gv
Member
@jj
I think you are having some difficulty in understanding what I am writing.
I do not adopt any single person's interpretation of 'right/wrong' I develop my own using a combination of my experience and my education. No single entity/being/school defines my right and wrong ergo i do not 'worship' any entity/being/school
gv
Member
@jj
1) i would say the same to you vis a vis the definition of democracy but i would hope our audience has enough sense to look it up for themselves.
2) i am not defending how democracy is practiced throughout the modern world and i do not think it is a perfect system
what i am saying is:
a) there is no fundamental incompatability with islam and democracy
b) the khilafat system as the hizb defines it is a form of representative democracy wrapped up in a lot of fancy arabic names
amin1924
member
gv,
No, there is fundamental difference between secularism and caliphate. I like to call it secularism because democracy is political wing and capitalism is economic wing of this creed.
In secular creed human is supreme being while in Caliphate system Allah swt is supreme being.
zia m
Member
When did Khilafat turn into malukiat and why?
amin1924
member
Good question, try your research and let us know what you get.
zia m
Member
I like it when Muslims (Maudoodi) expose Khilafat.
shahzad1924
member
@gv
"The Hadith were orally recited by ordinary FALLIBLE men and were not available in written (verifiable) form for at least 80 years (2-3 generations) after the prophet's death. therefore the Hadith are not even close to being infallible."
the Quran was also orally recited by ordinary FALLIBLE men and was not compiled in the form of a book until the era of Usman (RA) which was infact after the Prophet's (SAW) death. so, by questioning the legitimacy of the Hadith, you are questioning the legitimacy of the Quran too because the method of transmission was same.
"Islamic laws formed over the past 14 centuries have been the result of the independent reasoning of imams, scholars and qazis using the Quran, the Sunnah and prior interpretations of these as their source material."
independent reasoning? care to explain the process?
"Democracy is any form of governance where the leadership is directly or indirectly dependent on being elected by some form of popular vote"
that is not true. where did you get this from. are you saying that democracy is just elections?
"Therefore there is no fundamental difference in a Democracy where the legal code is based on Islamic law (shariah) or the 'khilafat' system you are so enamoured with."
there is no democracy in the world where the legal code is based on Islamic law. so, your conclusion is wrong.
gv
Member
@shahzad
let me rephrase that:
1) Muslims worldwide unanimously believe in the infallibility of the quran being the word of God. The hadith do not enjoy that distinction and by definition(being the word of man) are fallible.
Even if you choose to believe otherwise the fact remains that mortal men who are inherently fallible are required to interpret the quran and sunnah to make islamic law.
2) There has not been a system of khilafat (as you define it) since Ali died in 661AD (to answer our friend Zia's question). So if you can go around preaching the benefits of an ideal khilafat i can equally go around extolling an ideal democracy - the point remains there is no incompatibility with democracy and islam.
gv
Member
@jj
"No, there is fundamental difference between secularism and caliphate. I like to call it secularism because democracy is political wing and capitalism is economic wing of this creed."
That is your mis-interpretation. In a democracy which legislates on the basis of the quran and sunnah there is no difference.
gv
Member
@shahzad
"so, by questioning the legitimacy of the Hadith, you are questioning the legitimacy of the Quran too because the method of transmission was same."
- Firstly i am giving you the generic muslim point of view and not my point of view. Secondly common sense (if you bother to ask it ever) will tell you it is less likely for an oral tradition to be misquoted in a span of 27-30 years than in a span of 80 years.
"independent reasoning? care to explain the process?"
- why don't you ask your friendly neighbourhood maulvi how laws in a real honest to goodness islamic state come into being
amin1924
member
There is no such thing as democracy which legislates on the basis of Qur'an/Sunnah. You need to get your basic definitions correct.
You are mixing up things. Both ideologies are complete packages or systems. Can't mix them up.
It may seem to you that mouse and lion are same because both have four legs, tail, mouth, hair, teeth etc but a mouse is a mouse and lion is a lion.
gv
Member
@jj
you really need to start thinking out of the box - its not that hard really..
democracy is simply a system of governance where the members of that polity (the general public) have a say (usually indirectly)in appointing their political leadership
nothing more nothing less - what you are proposing can be termed as a form of representative democracy
amin1924
member
gv,
It is not about inside the box or outside the box. You pick up terms from particular philosophy and then insist on defining it per your idea.
Either don't use especial terms/phrases or use them with their correct meaning -that's all.
Good luck.
gv
Member
@jj because if i prospose a system of governance where the leadership is elected by popular vote and the legal code is based on shariah, any sane and rational person would call it a democracy or jamhuriat if you prefer. these are the two languages i speak so i can only use terms from them.
if you like i can call it god's specially choosen popular government or the holy vote or something in arabic which wwould probably appeal to you but i think i'll stick to democracy.
amin1924
member
That is where the real problem arises, when we insist on taking foreign terms and insist on defining per our own ideas.
