Muslim first or Pakistani ?

[Samudra]

Thats exactly what I've said in post 54. However I differ on the point that supporting a nations cause - aka supporting Taliban to gain strategic dept, does not make one less religious etc.

There are instances where a rather subtle conflict of these entities have occurred and people have made their choices.

In an Islamists dictionary its either absolutely Islamic or absolutely UnIslamic. That's the way its portrayed. So abandoning true religious values or supporting somebody like Taliban who've abandoned true religious values is purely UnIslamic and is therefore punishable ?!

Or is there a middle path eh ?

Otherwise one could argue that the Taliban were not necessarily seen as UnIslamic - exactly the opposite of which we are told when criticising radicals, associating them with religion.

And while all are claimed to be equal and Islam being a religion that has brought so many nice things like equality of fellow humans thereby ending the inescapable trap of the Indian caste system, it is certainly UnIslamic for a Islamic Republic to have in its constitution a clause that provides to deny a Hindu the highest post in the country.

Pakistan being a country of moderate and nicest Muslims living on the planet surely it beats me as to why such a law is tolerated!!!

The utopia - religious and national has to go somewhere, Neo.

Absoluteness in religion is a very dangerous thing. By hiding away its apparent vulnerablity to modern issues that we face daily we're not doing it or the followers a favor. We're pushing it back to the medieval age it came from.

 

[Neo]

Many have found the 'middle path' thru moderate believes and have made peace with their concience...i.e. heart and mind.
Again its not upto you or me to judge their priorities or loyalties. They'll answer to God at the End of Days.

 

[Samudra]

Again its not upto you or me to judge their priorities or loyalties.

Ah, but there is a slight problem.

This idea of 'it is only for God to decide' goes directly into the face of the shahada.

 

[Wounded Healer]

islam has always told its followers to walk on the middle ground.....extremism, of any sort, is vehemently discouraged, so is this so-called modernism......its just that some muslims have the capability to understand this and many dont.

as far as the question of a non-muslim not being able to rule a muslim country goes, well, the question is not as simple as it sounds.....the constitution that people talk about is not according to the shariah.....if the muslims were to follow the shariah, then all the muslims countries would have been joined together to form a single country, hence the word muslim ummah....in such a case, the ruler would have represented all the muslims and therefore the ruler/khalifah had to be a muslim.....

This idea of 'it is only for God to decide' goes directly into the face of the shahada.

as i have said earlier, some people understand this concept of a shaheed, and many dont

 

[BATMAN]

If there is no Pakistan than Pakistanis cannot practice Islam. Hence we should always think first for the survival of Pakistan which ensure us to practice Islam freely.
Pakistan is also termed as castle of Islam and is also a reason of moral support for brotherly Islamic states.
Pakistan is an un-spoken guardian of Holy cities.
So Pakistan's sovreignity is important not only to Pakistanis but also for the high honor of Islam.
Imagine this world without Pakistan. Allah has blessed Pakistan with modern world sowrds of Islam.
Now, considering all this, we should have no doubt that integrity of Pakistan is crucial to Islam and this is an obligation towards religon.
Hence Pakistan and Islam are two names but one spirit, which cannot be devided.
This is the wider picture which Mullahs fail to conceptulise.
Those who are enimies of Pakistan are enimies of Islam.

 

[Muradk]

If there is no Pakistan than Pakistanis cannot practice Islam. Hence we should always think first for the survival of Pakistan which ensure us to practice Islam freely.
Pakistan is also termed as castle of Islam and is also a reason of moral support for brotherly Islamic states.
Pakistan is an un-spoken guardian of Holy cities.
So Pakistan's sovreignity is important not only to Pakistanis but also for the high honor of Islam.
Imagine this world without Pakistan. Allah has blessed Pakistan with modern world sowrds of Islam.
Now, considering all this, we should have no doubt that integrity of Pakistan is crucial to Islam and this is an obligation towards religon.
Hence Pakistan and Islam are two names but one spirit, which cannot be devided.
This is the wider picture which Mullahs fail to conceptulise.
Those who are enimies of Pakistan are enimies of Islam.

BATMAN Friend I dont agree to some of your points at all.

Yes ZIA sahib said it twice in a speech that we are defenders of the 2 cities and GOP said it again in Desert Shield as well. The truth is the 2 cities are way more powerfull than Pakistan why there are countries who have more muslims than the population of Pakistan. other point I want to say is the only people we have fought is India so If India is our enemy then they are also enemies of Islam, NO that is totally worng my friend Indai has more Muslims than Pakistan and those muslims fought for there country in 65,71,99, and every day across the LOC.

