Why is our full history not taught to us in Pakistan Studies?

[VCheng]

There is a big difference between a MUSLIM country and an ISLAMIC country. Many people around the world seem to get the two concepts confused, and I don’t blame them. However, there are clear distinctions:

An Islamic country, or "Islamic Republic", is a nation whereby civil and common laws are based strictly on the Islamic Sharia code, and imposed forcibly on its citizens. All matters relating the economic, religious and cultural matters are handled through an appointed Mullah or an elected council of Mullahs. Personal independence of individuals is significantly curtailed in these countries and consumption and sale of alcohol, idol-worship, western clothing, blasphemy and apostasy would be considered illegal. Such countries that mimic this concept include Saudi Arabia and Iran.

A Muslim country is a nation whereby civil and common laws are based loosely on Islamic values and principles - hence Sharia is not imposed forcibly on its citizens. Modern democratic values are promoted and entertained in matters concerning economic, religious and cultural matters while personal independence of individuals is respected. Such countries that mimic this concept include Turkey and Malaysia.

Please do note that the official name for Pakistan is the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN. So I guess that makes it clear.

Pakistan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Pakistan (Urdu: پَاکِسْتَان [ˈpaːkɪstaːn]),[d] officially the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (اِسلامی جمہوریہ پاکِستان), is a country in South Asia.

 

[AlKardai]

The euro savages built their wealth by stealing them from the rest of the world and now they lecture us about adopting their culture and values to become successful.

As with all things, the winners write history.
But the winners won't necessarily be the winners for much longer. The power balance is tipping more evenly and will in the future, move almost entirely to the East. The Barbarisms will likely be shown more and more as the power tips the other way, but I actually don't think Eastern nations would do the same as the West has in terms of upkeeping their civilisations. This is because the rise of the East being slower has lead to stronger cultural and economic foundations being created without specifically exploiting other regions or gaining a high reliance on their exploitation.

This is why I hate desi liberals so much because they simplify their views to look at how prosperous so and so European country is so we need to be like them, without taking into account the 400 years of earth transfer from east and south to the west!

Absolutely, and the rubber band will soon come to constrict back to its original form, as the grip is lost in the power struggle between East and West. The West has been my home and I am thankful for it. But its decline is written on the wall- it is an unavoidable fact that all the Uncle Toms refuse to acknowledge, but may indeed see for themselves within their lifetime.

My main hope is that Africa rises as a beacon of prosperity, morality and humanity after having such unspeakable things forced upon them for millenia. Such would be poetic justice, but is also a real possibility with these countries greatly advancing in both population and development as well as having a greater understanding of the vast natural resources that they possess.

As for Pakistan, its future is entirely what it makes of it and it mainly depends on finding a valid industry or skill to push the nation into a trade surplus as a potential development boom occurs.

 

[Ssan]

Taking a step back.

In 1947, Jinnah stance was:

- Religion will not be a business of the state.
- The army will remain subservient to the public.

This was a historical fact.

To say that Jinnah, in 1947, wanted an Islamic state and teaching history lessons based on the false premise is wrong.

What the public or the state wants today is a different story and for Pakistanis to decide.

This is simply wrong.

First of all, the quote that this comes from has a context. It was a speech primarily addressed to the minorities in Pakistan who had suffered from violence and bloodshed post partition. He was telling them that the formation of the two states had to happen and there was no way around it.

Second, what Jinnah actually said in his August address was that he wanted Pakistan to become a civil state like the Great Britain. We can call it secularism of an American kind. This much is probably true.

But here’s the rub. The UK has a state religion. The queen reagent there is the head of the religious church there. The “secularism” of Great Britain particularly in the 1940s that Jinnah is referring to in his August address is actually a fairly conservative society with a state religion and frankly with the monarch heading the church of said state religion. Unlike today, in 1940s, UK had no laws or rules engendering secularism (today one could argue UK atleast signs EU chapter).

