Subsidy on Haj Issue

[Imad.Khan]

 

[ziaulislam]

Dollar was 90 in Feb last year. It is simply 140 Feb this year. The kartoots of Asad Umar and Imran Khan caused a rise in dollars price. Haj package is straightly affected by this price hike. Subsidy issue is mere a drama. If government can eat zakat then it can also compensate the pilgrims in a better way.

It is a 100% failure of the government's team on every front.

Dollar was at 129 on 25 july and now its 138. This is 7% devaluation the ground work for thijs devaluation (current account deficit) was set up by PMLN

on the other hand rupee lost 20% value from may 2017 to dec 2017 (drop from 103 to 120) and 30%(from 98 to 129) if 5 years are counted

Your second favourite leader mr zardari (zardari nawaz bhai bhai) dropped the rupee from 61 to 100 this is almost 100% devaluation

So by these calculation the rupee should hit at least 200rs

while bangladesh doubled exports our exports shrinked in last 5years
Pakistan economy has never been fucked this hard in last 70 years..signs of these were clear by 2016 and were pointed out by everyone even by amatuers like me in 2016-17

Saving (which fuel your economy ) dropped from 20 to 14% bangaldesh stand at 22%
GDP growth the one thing pmln has to show performed well in 2017-2018 simply due to debt driven foreign capital inform of loans

If someone still believe PMLN did better than zardari(yes zardari) than he is either a dishonest person himself or an idiot

PPPP screw up the economy but they didnt f***k it up like PMLN did ..their fiscal deficit, CAD, debt and GDP profile were all decent

 

[Pakistani sipahi]

No, this is a logical jump you are making. You are playing the part of Mufti here. You have one tenet of religion: Hajj is compulsory on those who can afford it, and from there you are making the logical jump that the state shouldn't do anything for it. What if the state intervenes so that Hajj becomes affordable for more people? Which Aayah of Quran disallows that? You are creating your own ruling out of your own mind.

I mean, the fundamental requirements of Hajj include being able bodied. So you are telling me that Hajj is not compulsory on disabled people in the modern world where you have things like wheelchairs?

Brother I never said that state shouldn't do anything . I am the only person who is asking for facilitation for pilgrims.
Aap ki yeh jo logic hai na Mana to nahi kia yehi Bidat ki ijad ka sabab banti hai.

 

[CriticalThought]

Brother I never said that state shouldn't do anything . I am the only person who is asking for facilitation for pilgrims.
Aap ki yeh jo logic hai na Mana to nahi kia yehi Bidat ki ijad ka sabab banti hai.

Which stands as an insinuation. I have nowhere called it compulsory, I have simply stated that based on the pattern of behavior they are showing, they are revealing their disgusting, irreligious face. The difference between piety and irreligiosity is the difference between facilitating Islamic tenets vs doing nothing. They do not come across as pious people to whom the governance of an Islamic country can be left.

 

[Pakistani sipahi]

Which stands as an insinuation. I have nowhere called it compulsory, I have simply stated that based on the pattern of behavior they are showing, they are revealing their disgusting, irreligious face. The difference between piety and irreligiosity is the difference between facilitating Islamic tenets vs doing nothing. They do not come across as pious people to whom the governance of an Islamic country can be left.

You cannot judge someone's piety or irreligiosity on this matter Husn e Zan Zaroori hai . But given the current financial conditions of the country you can't expect reliefs at least for at least 2.5 years .

 

[CriticalThought]

You cannot judge someone's piety or irreligiosity on this matter Husn e Zan Zaroori hai . But given the current financial conditions of the country you can't expect reliefs at least for at least 2.5 years .

And a pious person has complete belief in Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'aala that spending on good deeds WILL NOT lessen finances. Barakah is from Allah.

 

[Pakistani sipahi]

And a pious person has complete belief in Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'aala that spending on good deeds WILL NOT lessen finances. Barakah is from Allah.

Allah Khush rakhay !

To phir Hajj expense barhnay par itna shor sharaba kion .

 

[CriticalThought]

Allah Khush rakhay !

To phir Hajj expense barhnay par itna shor sharaba kion .

Let me put it like this. If a cruel ruler puts a blockade on the routes towards Mecca, Hajj will no longer be compulsory on anyone. Do you want Pakistan to be governed by such a cruel ruler?

 

[Pakistani sipahi]

Let me put it like this. If a cruel ruler puts a blockade on the routes towards Mecca, Hajj will no longer be compulsory on anyone. Do you want Pakistan to be governed by such a cruel ruler?

Brother Aap aik baat batao are you really concerned about the pilgrims or you just want to bash the government .
Close this Discussion here . . . . .

 

[CriticalThought]

Brother Aap aik baat batao are you really concerned about the pilgrims or you just want to bash the government .
Close this Discussion here . . . . .

What would I get out of unnecessarily bashing the government? If they were doing good for Islam and Muslims, I would be the first one praising them.

