Query about all-India Muslim League

[MilSpec]

That is second bi-product of following without understanding..
Unfortunately this is where most Khilafat followers shoot themselves in the foot...which MB was trying to put on.. by identifying all those that question Khilafat as secular... good to know that I was able to extract such a response.

Its not about the belief in Khilafat.. its about the conditions for it.

The Islamic Khilafat was introduced during medina..where Muslims were ruled justly by acclaimed leadership.
That is not the case here.. point one.
The Khilafat existed as a focal point for uniformity in Islam.. which by the time of the end of the Ottoman Empire(and the lame duck Khalifa or if he even deserved that title) had disappeared.

The Khalifa must be sworn alligence to by all.. but in today's fractured society.. where there are deep fissures within Islam itself. How does one expect people to swear an oath to an individual who may not agree with their teachings on Islam?

The khalifa is supposed to be elected by a council of Muttaqi's.. how do you find a Muttaqi in todays hypocritical times...when testimonies can be bought and pretenders roam the streets?

Unfortunately.. the last Paigham-e-Khilafat bearer..Muhd bin Qasim I think.. could not convince me with a detailed answer to this..

Now here is the bomb.. I too wish for Khilafat.. a leadership that bases its decisions on the teachings in the Quran and the example of the Prophet and his companions.
What I do not agree to ..is this rushed..desperate method of bringing it in.
It will lead to disaster.
Currently Islam is torn apart from the inside.. and trying to appoint a common political leadership is folly when you cannot even appoint a common religious one.
It is imperative that first and foremost, a concentrated attempt is made to research all we can about our religion, its history.. and lessons from it. Then work at a war pace to patch up , amend and preach against differences and fight against all forces bent on takrifism or those on a crusade of branding every other thing Shirk and Bidah.
You dont need forces conversions, you need to highlight common ground.. and convince people to understand their religion.. and then decide.. They will automatically start to unite.

Then you may introduce a new political system to govern a unified religious one.

I would like to ask a naive question. Why should religion be a factor to form a political union?

 

[miss]

I would like to ask a naive question. Why should religion be a factor to form a political union?

thats why a khilafa will never be formed. if the muslims believed in khilafa, arabs would have never fought for freedom from turks that too with British help. the only muslims who believe in this silly thing are the muslims from the poorer countries like Pak , Bangladesh etc who want to use the resources of other muslims countries and overnight increase their per capita without working by jus t joining richer lands.
simple thing.. why did BD and Pak separate. why didnt pak hand over power to the bengalis?

 

[SQ8]

I would like to ask a naive question. Why should religion be a factor to form a political union?

because the political union in Question is based on religious history.
A Khalifa may be apolitical..but cannot be a non-Muslim... The idea is to unite Muslims under a common banner.
So a strong religious identity must be cultivated for it.

thats why a khilafa will never be formed. if the muslims believed in khilafa, arabs would have never fought for freedom from turks that too with British help. the only muslims who believe in this silly thing are the muslims from the poorer countries like Pak , Bangladesh etc who want to use the resources of other muslims countries and overnight increase their per capita without working by jus t joining richer lands.
simple thing.. why did BD and Pak separate. why didnt pak hand over power to the bengalis?

You assume too much.. there was seed of discord sown by the British in the form of Saud's favourite ibn-Wahhab..
Basically tearing the religion apart through instigating a divide by people who insisted on religious divide.. hence the disunity.

The Pak-BD separation has more to do with racial oppression than a religious one.
There was never a demand for a Khilafat of Pakistan.. just a separate autonomous region where Muslims could govern as a Majority.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

That is second bi-product of following without understanding..
Unfortunately this is where most Khilafat followers shoot themselves in the foot...which MB was trying to put on.. by identifying all those that question Khilafat as secular... good to know that I was able to extract such a response.

Its not about the belief in Khilafat.. its about the conditions for it.

The Islamic Khilafat was introduced during medina..where Muslims were ruled justly by acclaimed leadership.
That is not the case here.. point one.
The Khilafat existed as a focal point for uniformity in Islam.. which by the time of the end of the Ottoman Empire(and the lame duck Khalifa or if he even deserved that title) had disappeared.

The Khalifa must be sworn alligence to by all.. but in today's fractured society.. where there are deep fissures within Islam itself. How does one expect people to swear an oath to an individual who may not agree with their teachings on Islam?

