Zakir Naik rejects Two Nation Thoery

[Materialistic]

sorry i forgot about the Zakir Naik.

One who being a Muslim can support Yazeed is just like a Bishop or a Molvi supporting Anti-Christ (Dajjal) or a Pandit supporting Rawann. So whatelse is to be expected from such a person.

 

[EjazR]

@kalidali

Bhai,

I am surprised that that you would strong words like I "hate" Pakistan. I have repeatedly stated that my rejecting the TWT in no way means that Pakistan should cease to exist. That it should now join with India. On the other hand, I have insisted that it should remain independent but usher in an era of co-operation in a SAARC like framework. Many eminent Pakistanis have also mentioned that pre-Zia era, the TWT was not taught as the ideology of Pakistan.

Now coming to my specific comment about Pakistan being a liability, it was in reply to another member commenting that Pakistan looks after the interests of Indian Muslims and that Indian Muslims should thankful for the existence of Pakistan. And what I said is not a reflection of Pakistani people many of whom I have friendly relations with. Our arguments on issues doesn't result in "hate" for each other.

However, the negative impact is due to GoP policies towards India. This is not my personal opinion but the opinion of many Muslims. This article can probably give a better view of what I mean.
Pakistan?s Impact on Indian Muslims | Indian Muslims

The rest of your comment, I will say that yes we have problems in India, the partition left the Indian Muslims in a weaker position which is a fact. Most of the elites and educated, particularly from UP-Bihar migrated to Pakistan. But you are mistaken that Indians are not doing anything for Gujarat riot victims. Sure the pace is slow but its steady. Not only Indian Muslims but Indians of other faiths as well provided aid and support to riot victims, exposed the atrocities through the media, took up riot cases and involved the SC to bring the culprits to justice.

If Pakistan wants to help Indian Muslims, it can instead of supporting the misguided youth by teaching them terror tactics and returning them to India for militancy e.t.c engage with the GoI and genuinely try to establish a peaceful relationship. You might say that why does India create this misguided youth in the first place by not managing its riots e.t.c and I agree. But the point is should GoP take advantage of this or does it genuinely care about Indian Muslims well being. I think this article here also captures this theme as well. http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...lk-indian-visitors-babar-ayaz.html#post702171

For example, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Iran have helped Indian Muslims much more by having a co-operative attitude with GoI.

Again, I hope you understand that I don't hate Pakistan, nor reject its existence or even want some sort of unification even though I reject the TWT.
I and any Indian who believes in the Indian constitution can't agree with the TWT. I can't agree with the same TWT that is supported by small section of Hindu extremists groups in India. And especially because I don't see any justification of it in Quran or Sunnah.

I won't go into the details of how some Pakistanis look down on Indian muslims despite the fact that the leaders of Pakistan movement were from present day India and their national language is after all a language that was native to India. Some don't even want "open borders" or a Cannada-US relationship here even though that is how Jinnah envisaged India-Pakistan relations.
But even if some Pakistanis refer to Indian Muslims misguidedly as "munafiq" and what not, I know (and hope) that majority of the Pakistani people don't feel that way.

Hope that clarifies my viewpoint.

 

[notsuperstitious]

I and any Indian who believes in the Indian constitution can't agree with the TWT.

Well said EjazR. This for some reason pakistanis chose to ignore and equate rejection of two nation theory with wanting to destroy pakistan.

We do not believe in two nation theory because we have hundreds of millions so called minorities and if we endorse the theory then we'll have to again split won't we? Hence we do not believe in the theory, and after bangladesh, even pakistanis should not.

 

[niaz]

Firstly let us keep sectarianism aside, whether Zakir Naik is a Yazidi or not is immaterial. Fact is that he is a popular Islamic evangelist and darling of the media. His opinions therefore influence a lot of naïve believers.

Allama Iqbal is one of my gurus, however I acknowledge the fact that Allama was also a human being and the possibility that he was mistaken cannot be ruled out. Allama had been greatly influenced by pan Islamic philosophers such as Jamaluddin Afghani. Situations and conditions change with time. Zakir Naik is speaking 63 years after the event and thus with 20/20 hindsight. How would he have behaved in the 1930’s and 40’s is only a matter of conjecture. Whether nations are born out of religion (Islamic Ummah) or from region is an on going debate. Historical experience probably favors the regional factors and only two states; Pakistan & Israel in the world are religion based

The fact remains that Pakistan has been a reality since 1947. East Pakistan seceded but did not join India and formed an independent Bangla Desh. Even if Pakistan breaks up further (I wouldn’t want to live to see that day), the new states would be independent and wouldn’t join with India.