The secularism it had (and even now) was essentially one that had the following:- 1) freedom of religion for all, 2) protection of minorities, 3) some degree of institutional separation (parliament that comes up with laws). It had a state religion then as it does now. The queen then headed the Church of England then as it does now. And it was a conservative society where laws were indeed made based on religion.

So when push came to shove and we had to write our objectives resolution, Jinnah, himself, selected religious figures to sit and advise on the drafting of the objectives resolution. That fundamentally enshrined the three principles above I have listed in the objectives resolution. Which was passed by the assembly with over 3/4ths majority. But also as Islam as state religion and our state as an Islamic republic.

So, we need to realize one of two things:-

1) we were never meant to be the sort of secular state that the secular liberals want at this moment. Reading that into Jinnah is an anachronism that frankly is silly. Given all the other history around the Pakistan movement. See for example constituting a panel of religious ulema under Syed Sulaymaniyah Nadvi after Lahore resolution to determine what is needed to be an Islamic state.

2) that the secularism that Jinnah wanted was compatible with the idea of having an Islamic republic in the first place. This might confuse a lot of you but it happens to be the case and is grounded in history and reality. One might argue that American secularism was actually conceived of in the Abbasid empire post mihna of ibn Hanbal.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

Arabs did overlap and incorporate their pagan past into Islam. Mecca was a home for their idols. Many other rituals and customs migrated over such as the reverence of the black stone. That's not to say anything is wrong with that, it's just natural evolution of a culture and its spiritual expression. So don't think you are any different from Christians or Hindus.

Now that you're exposed, in fact explicitly admit to it...
Was your cover and stealth for as long as it lasted, made the reader(s) stumped, perhaps on your views, stances or narrative.
Clarity, in this case goes a long way... now double down and hit the fifth... cause I don't care.
Carry on!

 

[Ssan]

Who's "they"?



A Muslim majority country is not equivalent to an Islamic country. Jinnah and the Muslim League opposed theocracy.

Pakistan had no state religion until 1973.

Pakistan had no Sharia court until 1980.

Pakistan's first Minister For Law and Justice was Jogendra Nath Mandal, a Hindu by faith, who was tasked by Jinnah to write up laws for the newly independent country. No Qari sahab was hired to write any Sharia Law.

Pakistan Movement was to protect minorities (the largest being Muslims) against a Brahmin Raj, not about establishing an "Islamic state".

Pakistan was created for everyone...it is not property of Sunni supremacists and was never meant to be an Islamic state.

Let’s just put this into perspective and assume for one minute that Pakistan was indeed “made in the name of Islam”. Okay, now ask yourself these questions:

1) Why was Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, Majlis-e-Ahrar-ul-Islam and Jamaat-e-Islami opposed to Pakistan's independence in 1947?

2) Why did Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, Majlis-e-Ahrar-ul-Islam and Jamaat-e-Islami refer to Pakistan as “Najistan” and Muhammad Ali Jinnah as “Kafir-e-Azam”?

Answer these questions if you can.

Read on: Muslim Pakistan vs Islamic Pakistan

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1864528243607151&id=780770378649615

Read objectives resolution. And how Jinnah selected religious ulema to advise on its drafting. The panel was constituted before his death and passed after his death.

Also see panel constituted by Muslim league post Lahore resolution, in 1940s, headed by Syed Sulayman Nadvi to address what is the requirement of an Islamic republic.

Having an Islamic republic does not necessarily conflict with having a secular civil state which has participation from all minorities.

For context, in Jinnahs time, the most extreme Muslim experiment in secularism was probably Kemalism. But even Attaturk had Sunnism as a state religion (one of his 12 principles). And government mandated support of said Sunnism through the Diyanet ( religious ministry). The sort of secularism you want to read into Jinnah is a total and complete anachronism.

