Secularists should 'mend ways or leave country', says PTI lawmaker

[VCheng]

Ever wondered why Jinnah made no such reference ? State of Medina was not a "state" in the modern sense of the word. And Khilafat (Pan-Islamism) was something Jinnah was strongly opposed to. Nation State itself is a modern western concept. The whole idea of Indian Muslim Nationalism developed by Sir Syed and Aligarians that ultimately led to the creation of Pakistan was inspired by the political theories of John Locke, Milton and Thomas Paine. Orthodox Muslims had rejected this idea outright.

Democracy and Absolute Equality of mankind are not Islamic ideals in the eyes of Orthodox Muslims. Jinnah wanted Pakistan to be a modern democratic welfare state and he believed that Islam taught us democracy and absolute equality. Jinnah's Muslim Pakistan was supposed to be secular in the sense that Religion was not to be the business of the state but an individual choice. Jinnah, just like Iqbal, didn't find the idea of separation of state and church to be in contradiction with the true spirit of Islam.

Those who are trying to recreate a romanticized City State from the seventh century are bound to fail in the 21st. Time always marches ahead.

 

[coffee_cup]

Fake "liberals" and right wing Mullahs are a huge problem for Pakistan!

We must get rid of both.

 

[Verve]

Rise of the Hindu Fascists in our east will leave us no choice (& possibly force) to do as Jinnah and Iqbal wanted us to.

Whether you claim to be a secular or a liberal Muslim, hate filled Fascist Hindu will still treat you as a Muslim. You confused lot, do you think the Hindu will spare you if he's given a free hand to take your life? Hindu will teach you.

 

[SoulSpokesman]

Would it be a fair position to state that our beloved Qaid wasnt an expert on Islam, never having been formally versed in theology and that his position on statehood was driven mainly by his exposure to Western ideas?

Regards

 

[M. Sarmad]

I believe this was Iqbal

"Jalal-E-Padshahi Ho K Jamhoori Tamasha Ho
Juda Ho Deen Siasat Se To Reh Jati Hai Changaizi "

I will leave it to the readers to decide for themselves what Iqbal may have thought.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/alla...giving-us-pakistan.468651/page-6#post-9045515

Nobody can answer that with absolute authority.

Why not ? It's plain logic. He simply never mentioned it in any of his speeches/interviews because that never was his goal/ideal. He was a realist, and not some starry-eyed romantic, who understood it quite well that if a system that reportedly worked successfully in seventh century tribal Arabia for 15-20 years only, even if somehow replicated in the twentieth century modern India, was bound to fail.

Obviously times have changed human mind has evolved, needs are different .......... but still whatever you may wish to call it, it was a system addressing needs of people.

Of course. It was a political system that successfully addressed the needs of seventh century Arab tribes. This political system, unlike Islam, was not meant for all times and all places.

So he was a person who was following Quran in its true spirit.

And yet the entire Muslim religious establishment in united India was vehemently opposed to Jinnah's Pakistan Movement. !!

I think state doesn't hold congregations to make non Muslims recite Shahdah? If that is the only concern? However I will disagree as far as if anyone wants governors of Pakistan to not to derive laws from immutable laws of Quran.

But the state does treat its Non Muslim citizens as second class citizens, and they do not enjoy the same rights as Muslims.

And its interesting that you were just telling us that Orthodox Muslims had been misled by Mullahs and you admitted that Jinnah was a true follower of Qur'an. You accepted that Jinnah's ideals (i.e Democracy and Absolute equality of mankind) were indeed Islamic ideals ... But you also advocate/support the opposite (Constitutional Discrimination against Non Muslim minorities)?? Hypocrisy much ? or confused ?

 

[Amalek]

Rise of the Hindu Fascists in our east will leave us no choice (& possibly force) to do as Jinnah and Iqbal wanted us to.

Whether you claim to be a secular or a liberal Muslim, hate filled Fascist Hindu will still treat you as a Muslim. You confused lot, do you think the Hindu will spare you if he's given a free hand to take your life? Hindu will teach you.

