Zakir Naik rejects Two Nation Thoery

[qsaark]

Two Nation Theory is wrong as it has no basis in Islam and that he disagrees with it totally.

Ejaz Saheb, would you explain this to me from the Islamic perspective?

 

[EjazR]

@FireFighter

None of the devout religious muslims and ulemas from for e.g. Deoband e.t.c supported the Two Nation Theory either. Infact, Iqbal never mentioned the words two nation theory as well. Some of the first graduates of AMU and his close friends of Sir Syed Ahmed were Hindus.

The Two Nation Theory was first explicitly propounded by Sarvarkar in his book Hindutva .

 

[asq]

Having read all that I would like to present following.

U.S. and Canada live as two countries side by side, their trade is intertwined so that one cannot tell if it is from Canada or U.S. no restrictions no hurdles. both benifit.

their border is so open that at some places there are houses half in U.S and half in Canada.

so if the leaders of India and Pakistan wanted to make it so, they could do it by over comming their short sighted visions and their greed for high offices.

What is done is done, sit down talk like mature people, learn from and open up border like U.S. and Canada.

If Indian leadership could have little courage and allow Kashmir problem be solved by its people.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Xtremeownage..looks like you have developed love for Fox and idiots oh add Arun shuri....classic example of Muslims eating Muslims to divide more Muslims..shame on you..pathetic of you..

This thread is going no where except few of you putting hate..i challenge you there aren't threads on Priests or Gurus or anti Islam morons but thread on Zaid Hamid and Zakir..keep on going you'll all end up ruining your own homes for the love of externals..

Ah yeah the man who dances and and money is all over him..watch for this controversial videos on youtube and everywhere else where most of the sunni Mullahs have objected too and valid are their objections..tahir qadari the one who celebrates fake Jesus birthday the christian biblical jesus? wow Xtremeownage you're making alot of sense lol..google the birthday of Isa-Inb-Mariam when you find it do let us know its not 25th..

some of you are classical hypocrites and this thread is off road..
Mods I request to close this thread...only hatred is spread here and people are not willing to look at the positive sides..

 

[Omar1984]

Having read all that I would like to present following.

U.S. and Canada live as two countries side by side, their trade is intertwined so that one cannot tell if it is from Canada or U.S. no restrictions no hurdles. both benifit.

their border is so open that at some places there are houses half in U.S and half in Canada.

so if the leaders of India and Pakistan wanted to make it so, they could do it by over comming their short sighted visions and their greed for high offices.

What is done is done, sit down talk like mature people, learn from and open up border like U.S. and Canada.

If Indian leadership could have little courage and allow Kashmir problem be solved by its people.

Keep the borders between Pakistan and India closed forever. Pakistan-India relations is no where near U.S.-Canada relations. No Pakistani should trust indians, they hate Pakistan's very existence and unlike U.S. and Canada, Pakistan and India dont share the same ideologies infact we have conflicting ideologies and conflicting interests.

If Pakistan opens borders with any neighbour it will be with a friendly neighbour like China, not india.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Omar1984..superb answer..

 

[FireFighter]

@FireFighter

None of the devout religious muslims and ulemas from for e.g. Deoband e.t.c supported the Two Nation Theory either. Infact, Iqbal never mentioned the words two nation theory as well. Some of the first graduates of AMU and his close friends of Sir Syed Ahmed were Hindus.

The Two Nation Theory was first explicitly propounded by Sarvarkar in his book Hindutva .

See this is what you guys are fed with. Disinformation and total lies.

Amongst the prominent elite Deoband Ulema who supported the creation of Pakistan were Mualana Shabir Ahmed and Ashraf Ali Thanavi, whilst majority resisted only b/c they saw division of muslims and were of the opinion that muslims would come to power/rule again once the British leave. They been proven wrong in all accounts b/c that has not happened.


Here is Iqbal's rebuttal to Nehru where two nation theory originated:

In conclusion I must put a straight question to pundit Jawahar Lal, how is India's problem to be solved if the majority community will neither concede the minimum safeguards necessary for the protection of a minority of 80 million people, nor accept the award of a third party; but continue to talk of a kind of nationalism which works out only to its own benefit? This position can admit of only two alternatives. Either the Indian majority community will have to accept for itself the permanent position of an agent of British imperialism in the East, or the country will have to be redistributed on a basis of religious, historical and cultural affinities so as to do away with the question of electorates and the communal problem in its present form.

It's been 60+ years but that communal problem in India still has not resolved where we have witnessed systematic massacres against Sikhs, Muslims, and Christian minorities.

