What's new

Work begins on first Hindu temple in Islamabad

It is just another publicity stunt of present government.
Pakistan capital to get Hindu temple, crematorium

The Hindu community living in the Pakistan capital will finally be getting a proper temple, allowing them to offer their religious rituals without having to travel out of this city anymore, besides a crematorium - the first in the city.

A simple ground breaking ceremony was held in Islamabad's H-9 sector area, allocating at least 4 kanal land for the construction of the first proper Hindu temple of the capital.

Parliamentary Secretary on Human Rights Lal Chand Malhi, performed the ceremony. He said the Hindu population in the capital has been increasing considerably in the past two decades, making it important to make a temple for them to worship in.

 
.
But What About Reciprocity and Tolerance?!
First of all, ignorant people shouldn’t talk about issues they don’t know the first thing about.

They want to argue that, since Muslims are allowed to have mosques and Islamic institutions in the West, that means Muslims should allow churches and temples in Muslim countries. This is a simple matter of mutual respect and reciprocity, they claim.

Such words demonstrate the depth of their ignorance on these issues.

What is reciprocity? The definition is quite simple, according to the dictionary:

The practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit, especially privileges granted by one country or organization to another.

For example, if someone gives me a gift, I should reciprocate by giving that person a gift or exchanging something else of value that demonstrates good will.

So, doesn’t that mean if non-Muslims allow mosques to be built in their lands, we should allow churches and temples to be built in Muslim lands? Absolutely not! There is absolutely nothing reciprocal about this. This is the exact opposite of reciprocity!

By building mosques and calling to Islam, Muslims are spreading truth and calling to salvation, Heaven, the pleasure of Allah. This is what Muslims are offering: service to humanity. How is that the same as building structures of kufr, calling to destruction, Hell, the displeasure and anger of Allah? How are those things the same?

The only people who view mosques, churches, and temples as all being essentially the same thing are secularists and atheists. From the batil secular perspective, there really is no difference between any of these religions. So reciprocity entails that if mosques are built in the West, then churches should be built in the East. “You scratch my back, I will scratch yours.”

But tell me why Muslims would accept this secular assumption? Why would we grant this atheistic premise? This is like, “I scratch your back, you stab me in the back and send me to the Fire.” How is that fair? How is that reciprocal?

Truth is clear from falsehood. There is no equivalence there.

I can understand why the Pope would see an equivalence and accept the secular presumption. Because he is the figurehead of a false religion, bereft of Divine Guidance. As such, he easily will fall into whatever popular ideologies come along, even when those ideologies contravene his own religion. Prior to the domination of secularism post-Enlightenment, the Catholic Church never allowed non-Catholics to build religious centers in their lands. At the same time, the Church was heavily involved with proselytizing all over the globe. It saw no contradiction in this. But the new Pontiff feels no hesitation in breaking the conventions of his own Church. Oh well. They just went from one kind of batil to another kind of batil.

But alhamdulillah, as Muslims, we have the Sharia as preserved by the ulama. Unlike the Papacy, we have the anchor that prevents us from drifting away from obedience to our Maker.
 
.
But What About Reciprocity and Tolerance?!
First of all, ignorant people shouldn’t talk about issues they don’t know the first thing about.

They want to argue that, since Muslims are allowed to have mosques and Islamic institutions in the West, that means Muslims should allow churches and temples in Muslim countries. This is a simple matter of mutual respect and reciprocity, they claim.

Such words demonstrate the depth of their ignorance on these issues.

What is reciprocity? The definition is quite simple, according to the dictionary:

The practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit, especially privileges granted by one country or organization to another.

For example, if someone gives me a gift, I should reciprocate by giving that person a gift or exchanging something else of value that demonstrates good will.

So, doesn’t that mean if non-Muslims allow mosques to be built in their lands, we should allow churches and temples to be built in Muslim lands? Absolutely not! There is absolutely nothing reciprocal about this. This is the exact opposite of reciprocity!

By building mosques and calling to Islam, Muslims are spreading truth and calling to salvation, Heaven, the pleasure of Allah. This is what Muslims are offering: service to humanity. How is that the same as building structures of kufr, calling to destruction, Hell, the displeasure and anger of Allah? How are those things the same?

The only people who view mosques, churches, and temples as all being essentially the same thing are secularists and atheists. From the batil secular perspective, there really is no difference between any of these religions. So reciprocity entails that if mosques are built in the West, then churches should be built in the East. “You scratch my back, I will scratch yours.”

But tell me why Muslims would accept this secular assumption? Why would we grant this atheistic premise? This is like, “I scratch your back, you stab me in the back and send me to the Fire.” How is that fair? How is that reciprocal?

Truth is clear from falsehood. There is no equivalence there.

I can understand why the Pope would see an equivalence and accept the secular presumption. Because he is the figurehead of a false religion, bereft of Divine Guidance. As such, he easily will fall into whatever popular ideologies come along, even when those ideologies contravene his own religion. Prior to the domination of secularism post-Enlightenment, the Catholic Church never allowed non-Catholics to build religious centers in their lands. At the same time, the Church was heavily involved with proselytizing all over the globe. It saw no contradiction in this. But the new Pontiff feels no hesitation in breaking the conventions of his own Church. Oh well. They just went from one kind of batil to another kind of batil.

But alhamdulillah, as Muslims, we have the Sharia as preserved by the ulama. Unlike the Papacy, we have the anchor that prevents us from drifting away from obedience to our Maker.

And this my friends is called Intolerance.
 
.
Work begins on first Hindu temple in Islamabad
Web DeskOn Jun 24, 2020Last updated Jun 24, 2020

ISLAMABAD: A Hindu temple is being constructed in the federal capital for the first time in the country’s history.

A ceremony to mark the commencement of construction work on the temple in H-9/2 area of the capital was held on Tuesday. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader and Parliamentary Secretary on Human Rights Lal Chand Malhi performed the groundbreaking.

The Capital Development Authority (CDA) had allotted a 20,000 square feet plot to Hindu Panchayat in 2017 for the purpose on the directives of the National Commission for Human Rights.

Construction work suffered delays owing to fulfillment of certain formalities, including the approval of the site map and other documents by the authorities concerned. The temple complex will include a cremation site and separate structures for other religious rituals.

The temple has been named Shri Krishna Mandir.


Speaking on the occasion, Lal Chand Malhi lamented that while India is obstructing Muslims’ access to mosques in occupied Kashmir, we are constructing Shri Krishna Mandir in Islamabad. He added it is the policy of the state and the Government of Pakistan to give rights to minorities residing here.

He appealed to the government to provide funds for the construction of the temple. Others present on the occasion were Hindu Panchayat’s Pritam Das, Mahesh Chaudhry, Ashok Kumar, and Chaman Lal.

https://arynews.tv/en/first-hindu-temple-construction-islamabad/

----------



IMRAN KHAN,S HERO
Tipu Sultan –WAS A Protector of Hindu Temples...


SO IMRAN IS HERE TO PLEASE MODI? THE SECULARS, ATHEISTS?

NAYA PAKISTAN.........?
 
.
How we know, what you are stating about history is true, this forum is any way notorious for stating false history.

Take history whether online or offline always with a "ton" of salt, sugar or any other commodity of your choice.
 
Last edited:
.
Can someone here provide any example, where an Islamic State based sharia had provided fund for building Temple or Church?
Non Muslim were allowed to build their places of worship but were they ever given funds by the state?

A government which state Hajj is a religious obligation on individual and state has no obligation to subsidies Hajj, provide fund for building Gurdawara and provide subsidy to sikh pilgrims and now building Mandir in ISLAMabad... Don't you thing these are contradictory actions?
 
.
But What About Reciprocity and Tolerance?!
First of all, ignorant people shouldn’t talk about issues they don’t know the first thing about.

They want to argue that, since Muslims are allowed to have mosques and Islamic institutions in the West, that means Muslims should allow churches and temples in Muslim countries. This is a simple matter of mutual respect and reciprocity, they claim.

Such words demonstrate the depth of their ignorance on these issues.

What is reciprocity? The definition is quite simple, according to the dictionary:

The practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit, especially privileges granted by one country or organization to another.

For example, if someone gives me a gift, I should reciprocate by giving that person a gift or exchanging something else of value that demonstrates good will.

So, doesn’t that mean if non-Muslims allow mosques to be built in their lands, we should allow churches and temples to be built in Muslim lands? Absolutely not! There is absolutely nothing reciprocal about this. This is the exact opposite of reciprocity!

By building mosques and calling to Islam, Muslims are spreading truth and calling to salvation, Heaven, the pleasure of Allah. This is what Muslims are offering: service to humanity. How is that the same as building structures of kufr, calling to destruction, Hell, the displeasure and anger of Allah? How are those things the same?

