Zakir Naik rejects Two Nation Thoery

[Hyde]

please ask i hope i can answer

good...... you just mentioned

No Islamic history not part of Islam (you were referring to Politics

Now i am going to ask you what is Khilafat? one of my dear friend asked me this question couple of months back and he had a point

You see

1) Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique R.A. was elected as Khalifa by Umar RA and some other prominent Sahabas and there were division among Muslims..... at least 3 peoples wanted to become Khalifa that time rihgt?

2) Hazrat Umar R.A. was elected Khalifa by the will of Hazrat Abu Bakr (entirely a different procedure of electing Khalifa comparing to Abu Bakr R.A.)

3) Hazrat Usman R.A was elected as Khalifa by the remaining Ashra-e-Mubashra (10 Sahabas who were given the good news of Jannah here in this world). Some of them had died by that time but remaining Sahabas were given the authority to elect Khalifa (by Hazrat Umar R.A) thats also entirely a different way of electing Khalifa comparing to Hazrat Abu Bakr or Umar RA

4) Hazrat Ali R.A. was elected Khalifa by the group of peoples/Sahabas living close to him and not all Muslim could find consensus on his Khilafat thus ultimately had to fight against two different Muslim groups first led by Ayesha Siddiqua RA and later on after 6 years had to fight against Ameer Ma'awiya R.A.

--------------------------

Now my question is

When you say "Khilafat Waqt ka taqaza hai" what kind of Khilafat are you talking about among these Khilafas? since all of them differed in way of electing Khalifa?

This is half of my question...... i will ask remaining half after you reply

 

[Spring Onion]

I could give you links of how the Mumbai muslim community refused burial for the mumbai attackers and where angry muslim protesters were burning Pakistani flags.

But I don't think that will change your opinion.

Anyways, to get back the good will of the average Afghans, Iranians and Indians including Indian muslims. It would be good if you stop equating Pakistan with Islam. and India with anti-Islam all the time.

I think they did the right thing for reasons

1. The Killed attackers are still not proven if they were Muslims or Hindus


2. If the Indian Muslims did not refuse to burry them then Indian Hindus would have burried them alive.


So overall a wise decision by them just like issuing fatwas against slaughtering of Cows by Muslims

 

[pak-yes]

The Burning of Pakistani Flags by Mumbai Muslims Clearly shows the fear Muslims have in their heart and mind in India.

 

[praveen]

The Burning of Pakistani Flags by Mumbai Muslims Clearly shows the fear Muslims have in their heart and mind in India.

 

[Hyde]

@ Musalman

Just to clear your misconceptions i am not against Khilafat....... but when it comes to ask what is Khilafat....... many of our peoples do not even know what it is

You see u just said Politics is not part of Islam....... but don't you think When Hazrat Umar R.A. authored Ashra-e-Mubashara to elect new Khalifa/Caliph was it not like the democratic system we have in our countries?............. the only difference i find is...... instead of those Ashra-e-Mubashara........ the peoples of our country have been authorized to vote for the next Prime Minister?

 

[EjazR]

@Jana and pak-yes
I have tried to show you the changing reality of what is happening. Otherwise one day you would express surprise, just as some Pakistani express surprise when they hear how Afghans don't like Pakistan, how Kashmiris don't want Pakistani interference and how Iranians are fed up with Pakistan's anti-shia support of Saudi/US sponsored groups.

This is no way means the Pakistani people, but when the GoP policies cause so much problems to the people living around them, they are bound to say that.

What excuse do the Afghans have of hating the ISI e.t.c.? Are the "Hindus" going to bury them alive? Why did the Afghan King in the 1947 threaten to invade Pakistan and called the ruling elite then an agent of the British? Was the newly formed and weak GoI so powerful that they were able exert their influence?

Anyways, I think I have tried my best. The rest is up to you. But don't be surprised when you meet an Indian muslim who still expresses unfavorable view of Pakistani policies despite no "Hindu" around to "threaten" him/her

 

[Fighter488]

good...... you just mentioned



Now i am going to ask you what is Khilafat? one of my dear friend asked me this question couple of months back and he had a point

You see

1) Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique R.A. was elected as Khalifa by Umar RA and some other prominent Sahabas and there were division among Muslims..... at least 3 peoples wanted to become Khalifa that time rihgt?

2) Hazrat Umar R.A. was elected Khalifa by the will of Hazrat Abu Bakr (entirely a different procedure of electing Khalifa comparing to Abu Bakr R.A.)

3) Hazrat Usman R.A was elected as Khalifa by the remaining Ashra-e-Mubashra (10 Sahabas who were given the good news of Jannah here in this world). Some of them had died by that time but remaining Sahabas were given the authority to elect Khalifa (by Hazrat Umar R.A) thats also entirely a different way of electing Khalifa comparing to Hazrat Abu Bakr or Umar RA

4) Hazrat Ali R.A. was elected Khalifa by the group of peoples/Sahabas living close to him and not all Muslim could find consensus on his Khilafat thus ultimately had to fight against two different Muslim groups first led by Ayesha Siddiqua RA and later on after 6 years had to fight against Ameer Ma'awiya R.A.

