What's new

Pakistan should be a Secular State

Can you provide an 'Audio visual evidence' of the August the 11th speech, so we can discuss it further? - Only then we can establish 'who is indulged in aberration' of Qaid's statements.

LOLZ cute and clever ))) :D :D You know it,s a damn hard job to find any video/audio recordings from 1935 and most probably i think there is no such audio/video exists today because no one recorded that speech.
 
. .
if they do so! i think the terrorism will increase so which could create more worse condition...so i think first we should control terrorism and when we'll find ourselves safe then we should declare these type of conditions other wise it could create much worse situations for pakistan!So think twicely before any declartion...
 
. .
@L@eeq

i'll answer these two questions but first come to the point.

What point exactly? - You said Pakistan should have Sharia law, I said fine, give me a book which has a title 'Sharia Law' so i can read an agree with you. Then i asked you to show me a country which you think is the perfect example for Pakistan to follow, is that too much to ask?


then i'll give you the answer.

I'm, not trading here.

so it means Quran is not a complete way of life for a muslim??

It is for those who believe it is. If an entire society believes that to be the case 'through democratic process', which Muslims of India did by voting for Muslim League, it can be implemented as the constitution of the state, which it was in the Pakistani constitution. How much more do you want?

since it was revealed 1400 (one thousend four hundred years ago ) its is not relevent in todays world.

I didn't say that the Quran is not relevant to the modern world, i stated that the early model of 'Khilafa' was totally different. If we are to judge it and learn from it so we can have something similar, we must understand it in its correct 'Historic, Socioeconomic,geopolitical' context. The question is not if the model is correct or not, but 'what upgrades' need to be made to make it work in this modern world.

so should we change it.???

Thats your brain being creative, i never said that.

what do you think about pakisan's constitution when its says(hakmiat ala sirf ALLAH k pas hai) i think you got the point.

It means that Allah is sovereign and every citizen of the state should act accordingly as if he/she was subjected to internal struggle and judgement, hence making citizens into a conformed, integrated society. However that still doesn't discount the fact that we are humans and need humans to govern us.

Quran and hadith provide all the laws which are needed now and which will be needed till end of the world.

Those laws need to be understood in their historic setting and studied in the modern world so we could make adjustments to our way of life where it doesn't violate the faith nor the sort of social economic and geopolitical structure we find ourselves in today.

What i have stated is that the historic social economic and geopolitical setting of the 7th century Arabia is obsolete and irrelevant not the laws. Its upto us to study the laws and find ways to benefit from them in the modern world as a citizen society of a country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
That was almost 1400 years ago [One Thousand Four Hundred Years] - It is not applicable to the modern world as Omar [RA] didn't face the challenges we face, the socioeconomic fabric of the society was totally different. Lastly i feel the need to remind you again to provide me with 2 requests i have made from you.



Its not called secularism, its called freedom of independent opinion and speech. I would encourage you to answer my query without any 'assumptions' about me or 'assumptions' on my critical thinking abilities. I for one love, long discussions as long as they are fruitful.

Peace

Please learn by heart the definition of secularism first) Just talk about the idea of being secular infront of some taliban or a fanatic moulvi he will either try to kill you or will call you an infidel.While in secularism you have a complete freedom to express your religious views or live your personal life style(as long as they dont hurt other people or are not hate oriented) without feeling any danger.
 
.
Out of curiosity ,what was the population of pakistani minorities at the time of partition and what is today ???

It has remained at 2-3 % of the total population for the last 66 years.

LOLZ cute and clever ))) :D :D You know it,s a damn hard job to find any video/audio recordings from 1935 and most probably i think there is no such audio/video exists today because no one recorded that speech.

Why do you find my request to be 'cute and clever' -?

If this is an academic debate which i'm assuming it is, we need to have 'material' to discuss, if that material doesn't exist there is absolutely no need for it to be discussed. If it is discussed the result would be more assumptions not established learning.

Lastly, its 'your question' - we are discussing, so you are the one who should research and bring forward the material you need to see people discuss. I am not the one who's asking a question, because if i pose this question, i have a pile of material to bring. Can we say that about you, no. Does this mean you are not educated on this subject, no. It only means that you are 'ill-prepared'.
 
.
Please learn by heart the definition of secularism first)

Sir i am not as educated as you, however i must say that all of my Education has been secular, including University education. I spent valuable years of my teen and beyond in a 'true secular society'. I don't need to be told the definition of secularism, because i have 'experienced' it and i understand it well enough.

I don't reject secularism as an idea for the western world as when understood in its 'historic setting' , anyone would have seen it coming. However i do reject secularism for Pakistan for a host of different reasons other than the fact that Pakistan was 'Not' created to be a secular state. I.e i believe that the dynamics of secularism in the west and in Pakistan are in a stark contrast of each other. The socioeconomic systems are totally different, the culture is totally different. I see secularism as something that will pose a threat to Pakistan's integrity. The experiments with secularism in other Muslim majority states have either failed or are in a evolving state of failure. Tunisia,Egypt,Syria were 'historically secular states' governed by Pan Arabism.

If you are educated about their history both of the last century and the recent history, it is not hard to understand that why people have rejected secularism there after having it for around a century. Turkey had a secular govt for a 100 years, but now it has a govt with roots in political Islam. Why hasn't secularism been able to replace the concept of 'Islamic Social Democracy' in societies that had legacies of Secularism?

Just talk about the idea of being secular infront of some taliban or a fanatic moulvi he will either try to kill you or will call you an infidel.

Why do you see things in black & white? - either - or ?

While in secularism you have a complete freedom to express your religious views or live your personal life style(as long as they dont hurt other people or are not hate oriented) without feeling any danger.

Wrong, personal freedoms are also guaranteed in Pakistani constitution of 1973. Most of the times, its not important whats written in the constitution but how does your society evolve. You can have the best constitution in the world and be the worst society on the planet, how does that work?
 
.
^^^ Bangladesh is now a "secular" state, don't see it doing too bad when compared to Pakistan.
 
.
^^^ Bangladesh is now a "secular" state, don't see it doing too bad whern compared to Pakistan.


That is good for them, we wish them good luck.



132288235_161n.jpg


40DFCBB3-D71F-4717-8E18-2A2D50DEC16E_w640_r1_s_cx0_cy7_cw0.jpg


606x341_220206_secularists-and-islamists-clash-a.jpg
 
.
Do we really need another form of crisis in these circumstances:confused:
945690_448443111915439_2113054327_n.jpg
 
. .
What point exactly? - You said Pakistan should have Sharia law, I said fine, give me a book which has a title 'Sharia Law' so i can read an agree with you. Then i asked you to show me a country which you think is the perfect example for Pakistan to follow, is that too much to ask?

Aeronaut, job well done on this discussion because you obviously have learned the use of logic and civilized discourse without emotion. Muhammad Asad discusses exactly what you are asking for - a book that would specify what Shariah Law should look like from an enlightened and today's point of view. He was given the job by the Quaid to find such solutions under the Department of Islamic Reconstruction. Please see his work "This Law of Ours" where he explains exactly what the problem is and how Pakistan (and the Muslim world) can overcome this.

Orya Maqbool Jan describes Muhammad Asad in the following words:
On the 14th of August, 27th of Ramazan right after the creation of Pakistan, the Pakistani government invited the famous thinker, scholar and writer Allama Muhammad Asad to Pakistan. He was granted Pakistani citizenship and first Pakistani passport was issued to him. After this Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah initiated a request for a department which would set up the constitution, law and education syllabus as per the soul of this country that is the Islamic way. This institution was named as the Department of Islamic Reconstruction; its leadership was entrusted to Allama Muhammad Asad. This was the first institution of Pakistan which had with its name the word ‘Islamic’. To clarify the objectives and boundaries of the department on 18thOctober 1948 Allama Muhammad Asad, delivered a speech from Radio Pakistan. He said that the aim of this department is to mold the rules and constitution of Pakistan according to the Islamic teachings, for which this country was created.

Muhammad Asad in This Law of Ours:
I cannot see any other way to our recovery. If there is some such other way, I challenge those who claim to have found it to show it to us. Simply talking about the need for a “rebirth of faith” is not much more worth than bragging about our past and extolling the greatness of our predecessors. Our faith cannot be reborn unless we understand to what practical goals it will lead us. Generalities won’t help us either. It won’t do us the least good if, for instance, we are glibly assured that the socio-economic programme of Islam is better than Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Liberalism, and God knows what other “isms” which the West has produced for its own good – its undoing. We ought rather to be shown, in unmistakable terms, what alternative proposals the Shariah makes for our social life – what its true concept of society is, what views it holds with regard to individual property and communal good, labour and production, capital and profit, employer and employee, the State and the individual; what alternative it proposes to banking (which is an Islamic society is impossible because of the obvious prohibition of riba), what its practical measures are for a prevention of man’s exploitation by man; for an abolition of ignorance and poverty ; for obtaining bread, blankets and homes for every man and woman….
Now, I do not mean to say that these material things of life are Islam’s sole concern; certainly not: for this religion of ours would not be God’s Message to man if its foremost goal were not man’s growth towards God: but our bodies and soul are so intertwined that we cannot achieve the ultimate well-being of one without taking the other fully into consideration. Specious sermonizing about “faith” and “spirit” and “surrender to God” cannot lead to the establishment of true Islam on earth unless we are shown how to gain faith through a better insight into God’s plan, how to elevate our sprit by living a righteous life, and how to surrender to God by doing His will by ourselves and by others. And all this, as far as Islam is concerned, can be gleaned from the Shariah alone.
And the Shariah can never become effective unless it becomes an open book for every one of us.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom