Where is Islam in Islamic Republic of Pakistan?

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

kahan ki baat ko kahan lay aey sir ... i strictly beleive in my religion to be my business why are you confusing it with the conversation here , my point was the second para .. with so many sects and bloody fueds btw sects a shariah or an islamic system cant be implemented!! now if you disagree please tell me what you have to say.

I have one question to ask of you sir...

Do you think that people who are involved in such sectarianism are of any importance?

 

[pak-marine]

That's actually completely inaccurate. The method of selecting/electing/appointing the first four caliphs was completely different - there was no standard practice employed between the four.

Can you provide the appropriate ayat in the Quran that says the Caliph is God's second in command?

I tire with these unending perversions of Islam...

let me also add here it was the conflict in caliphate system which created shiasm because these guys which cant be ignored and comprises of appx 20 -25% of muslim population thinks that it was unjustified and becuase of that 1400 years ago today we have a BIG divide btw muslims and a HUGE amount of blood have been spilt !! , so if we take this into account than implementing islam full time in pakistan also means get ready to divide pakistan. These moudidi genes wishes to split pakistan as there grandad wished for

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

let me also add here it was the conflict in caliphate system which created shiasm because these guys which cant be ignored and comprises of appx 20 -25% of muslim population thinks that it was unjustified and becuase of that 1400 years ago today we have a BIG divide btw muslims and a HUGE amount of blood have been spilt !! , so if we take this into account than implementing islam full time in pakistan also means get ready to divide pakistan. These moudidi genes wishes to split pakistan as there grandad wished for

Ludicrous assertion... You honestly think that the Shia are capable of dividing Pakistan because they are not happy with the government?

Pathetic...

 

[pak-marine]

Ludicrous assertion... You honestly think that the Shia are capable of dividing Pakistan because they are not happy with the government?

Pathetic...

AOA , dont get so jumpy my point was it is the flaws in caliphate system which divided the ummah ! if there was no injustice as shias claim and shia and sunnis were 1 how big of an empire muslims would be ! there would have been a lot less bloodshed

 

[T-Faz]

And his words are more important then allah's and his prophets?

I never stated that Jinnah's words were more important but as Pakistan is a nation founded by him, the governing structure should have been set up according to his judgement.

Now this is where Jinnah is WRONG! Many Pakistanis believe he is flawless and saint.

Jinnah said what he thought, it was a truthful statement to a question that was asked of him.

And no Pakistani has claimed Jinnah to be either flawless or a Saint.

Do you know its a sin to say something and do something else? How did Jinnah demand Pakistan? It was because MUSLIMS supported him and they all demanded a land for MUSLIMS!

You say as if all Muslims supported him, the Mullahs of India including many of the well known personalities opposed and cursed Pakistan. After all they did rightfully assume that it was not going to be an Islamic state but later they managed to hijack the nation and do just that.

These Muslims you speak of hailed from various sects and were working for a national identity, not a religious one. After all acquiring a nation is acquiring an identity and you can remain a Muslim even in a country where others are in clear majority.

Maybe to you Jinnah's words are more important but not to me because of the fallowing Hadiths.

I never stated as you so clearly assume.

The Prophet (pbuh)said: "You will not enter paradise until you believe, and you will not believe until you love one another. Shall I not guide you to something which if you carry out you will love one another? Spread salaam amongst yourselves." [Muslim]

Perfectly logical and clear statement, Muslims must show respect, humility and kindness to each-other and to Non Muslims alike. This has got nothing to do with the concept of a nation-state.

The Prophet (pbuh) described the Ummah as one body; if one member becomes sick then the other members of this one body will take care of the sick one

"The Believers, in their mutual love, mercy and compassion, are like one body: if one organ complained, the rest of the body develops a fever." [Bukhari & Muslim]

Perfectly logical again but Pakistan is not the Ummah and neither does it have all of worlds Muslim populace living in it.

Similarly Pakistan has extended help to all Muslim nations as and when required but only got negative influences and strings attached support in return.

The Prophet (pbuh)said: "Do not have malice against a Muslim; do not be envious of other Muslims; do not go against a Muslim and forsake him. O the slave of Allah! Be like brothers with each other. It is not allowed for a Muslim to desert his brother for over three days."