I don't think you have ever met any actual Hindus in your lifetime. They are not the bogeyman of your nightmares. There are normal people, like you and me. Just because they follow a different religion or lifestyle does not make them inherently evil. Don't forget our ancestors were Hindus too not too long in the past.

 

[Verve]

I don't think you have ever met any actual Hindus in your lifetime. They are not the bogeyman of your nightmares. There are normal people, like you and me. Just because they follow a different religion or lifestyle does not make them inherently evil. Don't forget our ancestors were Hindus too not too long in the past.

You are an idiot who thinks I've not met Hindus ever.

I studied (school, college and university) with many and I have been to Hindustan as well. And I have had an uncensored version of what a Delhi street Hindus think of Pakistan and Pakistanis after a bit of alcohol in their systems.

Those Hindus who know you at personal level they are almost always fine, but saying that in Gujarat the many Muslims killed were neighbours and friends of Hindus who killed them!

And let me tell you one thing, Hindi speaking Hindus and Brahmins are the real problem and Pakistan haters - it really does seem like a built in hate, being passed down every generation. Tamil Hindus are generally OK and very much neutral towards Pakistanis. And that's based on 11 years living with both northern and southern Hindus.

 

[Finer]

@I.R.A Let them dream of their secular Pakistan. They are just frustrated as the majority doesn't give a damn about their shrieking.

If Greater Pakistan is ever to take place, that would mean Jinnah's dream for Pakistan would flourish eventually thus undoing all the established acts in the constitution defined later.

Logically, Pakistan cannot expand with the rigid system at place. You wanna know why? That is the puzzle for your akal [brain] to figure out.

 

[Verve]

If Greater Pakistan is ever to take place, that would mean Jinnah's dream for Pakistan would flourish eventually thus undoing all the established acts in the constitution defined later.

Logically, Pakistan cannot expand with the rigid system at place. You wanna know why? That is the puzzle for your akal [brain] to figure out.

You akal is still stuck on Liberalism and Secularism. Stuck! That's as far as your freethinking brain got to!?

And at least I'm thinking beyond theocracy and the liberal secular western democracy systems.

 

[I.R.A]

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/alla...giving-us-pakistan.468651/page-6#post-9045515

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/alla...giving-us-pakistan.468651/page-6#post-9045515

It is not my fault if you misunderstood Iqbal. Iqbal had nothing to do with likes of Osama Bin Laden, Qazi or whatever. I have repeatedly said and will say it for the last time

Any system that doesn't derive its laws from immutable guidance and laws given in the holy Quran is bound to fail on many fronts. And for the last time Islamic state is opposite of Theocracy and a Secular state. Now you can relate whatever to Iqbal and Quaid its your understanding for me its clear what they wanted for Muslims of sub continent and it wasn't a theocracy or a secular state.

Why not ? It's plain logic. He simply never mentioned it in any of his speeches/interviews because that never was his goal/ideal.

Okay well then according to you and people who think like you Quaid and Iqbal were demanding the same thing as congress and indian nationalist mullah .............. but disagreed just because they would have failed to rule a separate piece of land?

He was a realist, and not some starry-eyed romantic, who understood it quite well that if a system that reportedly worked successfully in seventh century tribal Arabia for 15-20 years only, even if somehow replicated in the twentieth century modern India, was bound to fail.

Don't make twentieth century india look like as if it was at some advance stages of human development and had reached Mars. But still I don't know how much human needs as regards to justice, freedom, equality etc would have changed from that era to idnian modern (laughable) era.

Of course. It was a political system that successfully addressed the needs of seventh century Arab tribes. This political system, unlike Islam, was not meant for all times and all places.

Irony ................. you have problems with something that you yourself think is meant for all times and places. Azlan please I don't mind if you don't agree to my argument "Islamic state is opposite of Theocracy and a secular state" but atleast listen to your own inner thoughts and stop misrepresenting Jinnah and Iqbal.

And yet the entire Muslim religious establishment in united India was vehemently opposed to Jinnah's Pakistan Movement. !!

Okay you tell us why they were opposing Jinnah or vice versa when they were content with idea of a united secular india? .............. why Jinnah had problem with that then?