The khalifa is supposed to be elected by a council of Muttaqi's.. how do you find a Muttaqi in todays hypocritical times...when testimonies can be bought and pretenders roam the streets?

Unfortunately.. the last Paigham-e-Khilafat bearer..Muhd bin Qasim I think.. could not convince me with a detailed answer to this..

Now here is the bomb.. I too wish for Khilafat.. a leadership that bases its decisions on the teachings in the Quran and the example of the Prophet and his companions.
What I do not agree to ..is this rushed..desperate method of bringing it in.
It will lead to disaster.
Currently Islam is torn apart from the inside.. and trying to appoint a common political leadership is folly when you cannot even appoint a common religious one.
It is imperative that first and foremost, a concentrated attempt is made to research all we can about our religion, its history.. and lessons from it. Then work at a war pace to patch up , amend and preach against differences and fight against all forces bent on takrifism or those on a crusade of branding every other thing Shirk and Bidah.
You dont need forces conversions, you need to highlight common ground.. and convince people to understand their religion.. and then decide.. They will automatically start to unite.

Then you may introduce a new political system to govern a unified religious one.

Wow thats U-turn.
Well I agree with u that Khilafat cannot be implemented in Pakistan or even in any or joining all Muslim countries at once. Because Muslim of today is divided in sects. Follows Tailored Islam. while Khilafat requires unity and yes Muttaqi or Shurra of wise Momeneens. Lets just suppose if we stand a khilafat and select people like Amir Liqat, Tahirul Qadri, Zaid hamid, Tariq jamil, Emem e Kaba (which are given with Written Khutba from KSA for speeches) etc for Shuraa .. then u r definatly screwed.

But democracy is totally BS ... wont work in Muslims State at all unless u change the title from being Muslim state. like Turkey. Infect it is forbidden in Islam.

 

[miss]

You assume too much.. there was seed of discord sown by the British in the form of Saud's favourite ibn-Wahhab..
Basically tearing the religion apart through instigating a divide by people who insisted on religious divide.. hence the disunity.

The Pak-BD separation has more to do with racial oppression than a religious one.
There was never a demand for a Khilafat of Pakistan.. just a separate autonomous region where Muslims could govern as a Majority.

No the British just used the discontecnt of the Arabs under Turkish oppression. Please read about the horrible oppressive rule of the ottoman empire during 18-19th century.
So Pak-BD and the ottoman empire answers why this caliphate will never happen. You are trying to force various ethnicity under the stitch of religion . This will never work as shown in the above 2 instances.
An India like, inclusive model is a must for keeping together various ethnicities and religions where evreyone is inclusive.
So first the word khilafa should not be used for it to succeed.

 

[SQ8]

Wow thats U-turn.
Well I agree with u that Khilafat cannot be implemented in Pakistan or even in any or joining all Muslim countries at once. Because Muslim of today is divided in sects. Follows Tailored Islam. while Khilafat requires unity and yes Muttaqi or Shurra of wise Momeneens. Lets just suppose if we stand a khilafat and select people like Amir Liqat, Tahirul Qadri, Zaid hamid, Tariq jamil, Emem e Kaba (which are given with Written Khutba from KSA for speeches) etc for Shuraa .. then u r definatly screwed.

So you can see why its not a U-Turn...but rather an extreme oppostion to the bold part in red.
Its better to work on the red part first, it was a contributing factor to the fall of the last Khilafat.
And remains the biggest hurdle in uniting Muslims today.

the following may sound even more surprising.. but what is needed today is Jihad..not the lower grade guns blazing one...
but a much more difficult one where a massive and an unrelenting search for knowledge is needed.
Knowledge of the Quran.. from different tafasir.. from any and all books on hadiath ..and all sources on the prophets life.
So that one is well equipped to call people from the takfirism that has arisen from najd.
Its when people like you and me will have enough knowledge to post rebuttals to people like Tahirul Qadri or farhat hashmi..
Then people will come.. and set aside their differences to find common ground in the Kalimah.
If such people can achieve this.. then the precedent for Political change will be set... And khilafat will be accepted by all.

Long story short.. there can be NO political Khilafat.. without a religious one.
Unfortunately.. most.. if not all that wish for an Islamic system of rule are taking the wrong approach by trying to implement a political Khilafat first..which will be exactly the disaster that the enemies of Islam wish upon us.

No the British just used the discontecnt of the Arabs under Turkish oppression. Please read about the horrible oppressive rule of the ottoman empire during 18-19th century.
So Pak-BD and the ottoman empire answers why this caliphate will never happen. You are trying to force various ethnicity under the stitch of religion . This will never work as shown in the above 2 instances.
An India like, inclusive model is a must for keeping together various ethnicities and religions where evreyone is inclusive.
So first the word khilafa should not be used for it to succeed.

Due to an incompetent Khalifa.. but the seeds of discord for religion were sown during this time.
Pak-BD.. and ottoman empire answers as to why a political Khilafat without a religious one is going to fail.

 

[miss]

Long story short.. there can be NO political Khilafat.. without a religious one.
Unfortunately.. most.. if not all that wish for an Islamic system of rule are taking the wrong approach by trying to implement a political Khilafat first..which will be exactly the disaster that the enemies of Islam wish upon us.

I disagree.... A caliph who is an Arab or Turkish will not understand the aspirations of a malay or indonesian and there will discontent. Well all follow islam even today , however there are lot of cultural uniqueness to each region . eg. what you are saying is that a Pope like figure should rule the Islamic world. Not gonna happen. an arab will never let a pasmanda indian muslim to dictate to him.
Also, no one can answer my question of why only guys fro poor countries are keen on khilafa.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

So you can see why its not a U-Turn...but rather an extreme oppostion to the bold part in red.
Its better to work on the red part first, it was a contributing factor to the fall of the last Khilafat.
And remains the biggest hurdle in uniting Muslims today.

the following may sound even more surprising.. but what is needed today is Jihad..not the lower grade guns blazing one...
but a much more difficult one where a massive and an unrelenting search for knowledge is needed.
Knowledge of the Quran.. from different tafasir.. from any and all books on hadiath ..and all sources on the prophets life.
So that one is well equipped to call people from the takfirism that has arisen from najd.
Its when people like you and me will have enough knowledge to post rebuttals to people like Tahirul Qadri or farhat hashmi..
Then people will come.. and set aside their differences to find common ground in the Kalimah.
If such people can achieve this.. then the precedent for Political change will be set... And khilafat will be accepted by all.

Long story short.. there can be NO political Khilafat.. without a religious one.
Unfortunately.. most.. if not all that wish for an Islamic system of rule are taking the wrong approach by trying to implement a political Khilafat first..which will be exactly the disaster that the enemies of Islam wish upon us.



Due to an incompetent Khalifa.. but the seeds of discord were sown earlier.
Pak-BD.. and ottoman empire answers as to why a political Khilafat without a religious one is going to fail.

Couldn't agree more my bro.

 

[SQ8]

I disagree.... A caliph who is an Arab or Turkish will not understand the aspirations of a malay or indonesian and there will discontent. Well all follow islam even today , however there are lot of cultural uniqueness to each region . eg. what you are saying is that a Pope like figure should rule the Islamic world. Not gonna happen. an arab will never let a pasmanda indian muslim to dictate to him.
Also, no one can answer my question of why only guys fro poor countries are keen on khilafa.

Yet today you have democracy in your nation where a Punjabi has understanding of the aspirations of a Bengali.
A caliph is not all supreme, he is to be guided by a council of representatives.
Representatives from all parts of the caliphate.
In a way.. a democracy but ensuring that only the best are elected.(this part is the tricky one).
The idea is not to find differences in islam or impose one's own.. the idea is to remove differences and celebrate the common.
The Eid Dress in Indonesia is different from the eid dress in Turkey...yet they do all follow a similar pattern of prayer and ritual.
The removal of the ideology that declares the Eid practice in Indonesia illegal but the one in Saudi Arabia legal is what is paramount.
The strict control present in the immediate Khilafat following the passing of the prophet is impossible to implement..
What is possible to implement is a desire for common goals.. and a loose alliance.
anything further on that is up to the people..