"The believers are nothing else than brothers. So make reconciliation between your brothers, and fear Allah, that you may receive mercy." [Al-Hujjurat, 49:10]

"And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allah and be not divided among yourselves, and remember Allah's Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together, so that, by His Grace, you became brethren, and you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus Allah makes His Ayat clear to you, that you may be guided." [Al-Imran, 3:103]

PLEASE PAY EXTRA ATTENTION TO SURAT AL-IMRAN

thank you

Yes, I know these Hadiths but they are describing relations between Muslims and are not about nation-states and the role of religion within them.

There are many sects in Islam and many states with Muslim citizens, they all have to be together in spirit and a sense of unity through religion. It is not entirely possible to be united under one state that is being proscribed here.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

AOA , dont get so jumpy my point was it is the flaws in caliphate system which divided the ummah ! if there was no injustice as shias claim and shia and sunnis were 1 how big of an empire muslims would be ! there would have been a lot less bloodshed

So you agree that your assertion that Shias will divide Pakistan was wrong... thats good...

Now you need to explain how Caliphate was the cause of bloodshed... Is it some sort of rule in Caliphate that Muslims have to shed blood of each other?

Do you even think before you post?

 

[TechLahore]

Ludicrous assertion... You honestly think that the Shia are capable of dividing Pakistan because they are not happy with the government?

Pathetic...

Your understanding of his comment is what's pathetic.

The point he is trying to make is that you will NOT have all muslims agree to a single formula for sharia. It IS NOT going to happen. So until it does, the sharia crowd can keep waxing poetic, but that doesn't change reality in the slightest.

 

[TechLahore]

So you agree that your assertion that Shias will divide Pakistan was wrong... thats good...

Now you need to explain how Caliphate was the cause of bloodshed... Is it some sort of rule in Caliphate that Muslims have to shed blood of each other?

Do you even think before you post?

Did Muawiya not want to be Caliph? And for this purpose, did he not wage war against Ali, the Caliph of the time? And after Ali, did Yazid not ask Husain for bayt? And when he denied Yazid this bayt, did Yazid not shed blood? Was Yazid not interested in being Caliph and having Husain's bayt as affirmation of a universal following amongst muslims?

I will not get into several other battles and disagreements associated with the earlier caliphate(s), because the above suffices.

 

[Haseebullah]

I think it should be pretty clear that Quaid-E-Azam wanted a Islamic state,if you haven't forgotten the real reason why Pakistan was made and under what slogan the whole Muslims were united.
But that's just me.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Your understanding of his comment is what's pathetic.

The point he is trying to make is that you will NOT have all muslims agree to a single formula for sharia. It IS NOT going to happen. So until it does, the sharia crowd can keep waxing poetic, but that doesn't change reality in the slightest.

and you my dear sir are talking like an 8 year old child... heh even he could post better Tech... You disappoint me...

Now think about this for a minute... Do all people of Pakistan agree with the form of government that is imposed on top of us? Yes or No

Obviously NO...

Is there a government in Pakistan? Yes or No

Obviously YES...

You really think we are going to wait till every tom, dick and harry (and paid agents of our enemies) agree with the Caliphate to establish it...

There is absolutely no need to have everyone agree to the same formula... a few corps commanders would do... Hell... it worked for that idiot Musharaf...

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

AOA , dont get so jumpy my point was it is the flaws in caliphate system which divided the ummah ! if there was no injustice as shias claim and shia and sunnis were 1 how big of an empire muslims would be ! there would have been a lot less bloodshed

assalam alaikum

Brother if u think shia's differences with us just on the caliphs then u don't know the exact story ( response to ur earlier post ). Shia's r not 20-25% the r not more then 15% in the whole islamic world. Regarding their claim of injustice, they can say whatever but when the abbasiese ruling the vast land who was the prime minister of the caliphe he was a shia ( when holaku entered baghdad). shia's had thier own kingdoms over the history of islam qaramta , fatmies but they vanished. All the glory r for sunna ( spreading of islam , tableegh etc)

TARIQ

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Did Muawiya not want to be Caliph? And for this purpose, did he not wage war against Ali, the Caliph of the time? And after Ali, did Yazid not ask Husain for bayt? And when he denied Yazid this bayt, did Yazid not shed blood? Was Yazid not interested in being Caliph and having Husain's bayt as affirmation of a universal following amongst muslims?