 

[niaz]

If there is no Pakistan than Pakistanis cannot practice Islam. Hence we should always think first for the survival of Pakistan which ensure us to practice Islam freely.
Pakistan is also termed as castle of Islam and is also a reason of moral support for brotherly Islamic states.
Pakistan is an un-spoken guardian of Holy cities.
So Pakistan's sovreignity is important not only to Pakistanis but also for the high honor of Islam.
Imagine this world without Pakistan. Allah has blessed Pakistan with modern world sowrds of Islam.
Now, considering all this, we should have no doubt that integrity of Pakistan is crucial to Islam and this is an obligation towards religon.
Hence Pakistan and Islam are two names but one spirit, which cannot be devided.
This is the wider picture which Mullahs fail to conceptulise.
Those who are enimies of Pakistan are enimies of Islam.

Regret to disagree Hon Batman. Jamiat Ulemai Hind and JI strongly opposed two nation theory and were quite happy to remain in united India. Eminent scholars such as Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar ( President of Congress) and Abul Kalaam Azad were Congress leaders. Iqbal was forced to write:

Mullah ko jo Masjid main hai sajdey ki ijaazat

Nadaan ye smajhta hai kay Islam hai azaad.

Thus your assertion that without Pakistan, Pakistanis wont be able to practice Islam is naive to say the least. Are you implying that our forefathers; during the pre- partitions days; were unable to practice Islam.

If you are a true Muslim, you must believe that since Allah is the giver of Islam thru our holy Prophet ( PBUH), Allah will ensure that Islam survives. Islam was there before Pakistan and will remain long after Pakistan.

 

[BATMAN]

Regret to disagree Hon Batman. Jamiat Ulemai Hind and JI strongly opposed two nation theory and were quite happy to remain in united India. Eminent scholars such as Maulana Mohammed Ali Jauhar ( President of Congress) and Abul Kalaam Azad were Congress leaders. Iqbal was forced to write:

Mullah ko jo Masjid main hai sajdey ki ijaazat

Nadaan ye smajhta hai kay Islam hai azaad.

I have read it various times and I do not object this.

Thus your assertion that without Pakistan, Pakistanis wont be able to practice Islam is naive to say the least. Are you implying that our forefathers; during the pre- partitions days; were unable to practice Islam.

If you are a true Muslim, you must believe that since Allah is the giver of Islam thru our holy Prophet ( PBUH), Allah will ensure that Islam survives. Islam was there before Pakistan and will remain long after Pakistan.

I was not asserting exactly this and I see that I fail to clearly define my point.
I give an example: Even in the liberal socities of Europe. It is near impossible to build mosque or call AZAN. They are open to all cultures but to Islamic culture. You will find many houses decorated with religous symbols and gods from various religons of world but you will not find a caligraphic art because its a Quranic verse.
Now commming to my vision of Pakistan (God forbid) when it is conqured and ruled by un-Islamic forces.
Why should I think that Pakistan will be any different from today's Iraq or Afghanistan. Lets take the case of Afghanistan, it was conqured by USSR and they left in 10 years or so but it never recovered because it was left vulnerable now today if coalition forces sees few men together they fire upon them indiscriminately. Similarly they can consider people at pray as an Army of terrorists and shoot.
Now, second point and I have no doubts that Allah will protect the Islam. but that does not stop my brain from comparing the military hardware of anti-Islam powers and those of Islamic world. This exactly was the reason why Dick Cheny told the military Attache of Pakistan 'be prepared to go back to stone age'
I belive in deterrence and not in war.
In 80's it was F-16, which acted as detterence and in 90's it was missiles and war heads, without any of those history may have been different.
I think when it comes to today's world, reasons can be created for agression and Iraq is example and what does Saudi forces can do if a super power call a reason to invade?
That is again one dimension and I'm not against non-Islamic states, I support to do what ever is reasonable to keep the relations more than good it is even better than detterance.
I hope this indicate how I see things. I may be wrong and I love to hear where did I got lost.

 

[niaz]

I have read it various times and I do not object this.


I was not asserting exactly this and I see that I fail to clearly define my point.
I give an example: Even in the liberal socities of Europe. It is near impossible to build mosque or call AZAN. They are open to all cultures but to Islamic culture. You will find many houses decorated with religous symbols and gods from various religons of world but you will not find a caligraphic art because its a Quranic verse.
Now commming to my vision of Pakistan (God forbid) when it is conqured and ruled by un-Islamic forces.
Why should I think that Pakistan will be any different from today's Iraq or Afghanistan. Lets take the case of Afghanistan, it was conqured by USSR and they left in 10 years or so but it never recovered because it was left vulnerable now today if coalition forces sees few men together they fire upon them indiscriminately. Similarly they can consider people at pray as an Army of terrorists and shoot.
Now, second point and I have no doubts that Allah will protect the Islam. but that does not stop my brain from comparing the military hardware of anti-Islam powers and those of Islamic world. This exactly was the reason why Dick Cheny told the military Attache of Pakistan 'be prepared to go back to stone age'
I belive in deterrence and not in war.
In 80's it was F-16, which acted as detterence and in 90's it was missiles and war heads, without any of those history may have been different.
I think when it comes to today's world, reasons can be created for agression and Iraq is example and what does Saudi forces can do if a super power call a reason to invade?
That is again one dimension and I'm not against non-Islamic states, I support to do what ever is reasonable to keep the relations more than good it is even better than detterance.
I hope this indicate how I see things. I may be wrong and I love to hear where did I got lost.

