The fiction of the Ideology of Pakistan: YLH

[RescueRanger]

wow, Indians and Bangladeshis are obsessed with Pakistan and her ideology
cool

Post of the year!

 

[SQ8]

But the PDF management themselves have brought religion into this thread to discredit the author of the article.

The objective wasn’t religion per se but the loyalty of religious center and leadership.

The same way, one can have issue with Shia’ism having its religious gravity centered in Tehran versus having no issue with Fiqh-Jafria.
These are however EXTREMELY grey areas.

The issue with intolerance is beyond Islam and should not be used to ridicule the religion when the mindset comes from humans. Per Abrahmic beliefs Cain was essentially intolerant of his brother’s happiness..ramases was intolerant of Moses and so on..

no Mirza of Qadiyan who is purported by his opponents to have tripped in the outhouse and died in his own feces existed then.

The issue from the perspective of religious sentiment is false prophethood for which regardless of lenient applications today( the first Caliphs led military campaigns against false prophets and their followers were either slaughtered or forced to renounce their fallacy.. don’t see a military campaign against the Qadiyanis or otherwise).
is valid in the eyes of all accepted old and new scholars.

The second is from a state loyalty perspective and having a HQ in India to clear and tacit support of foriegn governments KNOWN to be hostile or harboring hostile elements to Pakistan presents a clear question on the loyalty of the religious and social leadership of the Qadiyani sect( other sects aren’t exempt but since the question revolves around why anything YLH states can be questioned and his motives suspected we should remain to this)

 

[Indus Pakistan]

All Ahmadis should leave Pakistan to save their lives. Our future does not belong in Pakistan anymore, whatever emotions I had for Pakistan has been dying over the years but reading this thread has definitely hit the nail in the coffin for me. There is no hope for Pakistan anymore. Enjoy your sectarian murderers and Khadim Rizvis. Even the so called educated people openly spreading false propaganda against Ahmadis.

Hey mate, I really empathize withyou. I really feel bitter about this. For what it's worth I would stand with you guys as Pakistani brothers. Your faith is yours. It's non of my business. I actually had a acquittance in my younger years in the 1980s. I had no idea what a Ahmedi was until I spoke with my dad and he told me. This guy was from Faisalabad I think and he told me [no reason to doubt him as his family was very educated] that his maternal uncle had been pilot in the first batch that went to USA to train on the F-16s. I still am in contact with him. He is just a regular guy and I can't understand this fcukin hate. I really can't. One day I hope Pakistan will move towards a secular society where all of us can be brothers. Until that day I want to thank your community for the srvices it has rendered for Pakistan. Sir Zafarullah comes to mind. Obviously he was good enough for Jinnah but look what has happened today.

 

[SQ8]

To reiterate what I mentioned directly to a family member of Ghulam Mirza of Qadiyan who was at that time working for the Large hotel group here.

I have no problem with you , or any common Qadiyani and will pray next to you if you do the same. But as long as I have doubts that you do not proclaim Mohammad ibn Abdullah (Peace be upon him) I cannot consider you a muslim because that is essential to my belief.

He insisted that they only consider him as a reformer and that he himself said so to which I said then why not come out and clearly say it..?! I never got a clear answer to that.

 

[M. Sarmad]

The objective wasn’t religion per se but the loyalty of religious center and leadership.

The same way, one can have issue with Shia’ism having its religious gravity centered in Tehran versus having no issue with Fiqh-Jafria.
These are however EXTREMELY grey areas.

The issue with intolerance is beyond Islam and should not be used to ridicule the religion when the mindset comes from humans. Per Abrahmic beliefs Cain was essentially intolerant of his brother’s happiness..ramases was intolerant of Moses and so on..

no Mirza of Qadiyan who is purported by his opponents to have tripped in the outhouse and died in his own feces existed then.

The issue from the perspective of religious sentiment is false prophethood for which regardless of lenient applications today( the first Caliphs led military campaigns against false prophets and their followers were either slaughtered or forced to renounce their fallacy.. don’t see a military campaign against the Qadiyanis or otherwise).
is valid in the eyes of all accepted old and new scholars.

The second is from a state loyalty perspective and having a HQ in India to clear and tacit support of foriegn governments KNOWN to be hostile or harboring hostile elements to Pakistan presents a clear question on the loyalty of the religious and social leadership of the Qadiyani sect( other sects aren’t exempt but since the question revolves around why anything YLH states can be questioned and his motives suspected we should remain to this)

All of this can be discussed but first please tell us that why do you insist that YLH is a Qadiyani when he himself has stated many times that he is not a Qadiyani. He says that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed was as delusional as Maudodi fool ... and many similar things.

Ap ham khuda to nahi jo dawa ker sakain kisi k eman k baray mein , dilon ka haal tou sirf rab hi janta hai

 

[SQ8]

All of this can be discussed but first please tell us that why do you insist that YLH is a Qadiyani when he himself has stated many times that he is not a Qadiyani. He says that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed was as delusional as Maudodi fool ... and many similar things.

Ap ham khuda to nahi jo dawa ker sakain kisi k eman k baray mein , dilon ka haal tou sirf rab hi janta hai

Unfortunately my source for that is based upon personal contacts, and while that is as concrete as me stating Jinns exist.. it’s a matter of experiencing it or trusting the source; be it one’s senses or a trusted well placed source.
The focus of that distrust however was less Qadiyani belief as much as his payrollers.
We got sidetracked into his religious beliefs which are seconday versus his bankrollers and supporters which to me at least is the primary objection rather than anything else.

Much like I find Hizb Ut Tahrir offensive regarding their methods and supporters instead of whether they pray with one leg up or think all beardless men are sissies.

Frankly, I’d still disagree just based on his sweeping statements.
Much as I do with TLP.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

He insisted that they only consider him as a reformer

That is exactly what this guy says but again when pressed further he prevaricates. Clearly there is a issue but that is not my problem. We all will face our maker and be held accountable individually and not for actions of others. If we can have Sikhs, Christians etc why do we have such a issue with Parsee's. It just provides gunk to mullahs I reckon ....

 

[SQ8]

Hey mate, I really empathize withyou. I really feel bitter about this. For what it's worth I would stand with you guys as Pakistani brothers. Your faith is yours. It's non of my business. I actually had a acquittance in my younger years in the 1980s. I had no idea what a Ahmedi was until I spoke with my dad and he told me. This guy was from Faisalabad I think and he told me [no reason to doubt him as his family was very educated] that his maternal uncle had been pilot in the first batch that went to USA to train on the F-16s. I still am in contact with him. He is just a regular guy and I can't understand this fcukin hate. I really can't. One day I hope Pakistan will move towards a secular society where all of us can be brothers. Until that day I want to thank your community for the srvices it has rendered for Pakistan. Sir Zafarullah comes to mind. Obviously he was good enough for Jinnah but look what has happened today.

It is a very stingy topic and has either a simple “get over it” answer or an extremely complicated one that won’t really solve it.

@M. Sarmad
To avoid digressing further, YLH and his article don’t state anything disputed in terms of Pakistani idealogical confusion but he has not done any research on what is a google click away as demonstrated to you. Regarding the authenticity of all these research levels, while Mohammad Ali Jinnah was instrumental and in MY opinion the ONLY Pakistani leader with no loyalty to anyone outside Pakistan, there isn’t really isnt a clear direction owing to his own political profession as to what Pakistan was to be besides a tolerant Islamic republic.
Is there further research on his vision needed? Yes, but purely from an academic perspective..
his vision for Pakistan died when the unionists and the sycophants started their musical chairs after he died(Liaqat Ali Khan was in my view irrelevant and essentially has his own vested interests).. today’s vision for Pakistan was not gain much from Mohammed Ali Jinnah other than some common sense ideas.. @Indus Pakistan might dispute this or agree.

YLH is to me not a writer I wish to acknowledge (regardless of his target audience which is the same at times as Christene Fair and Tarek Fatah). His belief system is irrelevant to me but his motives aren’t.

The debate on Qadiyanis is both theological and political which transcends Pakistan by a few years and the British Raj’s tacit support of the sect to this day will always be of concern much as Tahir ul Qadris excessive Canadian hibernations or certain Sunni leaderships Arab hugs and so on and so forth.

This goes back to the mentality of a security state(and I inherit some of its paranoia as a former resident).

That is exactly what this guy says but again when pressed further he prevaricates. Clearly there is a issue but that is not my problem. We all will face our maker and be held accountable individually and not for actions of others. If we can have Sikhs, Christians etc why do we have such a issue with Parsee's. It just provides gunk to mullahs I reckon ....