But the state does treat its Non Muslim citizens as second class citizens, and they do not enjoy the same rights as Muslims.

Did I ever claim that Pakistan of today is an Islamic state?

And its interesting that you were just telling us that Orthodox Muslims had been misled by Mullahs and you admitted that Jinnah was a true follower of Qur'an. You accepted that Jinnah's ideals (i.e Democracy and Absolute equality of mankind) were indeed Islamic ideals ... But you also advocate/support the opposite (Constitutional Discrimination against Non Muslim minorities)?? Hypocrisy much ? or confused ?

Ridiculous ................. you disappoint me buddy. You have either clearly misunderstood or have deliberately twisted whatever I had said.

For readers information

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/a-nam-nad-ds-anrz-astan-n-u-mant.484480/

Any neutral member can read our comments on above mentioned thread and let me know if I have really supported what Mr Azlan says. I will be more than happy to correct myself.

@I.R.A Let them dream of their secular Pakistan. They are just frustrated as the majority doesn't give a damn about their shrieking.

You haven't read my comments yet about traditions, hear say and book that is wrongly considered to be second most authentic book after Quran (the whole apparatus of a theocracy to derive personal laws from). I would request don't form any opinion about me yet because we may have some heated debates in which you may not like my views.

 

[Musafir117]

@majority
If majority is there we have JI and JUI(F) and mulla burqa posh ruling us majority

 

[Finer]

You akal is still stuck on Liberalism and Secularism. Stuck! That's as far as your freethinking brain got to!?

And at least I'm thinking beyond theocracy and the liberal secular western democracy systems.

You cannot think beyond when you endorse one-sided close-minded ideology. Liberal/Secular means equality and open-mind meaning go beyond, hence attests to the traits of free-thinking meaning influence-free from anything including Islam. You have to judge the information unbiased. But your support for one-sided close-minded ideology suggests otherwise.

Why do you think we are pro-Liberal ideology? That was the clue.

 

[Verve]

You haven't read my comments yet about traditions, hear say and book that is wrongly considered to be second most authentic book after Quran (the whole apparatus of a theocracy to derive personal laws from). I would request don't form any opinion about me yet because we may have some heated debates in which you may not like my views.

Book or a large volume of?

I got labelled 'wahabi' by own relatives for questioning them on wasting huge amounts celebrating birthday of Prophet S.A.W. Instead of buying expensive clothes/jubbas etc and extravaganza meals going in own stomachs, I think we should give all that money directly to the poor and needy but no, I am labelled Wahabi for such opinions.

I think I know which book(s) you are pointing at. I am inclined to agree and in addition I do not believe in any of these man made schools either, those are all divisions and for power. And each of these schools justify their relevance as 'we will be one who will enter paradise, being the right ones'!

£3k for a 5 day retreat with some 'world renowned' Sheikh in a remote luxury hotel ... That's how Deen is taught these days! And when you ask these Talibs, 'have you read even the translation of Quran to understand what Allah is saying', they reply 'we will after we understand Hadith first' and 'it's more important to get things like vuzu and namaz correct foremost'. Hadith before Quran. Hmmm

I don't discuss Deen with them anymore.

You cannot think beyond when you endorse one-sided close-minded ideology. Liberal/Secular means equality and open-mind meaning go beyond, hence attests to the traits of free-thinking meaning influence-free from anything including Islam. You have to judge the information unbiased. But your support for one-sided close-minded ideology suggests otherwise.

Why do you think we are pro-Liberal ideology? That was the clue.

I do not need to look at Islam wearing glasses of 300 or so years old man made concepts of liberalism and Secularism.

No one is stopping you from being a fool who does. Wear whatever glasses and have whatever bias you want to understand the words of Allah.

 

[I.R.A]

Book or a large volume of?

............... Well I am grateful to Bukhari for one thing that he reduced the number of his collection from 600,000 to 2000+, who knows what would have happened if everything was accepted as authentic by him.

I got labelled 'wahabi' by own relatives for questioning them on wasting huge amounts celebrating birthday of Prophet S.A.W. Instead of buying expensive clothes/jubbas etc and extravaganza meals going in own stomachs, I think we should give all that money directly to the poor and needy but no, I am labelled Wahabi for such opinions.