 

[kallol]

It's been 60+ years but that communal problem in India still has not resolved where we have witnessed systematic massacres against Sikhs, Muslims, and Christian minorities.

Dear Firefighter,

Let me repeat the questions again :

How are the condition of the minorities of pakistan ?
The rules and rights of them ?
Their social conditions ?
The % population in 1947 and now ?
The blashpemy law and its fallout ?
The representation of minorities in all forums ?
The idolization of the minorities as we do in India ?

Charity begins at home. Implement an universally accepted model and we will adopt.

&

 

[EjazR]

See this is what you guys are fed with. Disinformation and total lies.

Amongst the prominent elite Deoband Ulema who supported the creation of Pakistan were Mualana Shabir Ahmed and Ashraf Ali Thanavi, whilst majority resisted only b/c they saw division of muslims and were of the opinion that muslims would come to power/rule again once the British leave. They been proven wrong in all accounts b/c that has not happened.


Here is Iqbal's rebuttal to Nehru where two nation theory originated:



It's been 60+ years but that communal problem in India still has not resolved where we have witnessed systematic massacres against Sikhs, Muslims, and Christian minorities.

I stated that the majority of the ulema did not support the Two Nation theory. Even the two alims you mentioned did not support two nation theory as far as I know but did lend their support to the Pakistan movement after the increasingly hostile environment post 1940.

The other person who did try to justify the two nation theory religiously was Maududi. Pertinent to remind you that he had not completed his religious education and was a journalist by profession.

As I mentioned earlier, rejection of two nation theory does not mean the end of Pakistan. What I am saying is Pakistan does not need this "ideology" to continue to exist.


About Iqbal's rejoinder, do you have the source and ahve you read the entire statement that he gave. Do you know what Nehru said and in what context Iqbal replied.

Notice he does not mention Pakistan or creation of an independent state.

I quote here his concluding statements he gave to the Muslim League in 1930

Gentlemen, I have finished. In conclusion I cannot but impress upon you that the present crisis in the history of India demands complete organisation and unity of will and purpose in the Muslim community, both in your own interest as a community, and in the interest of India as a whole. The political bondage of India has been and is a source of infinite misery to the whole of Asia. It has suppressed the spirit of the East and wholly deprived her of that joy of self-expression which once made her the creator of a great and glorious culture. We have a duty towards India where we are destined to live and die. We have a duty towards Asia, especially Muslim Asia. And since 70 millions of Muslims in a single country constitute a far more valuable asset to Islam than all the countries of Muslim Asia put together, we must look at the Indian problem not only from the Muslim point of view, but also from the standpoint of the Indian Muslim as such. Our duty towards Asia and India cannot be loyally performed without an organised will fixed on a definite purpose. In your own interest, as a political entity among other political entities of India, such an equipment is an absolute necessity.

Presidential Address, annual session of the All-India Muslim League, Allahabad, December 1930, by Sir Muhammad Iqbal

 

[EjazR]

Ejaz Saheb, would you explain this to me from the Islamic perspective?

Qsaark Sir,

My own views as I mentioned above about it being against the Quran and Sunnah are based on the work by Jamiat-Uleama-i-Hind head Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madani who wrote Islam aur Muttahida Qaumiyat in 1938. He has provided a number of theological arguments on what Ummah and Qaum is and refutation of the TWT in the light of Quran and Sunnah. It is comprehensive work and highly recommended. The book can give you a much better explanation than what can be paraphrased in my own mismatched words.

Composite Nationalism and Islam (Muttahida Qaumiyat Aur Islam) - $11.95 : Al-Rashad Books and Gifts


The main thrust of the book is Islam is a spiritual universal concept while Qaumiyat is a geographical concept. Qaum does not distinguish between religions. So a Sindhi hindu and Sindhi muslim belong to the same Qaum as does the Keralite Christian and Keralite Muslim, or the Bengali Hindu and Bengali Muslim or say an American Muslim and an American Christian. They speak the same languages have similar mannerism and may even eat the same food.

However, to restrict Islam within borders or using nationalism as basis of Islam is to restrict the universal message of Islam to geographical borders that is against the spirit of the Quran and what the Prophet wanted. Ummat particularly Ummat-e-Muhammad is a universal notion that encompasses everyone of all nationalities till the day of Qiyamat. There are no boundaires when we look at the universal and spiritual nature of Islam. This applies to other religions as well. Hindus don't just live in India, they live in Nepal, Malaysia, Indonesia, Fiji, Suriname and other countries of the world. But Hindus living in these countries will have more in common with their Muslim countrymen than the Hindus in India.

Jinnah and Maulana Azad's views on this are also listed here if you are unable to get your hands on the book
Maulana Azad and M A Jinnah on Two Nation Theory (CabinetMissionPlan)

Paraphrasing Ambedkar -- a person of high calibre who came from the Dalit class-- wrote in his book "The case for Pakistan" in chapter VII that

“Strange as it may appear Mr. Savarkar and Mr. Jinnah instead of being opposed to each other on the one nation versus two nations issue are in complete agreement about it. Both agree, not only agree but insist that there are two nations in India – one the Muslim nation and the other the Hindu nation.”
.....
“They differ only as regards the terms and conditions on which the two nations should be. Jinnah says India should be cut up into two, Pakistan and Hindustan, the Muslim nation to occupy Pakistan and the Hindu nation to occupy Hindustan. Mr. Savarkar on the other hand insists that, although there are two nations in India, India shall not be divided into two parts, one for the Muslims and the other for Hindus; that the two nations shall dwell in one country and shall live under the mantle of one single constitution: that the constitution shall be such that the Hindu nation will be enabled to occupy a predominant position that is due to it and the Muslim nation to made to live in the position of subordinate co-operation with the Hindu nation.”

A theory that is whole heartedly embraced by Hindutva ideologues should in itself ring alarm bells to Pakistanis.


The main thrust of the TWT is that Hindus(and by extension non-muslims) and Muslims can't live in peaceful co-existence. But this is contrary to what the prophet strove for and what the Quran teaches. The treaty of Hudeibeyah, the Mithaq-e-Medina are all examples where the Prophet SAW tried to compromise (sometimes at a disadvantageous position) to strive for peaceful co-existence. In Mithaq-e-Medina it explicitly mentions the muslims and the non-muslims in Medina as one nation and party of an agreement and alliance.

And as long as freedom to practice and preach your religion was provided there was no problem in living and co-existing peacefully with other religious communities.

Lets not forget that at present about 30% of muslim live as minorities in different countries in the world. Infact there are many countries where the minority muslim population outnumbers by far muslim population in other muslim majority countries. And many countries like in UK, US and Australia, these books and theological arguments provided by Indian scholars in the 1930s are used by Imams in mosques to explain the composite nationalism envisaged in Islam and that it is not against Islam to be loyal to your Qaum or nation.

 

[Aslan]

Dear Ejaz, I have gone through many of your posts in this thread and one thing is clear and obvious that you are not comfortable with the existence of Pakistan at all. Why? Well you will be able to explain that in the best possible way. I will not try to make my own assumptions on that part.
Your hatred for Pakistan is very obvious and out in the open. But you know what that is your problem and not ours, you don’t accept the 2 nation theory we don’t care. The basic fact of the matter is that Pakistan exists and there is nothing you can do about it. Many of you here have tried to say that India is secular, and minorities flourish there including the Muslims. You know what good for them, we are happy for our Muslim brothers on the other side of the border. But then you should do the same for us as well.
At one point somewhere in this thread you had called Pakistan a liability for the Muslims of India, well if I interpret that correctly you meant that you guys suffer because of us. Well how is that so? If your country is secular and religion has no basis in it, then why should you a Muslim or many others like you living in good old India should have to prove your loyalties to the Hindus there when the Muslim Pakistan does or something happens in India that is blamed on us (well many a times we do get blamed for it but that is a separate issue). They should simply understand.
Now also going by your logic it will be safe to assume that it was because of the Pakistanis the Muslims in Gujarat got slaughtered like animals. It was because of us that the Babri Mosque was torn down. And definitely we were the reason for the Bombay riots, well when we are at it lets also blame Pakistan for the killing of Sikhs, Christians and any other religious minority or even ethnic riots that take place there.
The entire BS aside let me ask you something. What did you do for your brothers in Gujarat, or did u try to stop the demolition of Babri Mosque, or may be the riots in Bombay, or you were too busy trying to justify them by saying that Pakistan has become a liability. Let me tell you something I have met a person who happens to be a survivor of Gujarat a Muslim, whole of his village was slaughtered, I can’t provide you with links on the issue but this is a reality. He hated India, him all of his cousins his family they considered themselves Pakistanis more than us actual Pakistanis. The country manager of a well known beverage company in Kuwait is a Bihari Pakistani whose family migrated to Pakistan from India well into the late 1970's and he himself was almost 10 years old. And according to him the opportunity that Pakistan provided them his extended family that still lives in India cannot even think of affording.
So being an Indian does not mean that you should reject reality out right and not pay attention to anything at all. You also said that what did Pakistan do about the Gujarat massacre, well sir we tried to do what every we could I am sure that allot of coverage was given to it by Pakistan, you tell me what could we do. Our slightest of interference makes us a problem according to you for our fellow brothers in India. If we had tried to do something I guarantee you that you would have been the first in line to protest against us and burning the Pakistani flag. Not because we did something wrong but because yet again rather then trying to fight for your right in a hostile environment you would rather chose the easy path of bashing Pakistan and pleasing your masters.

I didn’t mean to hurt any ones feelings with the above post but though it to be a necessity to put in something that I thought was right. You have the right to disagree as much as you want to.

 

[asq]

Keep the borders between Pakistan and India closed forever. Pakistan-India relations is no where near U.S.-Canada relations. No Pakistani should trust indians, they hate Pakistan's very existence and unlike U.S. and Canada, Pakistan and India dont share the same ideologies infact we have conflicting ideologies and conflicting interests.

If Pakistan opens borders with any neighbour it will be with a friendly neighbour like China, not india.

I fully undrstand that BRo.

But they have a syaing here in Canada. and goes like this.


KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE, AND YOUR ENEMIES CLOSER.


Bsides we in pakistan can handle anything our adversaries can throw at us, by being closer we will know about thier acts and be able to counter it wihtout going to war, thereby not be party to the suffering to the families of war dead.

War should be to defend our faith and our integrity, but if it can be avoided it should be to present ourselves as the one who start by peace(Aslam-O-Alaiku) and go from there.
Keep out Armed forces strong and keep our wits sharp.

Once an American presedant said. Walk softly, but carrry a big stick.

 

[Jackdaws]

yawn...still...why doesn't pakistan offer "right of return" to all muslims?

 

[Materialistic]

frankly speaking the partition idea was proposed by the aligarh muslim elite and the awadh taluqadars.The people of present day pakistan literally had no idea of partition until 1946,there were a nobody in indian politics at that time .The Muslim league was nothing but a coterie of disgruntled nawabs and the old UP ruling elite .It never even had clout among the muslim masess including jinnah,faz-ul-haq of Praja karshak party(East bengal)and Mohammad shaukat ali and Sikandhar and khizr Hayat khan (Unionist party) Punjab,Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan of NWFP had more grip over the people.The Unionist Party only agreed to partition when they understood that Nehru would abolish the Zamindari system

Learn some historical facts, i feel bad for people living in denial.

Muslim Legue was found in 1906 and till around 20's Qaud-e-Azam was part of congress and represented Muslims, later he left politics as he was a lawyer basically, but he had to return because when he left movement of freedom started loosing colours but when he came back some incidents changed his perception towards Hindus, and those incidents were.

1914 he demanded,

- Muslims to be given their deserved quota based on their population in jobs.
- Muslims states should not be divided in such a way to bring demographical changes
- Developments for the states of Muslims majority as well
- Recognition of Muslims as a majority not minority
and a few more

But this was Rejected completely by Nehru in all aspects and specifically declaring Muslims as minority and he took an aggressive stance against it.

The other incident was where Gandhi when he was considered as a leader in general irrespective of religion he advised Muslims to abandone government jobs, education, and give up their titles (honors) from government(as a protest) and move to Afghanistan and take a refuge in their brotherly Muslim country. Which some fools even many followed and as they moved to Afghanistan firstly afghans dint give any asylum to them, Secondly Gandhi declared them as traitors which crushed Politically and economically.

And thats when Muslim League started to function for Independent country for Muslims, it was a revolution of years not a day or a single night to form Pakistan.

Also those who try to take major chunck of credit for freedom fight by saying they we all fought togather, well yeah we did but Our part was a bit more intense.Muslims were denied jobs health and education by British government and they were treated as 3rd grade citizens.



[I just wonder for one thing why was Pakistan given freedom on 14th and India 15th, well of course there was some strong reason behind it rather than just the alphabetical order.]

Gandhi in those days was highly criticized by Muslims and Hindus for accepting anything that British put infront of him, which resulted in the fame of Bhagat singh and the likes of him.

And as Nehru was a close ally and the Mind behind Gandhi, his illegal relationship with Edwina Mountbatten led to many favors to Delhi specially in Kashmir and Hydrabad issue and also on river control heads division as well.

Please dont bomb me with personal comments i dint do that either also i have some credible sources.

Edwina Mountbatten-Nehru affair was sexual: Catherine Clement Rupee News

The story in Rupee news also gives a reference to India times.

Edwina-Nehru affair not always platonic: French author - India - The Times of India

 

[Jackdaws]

So Mountbatten favored Nehru because Nehru was sleeping with his wife?