 

[313ghazi]

The problem is that the government has acquired a liberal image and people are becoming wary of their intentions. The question is, to what lengths will they go to wipe out the Islamic characteristics if Pakistan?

People need to use what limited brain they have. Did hajj subsidy make the loot maar of previous regimes halal? Of course not. The important thing for the state is to do the right thing, not the popular thing. It's the popularity contest politics which has got us to where we are.

To those giving arguments of Haj being Fardh on those who can afford it, let it be known that Ulema recommend giving money to others for Haj if someone has already performed their own Haj, instead of same person repeatedly going for Haj.

That is correct - this fatwa is for individuals who have performed their own hajj and have the intention to go again. Nobody is arguing that Hajj has to be done exclusively on ones own wealth, simply that it is only obligatory on those who have the means to do it.

No ulema reccomend the state should prioritise hajj subsidy over feeding the needy, sheltering them, providing them clean water, medicine and education. Even defence is the state of the duty ahead of hajj subsidy.

But here is the argument to Trump all arguments and reveal the ugly, disgusting, unislamic, black face of this government. They have money to facilitate Sikhs in Kartarpur, yet they don't have money to facilitate Muslims for Haj? Why are they governing the Islamic Republic of Pakistan? They should go govern the Sikh Republic of Khakistan and stay there. Good riddance!

This is to score political points. In fact there is no difference between this and the hajj subsidy, which is also to score political points. The corridor scores foreign political points, hajj subsidy domestic.

I think hajj subsidy ought to be redistributed entirely to ensuring each Masjid in Pakistan has a qualified imam on a decent salary and a small library of islamic books for the congregation to be able to borrow and read. Tableegh of the deen is more important than facilitating the hajj of those whom it is not an obligation. That is my personal opinion of course. If the state can afford to subsidise hajj, it should do - there is not harm in it, only benefit.

=====

Sallahudin Ayubi couldnt perform Hajj because his personal savings were not enough. What makes Pakistanis think using the state treasury for Hajj is halaal? It is absolutely haraam and i guess such a Hajj is not valid.

This is incorrect. As I said earlier on in my post, there is no stipulation that the money used to perform hajj has to be your own. The only financial clause associated with Hajj is that it becomes mandatory upon you once you can afford to do it.

Having said that - the state or anyone else for that matter, are under no obligation islamically to cover the financial cost of anyones hajj. If they do, there is no harm.

 

[Awan68]

People need to use what limited brain they have. Did hajj subsidy make the loot maar of previous regimes halal? Of course not. The important thing for the state is to do the right thing, not the popular thing. It's the popularity contest politics which has got us to where we are.


That is correct - this fatwa is for individuals who have performed their own hajj and have the intention to go again. Nobody is arguing that Hajj has to be done exclusively on ones own wealth, simply that it is only obligatory on those who have the means to do it.

No ulema reccomend the state should prioritise hajj subsidy over feeding the needy, sheltering them, providing them clean water, medicine and education. Even defence is the state of the duty ahead of hajj subsidy.



This is to score political points. In fact there is no difference between this and the hajj subsidy, which is also to score political points. The corridor scores foreign political points, hajj subsidy domestic.

I think hajj subsidy ought to be redistributed entirely to ensuring each Masjid in Pakistan has a qualified imam on a decent salary and a small library of islamic books for the congregation to be able to borrow and read. Tableegh of the deen is more important than facilitating the hajj of those whom it is not an obligation. That is my personal opinion of course. If the state can afford to subsidise hajj, it should do - there is not harm in it, only benefit.

=====



This is incorrect. As I said earlier on in my post, there is no stipulation that the money used to perform hajj has to be your own. The only financial clause associated with Hajj is that it becomes mandatory upon you once you can afford to do it.

Having said that - the state or anyone else for that matter, are under no obligation islamically to cover the financial cost of anyones hajj. If they do, there is no harm.

There is harm when half of ur population is living under the minimum wage, govt needs to subsidize other priority things. When passing edicts like u here are, try to ascertain the ground realities of the subject at hand. Umar( ra) was more concerned about the hunger of even an animal on the banks of Nile rather than Hajj subsidy.

 

[313ghazi]

There is harm when half of ur population is living under the minimum wage, govt needs to subsidize other priority things. When passing edicts like u here are, try to ascertain the ground realities of the subject at hand. Umar( ra) was more concerned about the hunger of even an animal on the banks of Nile rather than Hajj subsidy.

Maybe if you'd spare a minute to read my posts before getting offended, you'd see we're both in agreement on that.

I said this earlier;

No ulema reccomend the state should prioritise hajj subsidy over feeding the needy, sheltering them, providing them clean water, medicine and education. Even defence is the state of the duty ahead of hajj subsidy.

 

[Awan68]

Maybe if you'd spare a minute to read my posts before getting offended, you'd see we're both in agreement on that.

I said this earlier;

No, i know we are in agreement and im not offended at all. Im just saying that subsidy on hajj provided to atleast those who can afford it easily is haram in my book.

 

[El Sidd]

unless its the dam. its not a good enough excuse