In my view two nation theory was very relevant in the period after 1930’s and was originally proposed to ensure separate electorate for the Muslims; similar to the proportional representation in practice in many European democracies such as Germany and France. Two nation theory became irrelevant as soon as Pakistan came into being.

Greatest irony remains that all parties that opposed creation of Pakistan in the first place are those that want to impose their version of Islam on Pakistan by force. Deobandi Sheikh ul Hind, Maulana Madani was dead against Pakistan and JI founder Maudoodi dubbed the Quaid as ‘Kaffir Azam'. Founding fathers however never dreamed of creating an orthodox Wahabi Sunni state that JI, JUI and Taliban and also followers of the Khilafat dream of. Muslim League never associated itself with the slogan "Pakistan ka matlab kia, La Illaha illah”. This was coined by bigoted Islamic parties such as Ahraars who joined the Pakistan bandwagon only when it became evident the partition was on the cards.

There is also little doubt that majority of Muslims in India today enjoy a better standard of living and more freedom than poor Muslims of Pakistan ( IMO almost 70% of the population) This has prompted some Pakistanis to question the very basis of creation of Pakistan. For example Altaf Hussein is reputed have said that creation of Pakistan was a mistake. This is however water under the bridge and discussion is pointless as what has happened cannot be undone. On the other hand, supporters of Lal Masjid rebels which include CJ Iftikhar Chaudry and PML (N) are a proof that Pakistan of today is a dream gone sour.

 

[rubyjackass]

Why they don't consider it that the presence of Pakistan as an Islamic state in the neighborhood of India is itself a refuge and infact a source of defense for indian muslims ;Formation of Pakistan lead the congress and Indian leader to consider Muslims of india a powerful minority.They were forced to give them their rights in order to avoid an other division of the remaining country.(Although i still feel that the indian leadership still failing to give them the respect/rights they deserve.).Before partion the rule of congress ministries in 1937-1939 was an eye opener for the indian muslims.I think Zakir Naik unfortunately missed that era.
Pakistan Zindabad

You are grossly misled dude. Or it could be wishful thinking. I see everyday the stunts pulled by politicians and parties here trying to plaacte very goddamn caste sect, region and religion. Even if they did not like it, they would be forced to do the same.
What happened is that the intellectual muslims who could have 'defended' their peers went for Pakistan leaving behind what is now in India.

 

[rubyjackass]

So Mountbatten favored Nehru because Nehru was sleeping with his wife?

He could be watching

 

[Luftwaffe]

Materialistic and others Lets leave the topic here all do your home works gather contents and read history some of you maybe missing something absurd to call someone yizidi while you people watch pornos and what not and come out here be clean Muslims..fix your own selves before pointing at others...I'll break off from this thread..useless your fat heads understand nothing except for few..and thank you for good explanation niaz..

 

[third eye]

There is also little doubt that majority of Muslims in India today enjoy a better standard of living and more freedom than poor Muslims of Pakistan ( IMO almost 70% of the population) This has prompted some Pakistanis to question the very basis of creation of Pakistan. For example Altaf Hussein is reputed have said that creation of Pakistan was a mistake. This is however water under the bridge and discussion is pointless as what has happened cannot be undone. On the other hand, supporters of Lal Masjid rebels which include CJ Iftikhar Chaudry and PML (N) are a proof that Pakistan of today is a dream gone sour.

This is the 1st time I have read something like this.

We all had our chances we blew some and made it with some.

What are we squabbling about ? Thank god for the partition, the mujaheedien would be in Hyderabad , Lucknow, Bhopal and god knows how many more places.

Pak today is nowhere close what its founding fathers wanted it to be.They need to apply the correctives as they deem fit.

 

[MastanKhan]

oh well i partially agree with Zakir Naik here.......... you see he is saying it could have been more better if all the Muslims of the subcontinent were living as a one country

I know he is against the Two nation theory but what if all the Muslims of Subcontinent had the seperator country instead? It could have been far bigger country than this

Hi,

We still can---seperate but together like the european union. Each has its own identity but then the goals are similiar.

 

[asq]

yawn...still...why doesn't pakistan offer "right of return" to all muslims?

What an ignorant statement.

Let me open your brain a litlle. At the time of partition, Mr.Azad chose to stay in India on the promises of heavens and stars by would be prime minister Nehru, believing it he choose to stay back in India along with many MUslims.

Those promises were fake and the proof is the treatment dished out to these Muslims in the past 60 years.

They chose to stay back and U cannot fault them for believing in a man of integrity, at least they thought about him, but it turned out to be a lie.

Sure we are willing to take them back as long as they are given the land, the resources and the wealth belonging to them as they are 120 millions.

so to put it simply, let us do it once again and devide India to give the share of 120 million and create another muslim state. would you not agree that if you like to get rid of them, they should have a place to go.

1947 Pakistan was devided for those who came at the time, now for 120 million we will need more space, money and resources. choice is yours. dude.

So read the history and stop puting your weired ideas on the forum.

 

[asq]

This is the 1st time I have read something like this.

We all had our chances we blew some and made it with some.

What are we squabbling about ? Thank god for the partition, the mujaheedien would be in Hyderabad , Lucknow, Bhopal and god knows how many more places.

Pak today is nowhere close what its founding fathers wanted it to be.They need to apply the correctives as they deem fit.

The reason for Pakistan not close to its progress is that it is used by opertunistic forces for their needs and than abandon it.

Not a friendly acts, I say.

but we are a people of metal and of fighting souls, we shall overcome.

Another in our place would be running like a chicken with head cutoff.

We have been chosen to do this for the good of our people and for world.

cupish. Dude.

 

[Jackdaws]

What an ignorant statement.

Let me open your brain a litlle. At the time of partition, Mr.Azad chose to stay in India on the promises of heavens and stars by would be prime minister Nehru, believing it he choose to stay back in India along with many MUslims.

Those promises were fake and the proof is the treatment dished out to these Muslims in the past 60 years.

They chose to stay back and U cannot fault them for believing in a man of integrity, at least they thought about him, but it turned out to be a lie.

Sure we are willing to take them back as long as they are given the land, the resources and the wealth belonging to them as they are 120 millions.

so to put it simply, let us do it once again and devide India to give the share of 120 million and create another muslim state. would you not agree that if you like to get rid of them, they should have a place to go.

1947 Pakistan was devided for those who came at the time, now for 120 million we will need more space, money and resources. choice is yours. dude.

So read the history and stop puting your weired ideas on the forum.

Clearly, I have read far more history than you have since you have no clue about either history or the point I was making.

a. I never said Indian Muslims should leave or be forced out of India - it is their country too. I questioned that out of 2 countries formed on the basis of religion on the planet - a. Israel (homeland of Jews) and b. Pakistan (homeland of subcontinental Muslims) - why doesn't Pakistan have law which would allow any Muslim to emigrate? Even if they did - lol - I don't think anyone would.

b. What are these promises of heavens and stars made by Nehru? Equality? Right to adult franchise? A separate civil code?

c. "1947 Pakistan was devided for those who came at the time" - that is a blatant lie - it was divided on the basis of religion and people crossed borders right up to the 1965 war. Classic example is Asif Iqbal - the Hyderabadi cricketer who later moved to Pakistan in 1961. Learn your history before commenting.

 

[asq]

Clearly, I have read far more history than you have since you have no clue about either history or the point I was making.

a. I never said Indian Muslims should leave or be forced out of India - it is their country too. I questioned that out of 2 countries formed on the basis of religion on the planet - a. Israel (homeland of Jews) and b. Pakistan (homeland of subcontinental Muslims) - why doesn't Pakistan have law which would allow any Muslim to emigrate? Even if they did - lol - I don't think anyone would.

b. What are these promises of heavens and stars made by Nehru? Equality? Right to adult franchise? A separate civil code?

c. "1947 Pakistan was devided for those who came at the time" - that is a blatant lie - it was divided on the basis of religion and people crossed borders right up to the 1965 war. Classic example is Asif Iqbal - the Hyderabadi cricketer who later moved to Pakistan in 1961. Learn your history before commenting.[/quote

you are not only totaly rong, but funny is u keep insisiting that u r right, only on Pakistani forum, on an India forum they wont even let me be the member.

At the time of patition Nehru promised and in 60 years, their has been more than 300 Mulim killing roits in India, where is that India promised to Muslims by Nehru,

and don't tell me I donot know the history, u should read your shining India's record and than come and talk.

One of your compadre is saying that their should be right of return, he is using analogy used by Israelis, they apply the this rule to Palistenians. Israel is forcibaly taking the land belonging to Palistenaians and settling their new comers, u want us to do the same, we have no problem doing it, with new comers we will take the land and settle them. Dude.

Itr was devided on the based of Nehru's extras martial affairs and not by the considering options of those who wanted to join PaKistan. Hyderabad, Junagarh are two of the few examples WHICH WERE FORCIBALY KEPT IN iNDIA, which were to come to Pakistan. Dude. Dude.

Those who chose to stay back were asked by Maulana AZAD TO STAY BACK and did so on their own, now after 60 years, if they want, we will need more land.Dude.


U should read this article writen by an Indian refering to Patition, mostly taking about basngal, but once u read in an unprejudice manner u will,see what was dished out to Mslims.

Partition and Bengal: A book review of Joya Chatterji's 'The Spoils of Partition' - South Asia Citizens Web

for those of u who with their agenda are criticising Pakistan. Read and learn the facts.

Be Pakistan - The Color Of Our Blood Is Green - Long Live Pakistan

And read this and learn the real culprit noted as Nehru asusuming that pakistan will come back to rejoin as India will force unreasonable measures and starngle it to rethnk its existance.

Initial problems of Pak

Now i can go on more, but this should be enough for you to stop spreading you propognada and Indian agenda on a Pakistani forum.

Dude.

 

[Jackdaws]

sorry i forgot about the Zakir Naik.

One who being a Muslim can support Yazeed is just like a Bishop or a Molvi supporting Anti-Christ (Dajjal) or a Pandit supporting Rawann. So whatelse is to be expected from such a person.

Ravan himself was a pandit - and performed a yagna for Ram although he knew that it was for Ram wanting to defeat him. So there u go.

 

[Jackdaws]

Clearly, I have read far more history than you have since you have no clue about either history or the point I was making.

a. I never said Indian Muslims should leave or be forced out of India - it is their country too. I questioned that out of 2 countries formed on the basis of religion on the planet - a. Israel (homeland of Jews) and b. Pakistan (homeland of subcontinental Muslims) - why doesn't Pakistan have law which would allow any Muslim to emigrate? Even if they did - lol - I don't think anyone would.

b. What are these promises of heavens and stars made by Nehru? Equality? Right to adult franchise? A separate civil code?

c. "1947 Pakistan was devided for those who came at the time" - that is a blatant lie - it was divided on the basis of religion and people crossed borders right up to the 1965 war. Classic example is Asif Iqbal - the Hyderabadi cricketer who later moved to Pakistan in 1961. Learn your history before commenting.[/quote

you are not only totaly rong, but funny is u keep insisiting that u r right, only on Pakistani forum, on an India forum they wont even let me be the member.

At the time of patition Nehru promised and in 60 years, their has been more than 300 Mulim killing roits in India, where is that India promised to Muslims by Nehru,

and don't tell me I donot know the history, u should read your shining India's record and than come and talk.

One of your compadre is saying that their should be right of return, he is using analogy used by Israelis, they apply the this rule to Palistenians. Israel is forcibaly taking the land belonging to Palistenaians and settling their new comers, u want us to do the same, we have no problem doing it, with new comers we will take the land and settle them. Dude.

Itr was devided on the based of Nehru's extras martial affairs and not by the considering options of those who wanted to join PaKistan. Hyderabad, Junagarh are two of the few examples WHICH WERE FORCIBALY KEPT IN iNDIA, which were to come to Pakistan. Dude. Dude.

Those who chose to stay back were asked by Maulana AZAD TO STAY BACK and did so on their own, now after 60 years, if they want, we will need more land.Dude.


U should read this article writen by an Indian refering to Patition, mostly taking about basngal, but once u read in an unprejudice manner u will,see what was dished out to Mslims.

Partition and Bengal: A book review of Joya Chatterji's 'The Spoils of Partition' - South Asia Citizens Web

for those of u who with their agenda are criticising Pakistan. Read and learn the facts.

Be Pakistan - The Color Of Our Blood Is Green - Long Live Pakistan

And read this and learn the real culprit noted as Nehru asusuming that pakistan will come back to rejoin as India will force unreasonable measures and starngle it to rethnk its existance.

Initial problems of Pak

Now i can go on more, but this should be enough for you to stop spreading you propognada and Indian agenda on a Pakistani forum.

Dude.

Do you even know when is an appropriate time to use the word "dude"? Anyhow - I offered you historical evidence of the likes of a cricketer migrating right upto the 1960s. You on the other hand only have rants.