If not Qadiyanis, then frail women.. this cancer that migrated after Partition after calling this land Kafiristan will haunt us to the end of time.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

haunt us to the end of time.

Yeh, you know your right there. Unfortunately!

It is a very stingy topic and has either a simple “get over it” answer or an extremely complicated one that won’t really solve it.

Well said.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Unfortunately my source for that is based upon personal contacts, and while that is as concrete as me stating Jinns exist.. it’s a matter of experiencing it or trusting the source; be it one’s senses or a trusted well placed source.
The focus of that distrust however was less Qadiyani belief as much as his payrollers.
We got sidetracked into his religious beliefs which are seconday versus his bankrollers and supporters which to me at least is the primary objection rather than anything else.

Much like I find Hizb Ut Tahrir offensive regarding their methods and supporters instead of whether they pray with one leg up or think all beardless men are sissies.

Frankly, I’d still disagree just based on his sweeping statements.
Much as I do with TLP.

You know what's the easiest way to render someone unreliable ?

I will give just one Example,
The greatest medieval Muhaddith, Ibn e Hajar Asqalani, declared that the greatest Muslim historian, Al Masudi , had shiite influence, so his history should be rejected. ... Interestingly, he said so after 500 years of death of Al Masudi ..... For 500 years Al Masudi was considered reliable, after Ibn e Hajar's "revelation" he was rendered unreliable ... It's really very easy and effective technique ... Just create a doubt about the religion/belief of your ideological opponents and you will have to "prove" nothing ..

 

[SQ8]

You know what's the easiest way to render someone unreliable ?

I will give just one Example,
The greatest medieval Muhaddith, Ibn e Hajar Asqalani, declared that the greatest Muslim historian, Al Masudi , had shiite influence, so his history should be rejected. ... Interestingly, he said so after 500 years of death of Al Masudi ..... For 500 years Al Masudi was considered reliable, after Ibn e Hajar's "revelation" he was rendered unreliable ... It's really very easy and effective technique ... Just create a doubt about the religion/belief of your ideological opponents and you will have to "prove" nothing ..

The same can be applied in reverse. What YLH has tried to do with the publications on Jinnah.

 

[M. Sarmad]

The same can be applied in reverse. What YLH has tried to do with the publications on Jinnah.

He hasn't "revealed" after reading publications on Jinnah that Jinnah was an Ahmadi (or Shia or Sunni or whatever) or that Jinnah could be declared right or wrong solely on the basis of his religious/political beliefs/affiliation ... So, the same cannot be applied

 

[SQ8]

He hasn't "revealed" after reading publications on Jinnah that Jinnah was an Ahmadi (or Shia or sunni or whatever) or that Jinnah could be declared right on wrong solely on the basis of his religious/political beliefs/affiliation ... So, the same cannot be applied

So you can hide it. That is up to you regarding your veneration for YLH, be it on his content echoing with your ideals or otherwise as your focus is to support him. I oppose him and his kin along with most of his ideals and will do whatever I deem necessary to promote the level of opposition I wish for it.

 

[M. Sarmad]

So you can hide it. That is up to you regarding your veneration for YLH, be it on his content echoing with your ideals or otherwise as your focus is to support him. I oppose him and his kin along with most of his ideals and will do whatever I deem necessary to promote the level of opposition I wish for it.

I do not consider him a scholar as his views are not balanced.
He is an excellent lawyer though ... His strength is not his ideas but how he presents them
In fact none of his ideas are unique ... He only says what a lot of other people have said before him ...
I am defending him only because you guys are attacking him personally


Instead of discussing YLH , we should discuss what he has said ..

 

[TMA]

I know what i am talking about ... I can post Fatwas from the very founders of various Sub Continent sects declaring each other kafirs, dogs of hell and whatnot. But keeping in view the sectarian mud-slinging that will follow I choose not to (can send you PM if you want).


However, the observation made by the Honorable Chief Justice of Pakistan, after questioning Mullahs belonging to all sects regarding definition of Islam, is more than enough to prove my point.

Keeping in view the several definitions given by the ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental? If we attempt our own definition, as each learned divine has done, and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim, but kafirs according to the definition of everyone else.

https://archive.org/details/The1954...tOnTheAntiAhmadiRiotsOfPunjabIn1953/page/n225




Sahi hai bhai



Denial ain't just a river in Egypt

Perhaps I should change my words and say no persecution on Constitutional grounds...would that be more acceptable to you?