 

[AA_]

As with all things, the winners write history.
But the winners won't necessarily be the winners for much longer. The power balance is tipping more evenly and will in the future, move almost entirely to the East. The Barbarisms will likely be shown more and more as the power tips the other way, but I actually don't think Eastern nations would do the same as the West has in terms of upkeeping their civilisations. This is because the rise of the East being slower has lead to stronger cultural and economic foundations being created without specifically exploiting other regions or gaining a high reliance on their exploitation.

Absolutely, and the rubber band will soon come to constrict back to its original form, as the grip is lost in the power struggle between East and West. The West has been my home and I am thankful for it. But its decline is written on the wall- it is an unavoidable fact that all the Uncle Toms refuse to acknowledge, but may indeed see for themselves within their lifetime.

My main hope is that Africa rises as a beacon of prosperity, morality and humanity after having such unspeakable things forced upon them for millenia. Such would be poetic justice, but is also a real possibility with these countries greatly advancing in both population and development as well as having a greater understanding of the vast natural resources that they possess.

As for Pakistan, its future is entirely what it makes of it and it mainly depends on finding a valid industry or skill to push the nation into a trade surplus as a potential development boom occurs.

Beautifully said and agreed on all points

 

[AlKardai]

Beautifully said and agreed on all points

Good to know that my braincell is still in shape lol

 

[Ssan]

Now that you're exposed, in fact explicitly admit to it...
Was your cover and stealth for as long as it lasted, made the reader(s) stumped, perhaps on your views, stances or narrative.
Clarity, in this case goes a long way... now double down and hit the fifth... cause I don't care.
Carry on!

It’s clear he has no idea what he is talking about. Leave him in his ignorance. Islam was so quickly adopted by ajamis in Persia that we quickly became the majority of the ummah by the time of the Unmayads. Islamic history is more Ajami history than it is Arab history.

 

[AA_]

It’s clear he has no idea what he is talking about. Leave him in his ignorance. Islam was so quickly adopted by ajamis in Persia that we quickly became the majority of the ummah by the time of the Unmayads. Islamic history is more Ajami history than it is Arab history.

I would say, it was the second phase of Islamic growth. Many of the Kufars and their worshippers falsely claim that Islamic golden age occurred prior to Islam/Muslims. Muslim Persians played a large in the golden age. The Arabs provided stability and security for the Muslims. Everything is interconnected.

Good to know that my braincell is still in shape lol

Well he’s mad that we’re not Christians and eating pork lol imo

 

[LeGenD]

@AA_

Why are you such a foul mouthed twat?

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

Pakistan literally was created on basis of Islam and our population being Muslim. It wasn’t created because we were “Indus Valley Civilization” and needed a separate homeland. You need to just stfu!

Pakistan was established for the religious freedom and economic uplift for the Muslims of this region.
Not to become a theocratic state like Iran or Afghanistan.
In fact,Jinnah dreamed Pakistan as a state that can ensure social and economic freedom of its people regardless of their caste, ethnicity and even religion.
Generals and Mullahs just hijacked the whole purpose of Pakistan for their own short term gains.

Only mistake Muslim League ( or let's say Quaid e Azm) did is that they could not formulate a documented system of what they want to be implemented in Pakistan.

And the result is that even after 75 years,we don't know who actually rules Pakistan( it's judiciary it's Jernails or it's Politicians? our government system has become a khichri. every lalu panju can hijack the whole system any time any day)

Indus Valley civilization is a part of our history and there is no shame in teaching it to our kids

 

[AA_]

@AA_

Why are you such a foul mouthed twat?

Ah the famous Legend, our residential American *** kisser Moderator. I was hoping we’d crossed path, but in a more civilized way.

I have this small problem, well not really wall considering how big my mouth is. I can articulate proper arguments, but I also like to play rough at times.

Going forward, I will better manage my language.

Pakistan was established for the religious freedom and economic uplift for the Muslims

So basically an Islamic state for Muslim? None of previous posts advocate theocracy for Pakistan, but the system should have it roots in Islamic law, not some colonial cum faux blasphemy cum secular crap you see today. This is why Pakistans like ship floating rudderless. I want us to be the Indonesia or Malaysia of South Asia. Not advocating Iran or Afghanistan here

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

Our people are still arguing what they want of Pakistan.
Extremists want it be a fanatic breed production factory to be used for their Ummah purposes.
Jernail bootlickers want jernail rule
And political parties just want to keep the halwa system as it is so that it can used for their own purpose whenever needed
While the Nationalists are just busy in trolling mullahs Jernails and foul politicians
I think we really need to formulate a well organised system for education,state's survival narrative of, economic uplift of people and then launch a political struggle.One day we will really turn Pakistan into what QeA really dreamt of.

Islamic state

Muslim State actually

 

[Neelo]

You can't form a country on the basis of a religion unless it originates and represents your ethnicity. Judaism is for the Jews. Islam is for the Arabs. Hinduism is for the pajeets.

The west understands this and integrated their faith into the state, americanized, protestantism etc and became secular republics.

Iran is a great example of internalizing Islam, they went the sect route and took ownership of Shiaism and its basically an Iranian religion. Very smart. That's what civilizations that last the ages do, they adapt. I am sure they will take another form in a few hundred years to keep going.

Only retarded Pakistani mullahs on the payroll of retarded establishment thought this was a good experiment to carry out since the 50s. Jinnah was a western educated intelligent secular who wanted to create an inclusive and forward thinking Pakistan that would have developed into a 1st world country like South Korea, Japan, China.

Look at what they've done to Afghanistan, it's a clusterf**k, the concept doesn't work, has never worked.

You're wasting your time with him. Guy cannot provide a shred of evidence.

Basically what I meant by the Zia generation unable to be independent thinkers.

He literally posted a fake quote of Jinnah and when I asked him to provide a source of that quote from Jinnah's Archive he ignored it.

This is the level of intelligence of the average Islamic extremist in Pakistan.

 

[hussain0216]

You can't form a country on the basis of a religion unless it originates and represents your ethnicity. Judaism is for the Jews. Islam is for the Arabs. Hinduism is for the pajeets.

The west understands this and integrated their faith into the state, americanized, protestantism etc and became secular republics.

Iran is a great example of internalizing Islam, they went the sect route and took ownership of Shiaism and its basically an Iranian religion. Very smart. That's what civilizations that last the ages do, they adapt. I am sure they will take another form in a few hundred years to keep going.

Only retarded Pakistani mullahs on the payroll of retarded establishment thought this was a good experiment to carry out since the 50s. Jinnah was a western educated intelligent secular who wanted to create an inclusive and forward thinking Pakistan that would have developed into a 1st world country like South Korea, Japan, China.

Look at what they've done to Afghanistan, it's a clusterf**k, the concept doesn't work, has never worked.

Stop being stupid

Islam is for humanity,, it is not for Arabs that's where your tripping up

The Muslims of South Asia were too diverse to rally behind ethnicity when we were all so different

The only thing we had in common was faith and this was the basis of Pakistan, freedom for the Muslims




You want to make a ethnocentric state, go make it somewhere else


Islam cannot be changed or revised or reformed

Islam is Islam it is eternal, it's what sets it apart from everything else

You're wasting your time with him. Guy cannot provide a shred of evidence.

Basically what I meant by the Zia generation unable to be independent thinkers.

He literally posted a fake quote of Jinnah and when I asked him to provide a source of that quote from Jinnah's Archive he ignored it.

This is the level of intelligence of the average Islamic extremist in Pakistan.

There is no point in wasting time with you , because you think all the DIFFERENT Muslims of South Asia from different areas would rally behind ethnocentric bullshit that centered on the current Pakistani landmass

First tell me why a Muslim from Kerala or UP for example would give a toss about the IVC and how he would rally behind a state made upon that history?