Well ask them to celebrate birthday of each and every messenger of ALLAH with equal zeal, why this discrimination when we believe in all of them. I hope 365 days would fall short for that

I think I know which book(s) you are pointing at. I am inclined to agree and in addition I do not believe in any of these man made schools either, those are all divisions and for power.

If you haven't then you should give a reading to Allama Tamana Amadi's (Tasweer ka doosra rukh). Plus Abdul Wadud, Shabir Ahmed, G.A. Perwez, Uzair and many others.

Interestingly there is a character who appears to have collected hadeeth both for shia and sunni, however, both shia and sunni don't accept each others hadeeth books.

Hadith before Quran. Hmmm

10% Quran 80% Hadeeth and 10% personal views is religion of today's Muslim. Hadeeth has been given authority over Quranic verses, the concept of Nasikh Mansukh all stems from hadeeth. And some hadeeth even tried confusing people with regards to Quran whether its complete or not.

 

[M. Sarmad]

It is not my fault if you misunderstood Iqbal.

I have misunderstood Iqbal ?? Really ?? it's not my fault if you refuse to read what has been posted already... Let me post it again. Allama Muhammad Iqbal, in fact, categorically stated that Islam did allow Separation of Church and State, although he himself was not a great admirer of Western Secularism:

............. There were, a short time ago, two main lines of thought in Turkey represented by the Nationalist Party and the Party of Religious Reform. The point of supreme interest with the Nationalist Party is above all the State and not Religion. With these thinkers religion as such has no independent function. The state is the essential factor in national life which determines the character and function of all other factors. They, therefore, reject old ideas about the function of State and Religion, and accentuate the separation of Church and State. Now the structure of Islam as a religio-political system, no doubt, does permit such a view,.though personally I think it is a mistake to suppose that the idea of state is more dominant and rules all other ideas embodied in the system of Islam.....

http://www.allamaiqbal.com/works/prose/english/reconstruction/06.htm


^^ These are Iqbal's words, not my own

Irony ................. you have problems with something that you yourself think is meant for all times and places.

No bro, I have absolutely no problem with Islam (or any other religion for that matter). I have problem with those only who present their own twisted and narrow interpretation(s) of Islam as the True Islam and the only acceptable version, and then try to impose it on others.

Okay well then according to you and people who think like you Quaid and Iqbal were demanding the same thing as congress and indian nationalist mullah .............. but disagreed just because they would have failed to rule a separate piece of land?

Jinnah was not demanding the same thing as Congress. Jinnah wanted one-third Muslim representation in Central Legislature of United India, residual powers he wanted to be put in the domain of the provinces rather than centre; Muslim majority provinces of Bengal and Punjab he suggested should be representation in proportion to their population. Nehru rejected all these suggestions. It was communal posture of Congress that alienated Jinnah in the first place.

Jinnah was ready to give up his demand for a separate Muslim homeland as late as 1946 if Congress agreed to Fixed Muslim representation. He only wanted to safeguard the rights of Muslims.

Ironically, He feared that The Hindu majority would do to the Muslim minority in United India what the Muslim majority is doing to Non Muslim minorities in Maududi's Pakistan today !!

Ridiculous ................. you disappoint me buddy. You have either clearly misunderstood or have deliberately twisted whatever I had said.

For readers information

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/a-nam-nad-ds-anrz-astan-n-u-mant.484480/

Any neutral member can read our comments on above mentioned thread and let me know if I have really supported what Mr Azlan says. I will be more than happy to correct myself.

Thanks for the link. You actually do support Constitutional Discrimination against minorities in Pakistan, but refuse to accept it. It's there for everyone to see.

And for the last time Islamic state is opposite of Theocracy and a Secular state.

You are entitled to your opinion. You can keep repeating/parroting it. But don't expect others to agree with you until and unless you are able to answer simple questions that have been asked to you repeatedly (which you have failed to answer).

But I won't blame you. You, just like many others here, are a victim of state-sponsored religious-chauvinistic indoctrination via distortion.