--------------------------

Now my question is

When you say "Khilafat Waqt ka taqaza hai" what kind of Khilafat are you talking about among these Khilafas? since all of them differed in way of electing Khalifa?

This is half of my question...... i will ask remaining half after you reply

Good Question Zaki. I am waiting for an answer, as well.

Some one here in this thread said that politics is not part of Islam. I wonder then how, without political structure, a country would run, even by Khilafah. Why then a huge amount of Islamic laws (Fiqah/jurisprudence) are all about, if there are no place for alternate opinions, political or otherwise?

Fighter

 

[Musalman]

good...... you just mentioned



Now i am going to ask you what is Khilafat? one of my dear friend asked me this question couple of months back and he had a point

You see

1) Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique R.A. was elected as Khalifa by Umar RA and some other prominent Sahabas and there were division among Muslims..... at least 3 peoples wanted to become Khalifa that time rihgt?

2) Hazrat Umar R.A. was elected Khalifa by the will of Hazrat Abu Bakr (entirely a different procedure of electing Khalifa comparing to Abu Bakr R.A.)

3) Hazrat Usman R.A was elected as Khalifa by the remaining Ashra-e-Mubashra (10 Sahabas who were given the good news of Jannah here in this world). Some of them had died by that time but remaining Sahabas were given the authority to elect Khalifa (by Hazrat Umar R.A) thats also entirely a different way of electing Khalifa comparing to Hazrat Abu Bakr or Umar RA

4) Hazrat Ali R.A. was elected Khalifa by the group of peoples/Sahabas living close to him and not all Muslim could find consensus on his Khilafat thus ultimately had to fight against two different Muslim groups first led by Ayesha Siddiqua RA and later on after 6 years had to fight against Ameer Ma'awiya R.A.

--------------------------

Now my question is

When you say "Khilafat Waqt ka taqaza hai" what kind of Khilafat are you talking about among these Khilafas? since all of them differed in way of electing Khalifa?

This is half of my question...... i will ask remaining half after you reply

You see that was the time when Islam was spreading and people were starting to accept Islam. However, their knowledge was not as complete as that of Muslim of Medina. Therefore, initially it was the people of Madina (i.e. the sahabah of the Prophet(SAW) who elected the Khalifah. I agree completely different method were used. However in any case a complete bait of all citizen was taken ... making it a referendum. Hazrat Ali (RA) initially did not gave bait to Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA) due to political difference but later he gave him the bait.

In today's world a Khalifah should be a democratically elected person by Muslims. However, qualification of Khalifah should be the same as per our constitution artcle 62, meaning a Sadik and Amin . One who follows all features of Islam and in any way d not contradict Islam. Election comission in this case should have to be a council of Ulema and elders (also following the same article) who should allow that person to contest. Once elected he should be the Khalifah.

 

[Musalman]

@ Musalman

Just to clear your misconceptions i am not against Khilafat....... but when it comes to ask what is Khilafat....... many of our peoples do not even know what it is

You see u just said Politics is not part of Islam....... but don't you think When Hazrat Umar R.A. authored Ashra-e-Mubashara to elect new Khalifa/Caliph was it not like the democratic system we have in our countries?............. the only difference i find is...... instead of those Ashra-e-Mubashara........ the peoples of our country have been authorized to vote for the next Prime Minister?

Yes it was but now a days the key issue is that of the qualification of our elcted MNA. I due to my job is in contact with these MNA's and minister every day. I despise them all. Trust me they are full of *****. This is because article 62 is not used when their candidature was authorized by the EC

Good Question Zaki. I am waiting for an answer, as well.

Some one here in this thread said that politics is not part of Islam. I wonder then how, without political structure, a country would run, even by Khilafah. Why then a huge amount of Islamic laws (Fiqah/jurisprudence) are all about?

Fighter

Politics is allowed in Islam. Politics done after the Prophet (SAW) is part of Islamic history not necessarily Islam. It is Islam we have to follow not the acts done by people after the Prophet(SAW) when we have guidance of the Prophet (SAW)

 

[Hyde]

You see that was the time when Islam was spreading and people were starting to accept Islam. However, their knowledge was not as complete as that of Muslim of Medina. Therefore, initially it was the people of Madina (i.e. the sahabah of the Prophet(SAW) who elected the Khalifah. I agree completely different method were used. However in any case a complete bait of all citizen was taken ... making it a referendum. Hazrat Ali (RA) initially did not gave bait to Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA) due to political difference but later he gave him the bait.

In today's world a Khalifah should be a democratically elected person by Muslims. However, qualification of Khalifah should be the same as per our constitution artcle 62, meaning a Sadik and Amin . One who follows all features of Islam and in any way d not contradict Islam. Election comission in this case should have to be a council of Ulema and elders (also following the same article) who should allow that person to contest. Once elected he should be the Khalifah.

But what exactly is Khilafat is now?

please care to define what kind of Islamic degrees most of the Muslim rulers had? including the Sahabas like Umar R.A. who ruled the world?

Hazrat Ali R.A. said "Awam main se hi Hakim aatay hain / You find leaders from the public" If the public is SAADIK and Ameen (Truthful and Honest) you will find the honest leaders...... if the public is corrupt...... how are you expecting the leader to be an Angel?

and for your general knowledge, Prophet Muhammad gave a full training to Sahabas...... he was probably the only Prophet who got enough time to teach each and every single thing of Islam to Sahabas hence completed the Religion for the mankind. Do you know about 124,000 Sahabas were presented on Khutba-tul-Wida?

and don't know how many more Sahabas there will be by that time?

 

[Fighter488]

I think they did the right thing for reasons

1. The Killed attackers are still not proven if they were Muslims or Hindus


2. If the Indian Muslims did not refuse to burry them then Indian Hindus would have burried them alive.


So overall a wise decision by them just like issuing fatwas against slaughtering of Cows by Muslims

This shows a very limited and coherent information, you have about India, dear Jana.
1. If they are not proven Muslims / Pakistani, there is no proof of them being otherwise, as well. You or any other, widely informed, educated and reasonable Pakistani brother / sister, did not prove that they were actually HINDU FANATICS controlled by RAW!

2. Again your assumption! You did not know the fact that GUJRAT was the last straw, in developing India. The -ve publicity it gave, will not be tolerated again by any government in India. So there is no place for another GUJRAT in India for now. So retaliation of HINDUS like you mentioned is out of question. More over, Mumbai massacre took a heavy toll of Innocent muslims as well. Hindu names appearing in the casuality list were not alone. There are a significant portion of muslims casualities as well.

Fighter

 

[jagjitnatt]

The question why Indians hate Pakistani's because they are Muslim.Come on yar the truth there is no such thing as Indian hate for Pakistanis it's Hindus hate against Muslims.

Its not so yaar. I am a sikh and according to some pakistani members I should hate Hindus and Muslims. But hey, I don't.
If it ever was like you mentioned, Hindus would have wiped us and muslims off the face of India. Bollywood stars like ShahRukh, Salman, Aaamir, Imran etc wouldn't have been allowed to act. Irfan Pathan, Yousuf Pathan, Zaheer Khan wouldn't have been playing for India. Things would have been very different. Muslims get equal right in India, its a different things how they utilize it.

Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Jains all live in harmony and support each other in India. But they all have a degree of hate against Pakistan. Ever wondered why sikhs and muslims also join the army? They know someday they'll have to fight Pakistan, and they are ready for it.

Hell, even my house was built by a muslim contractor.

 

[EjazR]

I think what Musalman is referring to is that the concept of using the name of Islam to establish a so-called Islamic state as some groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir, JI and others espouse is wrong and not in accordance to Quran and Sunnah. Infact his deviant ideology is one of the reasons of extremism and fundamentalism among muslims today.

However, imbibing Islamic values whether you are a politician, police officer, or peon is important as that will improve the morals of the person in whatever role he is in.

There has been extensive discussion around this in this thread.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/curren...wered-questions-case-pakistan.html#post550583

 

[Musalman]

But what exactly is Khilafat is now?

All Muslim countries under one rulers. He is administrative and spiritual ruler of Muslim.

please care to define what kind of Islamic degrees most of the Muslim rulers had? including the Sahabas like Umar R.A. who ruled the world?

I am not taking about degree. WIth qualification i meant their quality. They have to be sadik and ameen

Hazrat Ali R.A. said "Awam main se hi Hakim aatay hain / You find leaders from the public" If the public is SAADIK and Ameen (Truthful and Honest) you will find the honest leaders...... if the public is corrupt...... how are you expecting the leader to be an Angel?

Well i think we never tried to find sadik and ameen people among us. I agree most are corrupt but still we have good people around

and for your general knowledge, Prophet Muhammad gave a full training to Sahabas...... he was probably the only Prophet who got enough time to teach each and every single thing of Islam to Sahabas hence completed the Religion for the mankind. Do you know about 124,000 Sahabas were presented on Khutba-tul-Wida?

and don't know how many more Sahabas there will be by that time?

Indeed you have taught me something i didn't know. Jazak Allah for that

 

[Musalman]

I think what Musalman is referring to is that the concept of using the name of Islam to establish a so-called Islamic state as some groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir, JI and others espouse is wrong and not in accordance to Quran and Sunnah. Infact his deviant ideology is one of the reasons of extremism and fundamentalism among muslims today.

However, imbibing Islamic values whether you are a politician, police officer, or peon is important as that will improve the morals of the person in whatever role he is in.

There has been extensive discussion around this in this thread.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/curren...wered-questions-case-pakistan.html#post550583

Not name but Islam be part of Islamic constitution. I understand Indian Muslim have to be politically correct and apologetic to survive...... Infact that goes to us Pakistani too when it comes to the western world