The only people who view mosques, churches, and temples as all being essentially the same thing are secularists and atheists. From the batil secular perspective, there really is no difference between any of these religions. So reciprocity entails that if mosques are built in the West, then churches should be built in the East. “You scratch my back, I will scratch yours.”

But tell me why Muslims would accept this secular assumption? Why would we grant this atheistic premise? This is like, “I scratch your back, you stab me in the back and send me to the Fire.” How is that fair? How is that reciprocal?

Truth is clear from falsehood. There is no equivalence there.

I can understand why the Pope would see an equivalence and accept the secular presumption. Because he is the figurehead of a false religion, bereft of Divine Guidance. As such, he easily will fall into whatever popular ideologies come along, even when those ideologies contravene his own religion. Prior to the domination of secularism post-Enlightenment, the Catholic Church never allowed non-Catholics to build religious centers in their lands. At the same time, the Church was heavily involved with proselytizing all over the globe. It saw no contradiction in this. But the new Pontiff feels no hesitation in breaking the conventions of his own Church. Oh well. They just went from one kind of batil to another kind of batil.

But alhamdulillah, as Muslims, we have the Sharia as preserved by the ulama. Unlike the Papacy, we have the anchor that prevents us from drifting away from obedience to our Maker.

I would be surprised to find a SINGLE non-Muslim country which build mosques for Muslims on taxpayers expense.

The mindset of those people is very different and they bring their taxmoney over the slightest of shortcoming of government as they should.

I got my Facebook flooded from a group of Islamic scholars asking for donations for a mosque to be built in Norway in Ramadan and it's still not built due to the high expenses and hurdles.

Norway is a welfare state unlike Riasat e Niazi yet the government won't spend a penny of taxpayers money on building that mosque in fact, put hurdles. Yet see if these so called Muslims will call Norway intolerant or even say "uff". Not to mention the countries that have a blanket ban on Muslims or mosques and destruction of it.

It's shameful to say that today's Muslims are the most beigherat, most ashamed of Islam and feel disgusted to own up to be Muslims.

Ahmad Deedat (May Allah give him Jannat ul Firdous, ameen) said this very clearly


Of course the Non-Muslims hate you, they know Islam will dominate them and is the truth. I don't understand this weasel like behaviour of Muslims. If you know you're following God then why do you care what a person defying and mocking God thinks about you.

No other religion has as much haters as Islam has, no other religion is spreading like Islam does despite all the opposition.

We like to obsess over Ertugrul but are cowards to act like Ertugrul whenever the West objects to our Islamic practices and beliefs.
 
.
Pakistan should revive its economy rather than going for this virtue signaling PR stunt. Nothing against Hindu temples, the 5 Hindus of Islamabad have a new place to go now, but please pay for it for yourself. Government shouldn’t fund religious buildings - including mosques - if people have the need for public places of worship they will manage to build them on their own!

It is my opinion that all holy places in Pakistan need to have government supervision. This will prevent sectarianism, give them official support, and badly needed oversight.

We have far too long avoided the necessary steps needed to rein in religious organizations in Pakistsn who have betrayed the country.

That also requires the government to adopt official stances of religious jurisprudence, especially acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. Pakistan would no longer be a secular state. It is badly needed in my opinion.

All speakers, muazin, teachers,and muftis would need to become government employees.
 
.
I object to any free land and government funds to build this temple. Otherwise, I don't see any problem.
 
. .
.
It is my opinion that all holy places in Pakistan need to have government supervision. This will prevent sectarianism, give them official support, and badly needed oversight.

We have far too long avoided the necessary steps needed to rein in religious organizations in Pakistsn who have betrayed the country.

That also requires the government to adopt official stances of religious jurisprudence, especially acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. Pakistan would no longer be a secular state. It is badly needed in my opinion.

All speakers, muazin, teachers,and muftis would need to become government employees.
Brother I respect your opinion, but you should consider the fact that people tend to sectarianism no matter what kind of government is in charge. I think it's a basic human trait to set new borders within a community. Right now the government has created an environment there every "religious" idiot can start a riot and destroy the economy of a specific region. The government must provide basic security measures for its people.

You must also know that the our current state of affairs is due to the fact that governments employed Mullahs and organized a new religion. Religion shouldn't be controlled by the government, it should influence our state (of mind!) in a manner that we can achieve JUSTICE (not the kind of "justice" the leftist SJWs want).

Look at Saudi-Arabia, their Mullahs will condemn interest each and every time but if the KSA government takes out loans from foreign countries it's okay to do so? Yeah, thanks for nothing.