 

[miss]

Yet today you have democracy in your nation where a Punjabi has understanding of the aspirations of a Bengali.
A caliph is not all supreme, he is to be guided by a council of representatives.
Representatives from all parts of the caliphate.
In a way.. a democracy but ensuring that only the best are elected.(this part is the tricky one).
The idea is not to find differences in islam or impose one's own.. the idea is to remove differences and celebrate the common.
The Eid Dress in Indonesia is different from the eid dress in Turkey...yet they do all follow a similar pattern of prayer and ritual.
The removal of the ideology that declares the Eid practice in Indonesia illegal but the one in Saudi Arabia legal is what is paramount.
The strict control present in the immediate Khilafat following the passing of the prophet is impossible to implement..
What is possible to implement is a desire for common goals.. and a loose alliance.
anything further on that is up to the people..

thats a better idea.. but why to bring religion into this at all. then there are shias, ahmadis, ismaili, bohra etc. how will they be included. what about all the non-muslims. Why not just have a secular democracy where all men are equal and have an equal chance to rule.. Like in india.
On the reference to India.. we are a secular nation which is paramount for different ethnicities to co exist, and also geographocally continuous, and share the same history. Arabia and Malaysia did not share same history, are not geographically continuous . But a loose federation may work, but again if an Indonesian caliph, tells the Saudi to supply a billion barrels for free to Pakistan they will get nothing. if a bangla says that labour markets in Malaysia and UAE should be freed and any one can go there anytime and stay as long as they want, will only result in a massive pushback. why would a prosperous Dubai or malaysia take in 150 million muslims who are poor for the sake of islam?

 

[SQ8]

thats a better idea.. but why to bring religion into this at all. then there are shias, ahmadis, ismaili, bohra etc. how will they be included. what about all the non-muslims. Why not just have a secular democracy where all men are equal and have an equal chance to rule.. Like in india.
On the reference to India.. we are a secular nation which is paramount for different ethnicities to co exist, and also geographocally continuous, and share the same history. Arabia and Malaysia did not share same history, are not geographically continuous . But a loose federation may work, but again if an Indonesian caliph, tells the Saudi to supply a billion barrels for free to Pakistan they will get nothing. if a bangla says that labour markets in Malaysia and UAE should be freed and any one can go there anytime and stay as long as they want, will only result in a massive pushback. why would a prosperous Dubai or malaysia take in 150 million muslims who are poor for the sake of islam?

because that distribution of wealth is part of the core governance in Islam..
it will not be a freebie though.. again these are part of a much more detailed plan..only to be thought up once the core task of removing all extremist and divisive elements is accomplished.

Non-Muslims will be considered equal citizens.. in the same pattern as it was during the earliest Khilafats.. but adapted for todays's world.
Also.. most.. if not all Muslims do not regard the Qadiyani community as Muslims..so one cannot include them.
The rest however, will be included through a common ground policy as they are still considered Muslims.
How this process is to be accomplished requires study and deliberation... which I do not intend to do yet as my focus in on eliminating the misnomer "extremist"(since I am an extremist when it comes to certain matters) by pacifying or negating the forces that encourage divide and misguide people. That is only possible through a deep study of my religion..

 

[MilSpec]

because the political union in Question is based on religious history.
A Khalifa may be apolitical..but cannot be a non-Muslim... The idea is to unite Muslims under a common banner.
So a strong religious identity must be cultivated for it.

Can you say honestly that non-muslims will get equal rights in such a union.
The idea of unity of Muslims - for what? is there any discomfort within the muslim nations of identifying themselves as individual nations.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Pakistan was not created for system of allah, it was created for political rights of a mirnority section in pre 47 India. May be this will switch on a light bulb

" I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam. Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1,300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fairplay to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan. In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan."

Islam was used for the creation of Islam however the idea for a Islam state that would be run according to Islamic principle was quickly disposed because the leaders had a different agenda.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

lol, says the guy who live in West.

This nation was made by all Muslims & no one grant us anything, hell even Pakistan lost major parts like Hyderabad Deccan, Junagadh/Manavadar & Kashmir is still a conflict zone.

The maps, boundaries, provinces, independent date etc were all decided and made by the British empire.

If British would be so friendly with Pakistan they would have give decision on these three major areas.

Pakistan Military was designed, and created by the British. Who were the first Chiefs of Pakistan Military? Exactly.
Btw British Empire was "SOOOO FRIENDLY" with Muslims that they let Muslim leaders harbor in their own land and not only that provided VIP luxuries such as house, cars, Plane.

And in the end Pakistan is country of every Pakistanis, hopefully it will become true Jinnah's Pakistan where everyone will have rights of follow whatever he/she wants. All exteremists will be flushed out.

Yes one day Liberal, secular and Mullah extremists will be flushed out.
Btw do you think Freemasons should also be a allowed to freely practice their work in Pakistan once again as they use to during Jinnah's period?