What I understood from your post was that you identified Pakistan with Islam. Naturally I am a man of limited intellect, therefore I fail to understand what you are really trying to say. Now you are saying what can Saudi forces do??. Do you imply that Saudis were against US attack on Iraq. Where did you bring in the F-16 from. F-16 were stopped because of Atomic explosion. Sanction also applied to India. Why have you forgotten that majority of Pak weapons were supplied by US until 1965. All that for nothing??. What hapened to the US Aid worth billions of Dollars to Pakistan including PL-480.

Good God !!. People have very short memories. Have you forgotten that first Iraq war was fought because Saddam Hussain invaded Kuwait and first battle was between Saudis and Iraqis in the Neutral Zone between Kuwait and KSA. Where did you hear that Saudis wanted to defend Iraq??. Both the Kuwaities and Saudi supported Saddam Husain with billions of dollars to fight Iran ( Which Saddam attacked in the first place) and after the war was over Saddam Hussain invaded Kuwait. Saudis and Kuwaitis ( both Muslims ) asked US help to get rid of Saddam from Kuwait. Saudi Army is to keep the Royal family in power not to fight for Islam.

You are comparing military hardware of non muslim powers !. This harware didnot drop from the sky. US and the West have used their men and material resources to develop these. Let Pakistan be economically strong enough to develop their own weapons and not depend on others. Pakistanis on the other hand want to turn Pakisatn into a Taliban state; where women wouldnt even be allowed to read. How will Pakistan develop modern weapons. if you push your society back 1400 years. Then you bring in Calligraphic Art. Kindly visit Alhambra in Spain. It is a well preserved palace with lots of Quranic verses specially

" Walla ghalib illalah" written all over and even the most bigotted Christians have preserved it, unlike Taliban who destroyed 2000 year Budha statues.

Please understand that fight in Afghanistan and in Iraq is not against Islam. In Afghnaistan Talibans were defeated ( with US help) by the Northern Alliance- all muslims and most of them Sunnis. In Iraq it is because of oil. Even if Saddam was a Christain, US would do the same. Many Plaestinain are Christians, but US suport for Isreal is unyielding. In Real Politik, nations give you aid not because they have a good heart but because they want something from you. Do you expect to go against US interest and still demand US aid as your right??

I am a Pakistani as well but I dont believe that Pakistan is essential for Islam. Yes Pakistan was founded for Muslims and it is essentail for Pakistanis. How can you compare a western country where Muslim population is 2% at most with a muslim majority country and say that Azaan is difficult in Europe. There was Azaan in all parts of Pakistan when there was no Pakistan.

This is all off the topic. You have not said whether you are a Pakistani first or a Muslim first??

 

[Samudra]

Please understand that fight in Afghanistan and in Iraq is not against Islam. In Afghnaistan Talibans were defeated ( with US help) by the Northern Alliance- all muslims and most of them Sunnis. In Iraq it is because of oil. Even if Saddam was a Christain, US would do the same. Many Plaestinain are Christians, but US suport for Isreal is unyielding. In Real Politik, nations give you aid not because they have a good heart but because they want something from you. Do you expect to go against US interest and still demand US aid as your right??

Lovely. Lovely.

If only half the Muslims in this world understood this......

 

[ARSENAL6]

Lovely. Lovely.

If only half the Muslims in this world understood this......

Half the Muslims do realise this, its only hot headed narrowminded , extremists that take the spot light, who cry out Jihad and not facing the facts in the middleast, Niaz pointed out.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Lovely. Lovely.

If only half the Muslims in this world understood this......

Welcome from hindutva school.

 

[Ahassan]

me muslim first.......

 

[Adux]

I am Indian first, whatever else second

 

[Ababeel]

Funny Arabs see's themselves as arabs first, and rest of muslims as second class

The universal Islamic brotherhood is very very strong. I have seen great number of Arabs here in Saudi Arabia and UAE who meet us in everyday life whether in masjids, offices or any location, feel very happy when they come to know that this person is their brother in religion, their partner in believing in one and only God.