I just want to say that politics is a dirty game, you as an American resident can watch the spectacle every day now during the pre-election period: "Trump didn't wear a mask, Biden doesn't know how to sneeze correctly!" religion shouldn't be influenced by this game, it should rather influence the minds and hearts of politicians to do the right thing.
 
.
Brother I respect your opinion, but you should consider the fact that people tend to sectarianism no matter what kind of government is in charge. I think it's a basic human trait to set new borders within a community. Right now the government has created an environment there every "religious" idiot can start a riot and destroy the economy of a specific region. The government must provide basic security measures for its people.

You must also know that the our current state of affairs is due to the fact that governments employed Mullahs and organized a new religion. Religion shouldn't be controlled by the government, it should influence our state (of mind!) in a manner that we can achieve JUSTICE (not the kind of "justice" the leftist SJWs want).

Look at Saudi-Arabia, their Mullahs will condemn interest each and every time but if the KSA government takes out loans from foreign countries it's okay to do so? Yeah, thanks for nothing.

I just want to say that politics is a dirty game, you as an American resident can watch the spectacle every day now during the pre-election period: "Trump didn't wear a mask, Biden doesn't know how to sneeze correctly!" religion shouldn't be influenced by this game, it should rather influence the minds and hearts of politicians to do the right thing.

I agree, the current mess of a political leadership is not ready, however in sha Allah, when we have a technocrats and merit-based government founded on Islamic principles, then it will be time for major religious reforms.

As of now, basically, Pakistan is a secular state which gives token service to Islam. I want us to be more than that.
 
.
Work begins on first Hindu temple in Islamabad
Web DeskOn Jun 24, 2020Last updated Jun 24, 2020

ISLAMABAD: A Hindu temple is being constructed in the federal capital for the first time in the country’s history.

A ceremony to mark the commencement of construction work on the temple in H-9/2 area of the capital was held on Tuesday. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader and Parliamentary Secretary on Human Rights Lal Chand Malhi performed the groundbreaking.

The Capital Development Authority (CDA) had allotted a 20,000 square feet plot to Hindu Panchayat in 2017 for the purpose on the directives of the National Commission for Human Rights.

Construction work suffered delays owing to fulfillment of certain formalities, including the approval of the site map and other documents by the authorities concerned. The temple complex will include a cremation site and separate structures for other religious rituals.

The temple has been named Shri Krishna Mandir.


Speaking on the occasion, Lal Chand Malhi lamented that while India is obstructing Muslims’ access to mosques in occupied Kashmir, we are constructing Shri Krishna Mandir in Islamabad. He added it is the policy of the state and the Government of Pakistan to give rights to minorities residing here.

He appealed to the government to provide funds for the construction of the temple. Others present on the occasion were Hindu Panchayat’s Pritam Das, Mahesh Chaudhry, Ashok Kumar, and Chaman Lal.

https://arynews.tv/en/first-hindu-temple-construction-islamabad/

----------
That is a stupid idea and an act of deep shame for us all. We respect our non-Muslim fellow Pakistanis. Minorities in an Islamic country get protection and freedom to worship according to their beliefs. But that doesn't really mean that the government or state start building idle-worshiping places. That is an open declaration of war against Allah (SwT) , His prophet Muhammed (PBUH), and the Shariah. Whoever came up with this idea must be punished along with all those who approved this. A few years ago some Arabb kingdoms did the same stupid thing and since then they are caught by the punishment from Allah Jallu-Jalaluhu. May Allah Rahim and Kareem forgive us and have a mercy on Pakistan.
 
.
That is a stupid idea and an act of deep shame for us all. We respect our non-Muslim fellow Pakistanis. Minorities in an Islamic country get protection and freedom to worship according to their beliefs. But that doesn't really mean that the government or state start building idle-worshiping places. That is an open declaration of war against Allah (SwT) , His prophet Muhammed (PBUH), and the Shariah. Whoever came up with this idea must be punished along with all those who approved this. A few years ago some Arabb kingdoms did the same stupid thing and since then they are caught by the punishment from Allah Jallu-Jalaluhu. May Allah Rahim and Kareem forgive us and have a mercy on Pakistan.

"He appealed to the government to provide funds for the construction of the temple."

Only thing gov has done is provide the formalities to allow the construction. All you people crying that gov shouldn't spend money on building can't seem to read a basic English. No where does the article say gov is giving money to build it.

But i am 100% sure the people here making claims that gov has funded this, even though it hasn't, will be now forwarding this on whatsapp and facebook claiming gov is funding it.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom