Finally I am not lying about Jinah and I give a dam what others think

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

You made a claim that "In last 1400 years every Muslim kingdom, khilaafat /malukiat had constitutions with similar content", I asked you to quote a few examples here, and you have failed to provide any .... Beating around the bush now ??






I didn't miss anything. I only pointed it out to you that Misaq e Madina, unlike the Objectives Resolution, did not mention that Sovereignty over the entire Universe belonged to Allah alone...

And nowhere does it mention "Hadith" as a source of Law ... Who are you trying to deceive here ?







Let me repeat myself:

I have posted enough on this topic already. And it's there for everyone to see. So, let's leave it to the readers to decide. No point in going round in circles now.


And The Objectives Resolution was not a constitution, it was a "resolution" passed by the Constituent Assembly. It contained those objectives on which the future constitution was to be based... Unfortunately, Maududi was alive when the subsequent constitution(s) were enacted in the country. I suggest you read those constitutions (and amendments) carefully to understand that how is it "Maududi's Islamic Pakistan" (and not Jinnah's Pakistan)








You don't have to resort to lying to prove your point. What I have been advocating is there for everyone to see.

Here is what I wrote in my previous post (that you deliberately ignored):

And that is exactly what I had said in my posts (#101, #175 and then in #179). That's why I had been asking you to read carefully what had been posted on the thread alteady. Anyway, thanks for proving me right .... In your post (#183) you said "... you say Pakistan was not about Western secularism but it's own version of secularism.. seems you are confused on this one." .. Now read what you yourself have posted/pasted here (#233)... Hope that clears up YOUR confusion




In fact, I have discussed this before with those posters here who are far more mature and knowledgeable on this subject than you, and who possess a level of erudition about the birth and development of Pakistan You can't hope to match . And even they had failed to "refute" my position ... You are just a beginner .. Here is one such post (from 2014) where I referred to Misaq e Medina as the basis of Jinnah's Islamic-Secular Pakistan:

https://defence.pk/threads/best-way-to-implement-sharia-in-pakistan.321881/page-29#post-5879009

And here is another one (from 2014):



https://defence.pk/threads/best-way-to-implement-sharia-in-pakistan.321881/page-33#post-5900325


Adios ...

I still stick to that claim.I did correct myself that i was referring to everything apart from written constitutionalism. I would emphasize on the word "similar content" above and my last post was more than adequate to elaborate why i said that but since your reply shows you are out of arguments you have resorted to personal attacks.That only destroys your own credibility.
You have failed to prove maududi connection to the objective resolution and you are frustrated seeing this get out of hand.

*Summary of your rant*
You started off calling objective resolution making Pakistan a Theocracy. When the rebuttal came in that its the representatives and other institutions that decide the role of religion in Pakistan and that clergy has a limited role as aider only. When that was too hot to handle and to save yourself from the embarrassment you picked my point where i said " the clergy doesnt decide" pointing to Mualaana Muadudi calling him the "inspiration" for Objective Resolution. After that you just scavenged around quotes to find similarities between a Muadudis speech and Objective Resolution Points, like a historian as hopless as nadeem dumb paracha or those conspiracy theorist trying so hard to find eye symbolism on a toilet seat. )
When I brought in the similarities of Meesaq-e-Madina and Objective resolution you refused to accept that and insisted an arch rival of PMLN with no representation in assembly was able to influence the whole lot there..
You have lost it. So much for the misaq-emadina that separated state from religion. You have failed to explain how the madina consitution where is says

"Consult Allah when you differ among yourselves"
is in anyway different from
"Absolute sovereignty belongs to Allah"

Im not a lone voice like you tried to depict here,calling me immature or beginner wihtout answering my points only makes your own self look small.Majority out there endorse what i brought up but you will stay in denial..good for you At the back of your head you will always think, Jinnah too shy to utter the S word, but why?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The First Written Constitution of the World-Dr. Hamidullah
this authority and the autocratic royal authorities of other countries was that materialism had no part to play here. The Holy Prophet Muhammad introduced moral elements in politics. He regarded God as the source of authority and considered himself as His messenger and agent

In the very last sentence of this part of the document which concerns Muslims, this very principle is repeated, viz., that although the source of all authority is God Himself, yet people will obey the Messenger of God the Prophet Muhammad and in all their differences and dissensions will turn to him and regard his verdict in these matters as final (Clause 23).
http://www.ebooks.rahnuma.org/relig...e-First-Written-Constitution-of-the-World.pdf

 

[war&peace]

Interesting. But, don't you think that the instances mentioned by you as above are more of mutual convergence of interests and have less to do with friendship?

Why do you think that...why not Turkey chose India over Pakistan...I mean India is a big country?

 

[M. Sarmad]

No religion is not a private matter those who say this have worst knowledge of Islam far worse than that of Abu Juhal and Abdullah bin Ubai. As for ayat this shows when you have no clue about ayat background How you can end up misquoting it. This ayat is for that no one can be forced to convert to Islam. In Islamic state government has to enforce Islamic laws and have to do it with full power. Ibn Rushd doesn't matter in Islam it's Quran and Sunnah which does. Finally secular and Quran are art odds and no society based on Quran and Sunnah can never be secular. Finally I am not lying about Jinah and I give a dam what others think

I asked you to quote a single verse from the Holy Quran in which Allah has prescribed a worldly punishment for any religious offense. You have failed to quote any .. (as there is none)




As for your claim that "In Islamic state government has to enforce Islamic laws and have to do it with full power." This claim is not supported by the Holy Quran.


Firstly, there is no concept of an Islamic State in the Holy Quran, and the Holy Quran does not have any prescription for a Government.

The phenomenon of Modern governments and states began in the sixteenth century only.


And secondly, We read in the Holy Quran, ch 88, v 21-22 :

"So remind, [O Muhammad]; you are only a reminder."

"You are not over them a dictator."


The Arabic word "Musaitir" has been used by almighty which can be translated as a "controller, warder, dictator , dominator or superintendent of police"


And in 13:40 , Allah tells Muhammad (pbuh):

upon you is only the [duty of] notification, and upon Us is the account.(Al-Hisab)


Now here is the question ... When the perfect creation i.e Muhammad(pbuh) is not allowed by almighty to force or compel someone to follow Islam, How can any Mullah claim such an authority ???






Followers of Abu Lahab and Abu Jahal ?? These words were used by Allama Muhammad Iqbal to describe the followers and proponents of political Islam (like yourself) who he believed had damaged Islam ...Just google it


So you believe that Ibne Rushd does not matter, Allama Iqbal and Jinnah don't matter, even the Holy Quran does not matter ... For you, all that matters is how Mullahs have (mis)interpreted Islam !! ... It is only because of close-minded people like you who blindly follow the Mullahs of the past (ignoring the Holy Quran, and the realities of the modern world) that Islam has been turned into a Pariah religion in the modern times.