I will not get into several other battles and disagreements associated with the earlier caliphate(s), because the above suffices.

SubhanAllah... You dont even know the ABC of the matter and yet comment on it like an expert...

Mawviyah did not fight Ali RA for Caliphate yaar... First do some reading and then comment... War between Mawviyah and Ali RA was over the matter of punishment for the murderers of Usman RA...

The answer to your second question is YES... but that does not mean that we should not have a Caliphate now... Just coz someone is breaking the rules does nt mean that you start doing the same...

 

[Imran Khan]

and you my dear sir are talking like an 8 year old child... heh even he could post better Tech... You disappoint me...

Now think about this for a minute... Do all people of Pakistan agree with the form of government that is imposed on top of us? Yes or No

Obviously NO...

Is there a government in Pakistan? Yes or No

Obviously YES...

You really think we are going to wait till every tom, dick and harry (and paid agents of our enemies) agree with the Caliphate to establish it...

There is absolutely no need to have everyone agree to the same formula... a few corps commanders would do... Hell... it worked for that idiot Musharaf...

i am not expert at all and yes i am kid but whats difrence in this formula you wrote and taliban formula? nothing

you say who care tom herry dick we can impose

its mean you will force people to follow that gov. so there will be civil war.unfinished as we see in Afghanistan communists sleeping long before in there graves Islamics died long before but the fire they start is yet burning and killing millions.

and end you give example of mushy

its mean after 10 years caliph will be run away to west or USA and people will say WO DEKHO Caliphate KA JANAZA JA RAHA HAI.

yes its works hell corps commanders can do it but not forever.that gov has no roots

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

Did Muawiya not want to be Caliph? And for this purpose, did he not wage war against Ali, the Caliph of the time? And after Ali, did Yazid not ask Husain for bayt? And when he denied Yazid this bayt, did Yazid not shed blood? Was Yazid not interested in being Caliph and having Husain's bayt as affirmation of a universal following amongst muslims?

I will not get into several other battles and disagreements associated with the earlier caliphate(s), because the above suffices.

assalam alaikum

U r totally wrong Muawiya didnot fight for caliph he wanted to get hold or the qisas from the killers of the 3rd caliph coz he was his cousin and he had the right to ask for it. If i ask u give us a (authuntic) reference that he wanted caliphat u will not be able to do it but if u want i can bring u the reference from shia book where Ali R-A himself says it was the blood of ussman that we differed. I don't know about urdu books in shia or where to find them since i know arabic book i can post it in arabic if u want

I wished u didnot bring this subject as u always close such threads which discuss this matter.

TARIQ

 

[TechLahore]

SubhanAllah... You dont even know the ABC of the matter and yet comment on it like an expert...

Mawviyah did not fight Ali RA for Caliphate yaar... First do some reading and then comment... War between Mawviyah and Ali RA was over the matter of punishment for the murderers of Usman RA...

The answer to your second question is YES... but that does not mean that we should not have a Caliphate now... Just coz someone is breaking the rules does nt mean that you start doing the same...

That might be your version. Most historians who have analyzed Muawiyah have concluded that his advice to Aisha, Talha and Zubair, as well as his strategy with Siffeen and the subsequent raising of the Qurans on spearheads was all to further his own political cause. He wanted power. Plain and simple. The murder of Usman was a convenient ruse.

Ali's own thoughts on Muawiyah are well captured in his own writings and his speeches. These speeches and writings confirm that Ali too believed Muawiyah to be a power hungry politician who would stop at nothing to ascend the "throne".

And as for your final paragraph, so you agree that the Caliphate, even in the earliest history of Islam - a mere 60 years after the passing of the Prophet - resulted in significant bloodshed. Your earlier assertion stands disproved, then.

Most of the Caliphs that followed Yazid were nothing more than Kings. Go to Topkapi museum some day and look at the riches the Sultans (who declared themselves Caliphs), lavished on themselves.

The Caliphate is not a system inscribed in the Quran. There is a single verse in the Quran that uses the word Khalifa but not to describe the head of a government, rather to describe righteous people. But those who would wanted to twist the words of the Quran to pretend that they had some sort of divine right to rule obviously did so.