Democracy or the rule of majority means that the law will be what the majority desires. In sharia majority's desire is irrelevant. Is this so hard to understand?
Will of the majority vs the Will of Allah swt -can't you spot the difference? Or the selection/election process confusing you?
amin1924
member
Let us consider a case where majority agrees on implementation of sharia, in that case will the authority reside with majority meaning if they change their mind they can opt for another system or the authority resides with sharia which means even if majority disagrees the rule of sharia will be supreme?
Doing something because majority wants it is different than doing something because Allah order it so.
It is important to differentiate the source of authority.
SufiSoul
Member
{{{I like it when Muslims (Maudoodi) expose Khilafat. ..}}}}
In other words you like it for Sahaba to be blammed as shia OR maudoodi did this work????
Maudoodi at that time was warned and latter even came under Kuffar Fatwa by using judgement abt Sahaba in his book Khilafat aur Malookiyat..
It doesnot mean madoudi is SOMETHING to be followed.NEVER.
After latter investigating,Maudoodi was also misguided by some shia Teachers in the shape sunni ones..
This is history and out their.....
Turning Khilafat into malookiyat latter is never the fault of khilafat but the fault of latter ordinary ppl..
Even latter kings tried to invent another religion(Muslimohindu)i-e Akbar ka deeni Ilahi..
Also try to search different muslim sects other than acting upon completly on Quran+Hadees+Sunnah+act of sahaba.You will find that they are created by SOMEONE unknown for known purpose of devision of Muslims....
gv
Member
@jj
that is where you are wrong - what you have described is a secular democracy..
a democracy as i keep repeating ad nauseum is any system of governance where the political leadership is appointed by a popular or quasi popular vote.
that polity has the right to chose an existing codified system of laws if it so wishes - the crucial factor is that state leadership is elected by and accountable to THE PUBLIC
amin1924
member
gv,
I understand what you are saying, but I just request you to think about the meaning of "that polity has the right to choose..."
Question is: In Islam do they have the right to choose or not, do they have that permission to choose or not?
Can a Muslim pick and choose from ahkam-e-sharia what suits him and what doesn't?
I don't know any other to explain this point to you.
gv
Member
everything is a choice
you as a muslim choose to submit to the laws of god
Ghareeb
Old-chechen
Everything is choice but some choices are meant for pagans and unbelievers. There is a "list" ordained by Almighty of what can be chosen. If you chose what you like then you become an animal.
shahzad1924
member
@gv
"everything is a choice
you as a muslim choose to submit to the laws of god"
no its not a choice once you accept the fact that there is a creator.
amin1924
member
A Muslim is not free to choose what he likes and what he doesn't like, he has to submit fully to the Will of Allah swt.
I don't think this is such a complicated discussion that you are keep on revolving in circles. If you don't want to embrace Islam, that is fine. But remember you might end up worshiping someone may be lower in intellect than you.
Doing something because majority chose it or doing something because it is divine revelation are two different concepts which need a little deep thinking.
shahzad1924
member
@gv
"Firstly i am giving you the generic Muslim point of view and not my point of view."
look, im gonna make this very simple! say something that you believe in. dont tell me what X says or Y says. and anyway, that is not the general opinion in Muslims. only the likes of Qaddafi, Pervaiz and Ghamdi propagate this kind of thinking.
"Secondly common sense (if you bother to ask it ever) will tell you it is less likely for an oral tradition to be misquoted in a span of 27-30 years than in a span of 80 years."
you obviously haven't studied about the traditions of the arabs of that time. so, there is no point in discussing this point with you. my sincere advice for you is to study a bit more and then give your fatwas.
"why don't you ask your friendly neighbourhood maulvi how laws in a real honest to goodness islamic state come into being"
look, this isn't going anywhere if you come with that kind of attitude.
1. Most of the people are Muslims, Hindus, Christians or Jews by Chance and not by choice as they happened to be born to such parents.
2. But every human being has a choice to select and pick, out of several dishes at the dinning table, which ever fits to his/her stomach and chemistry, to stay healthy.
3. The host should not force or insist upon a particular dish or flavor what might give heart attack to the guest.
amin1924
member
sheikh,
There is difference between your kitchen and ahkam-e-sharia.
You can pick a dish you like in your kitchen, but can't choose/reject ahkam-e-sharia in Islam.
gv
Member
@shahzad
http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/the-institutions-of-the-khilafah-state/page/4#post-88103
Ghareeb
Old-chechen
I am a German, and I am a Muslim. It would be silly for me to be proud to be a German - did I chose my parents? - but am glad to be a German. In fact, I owe a great deal to having grown up within German culture and with the German language: both are problem-solving kits, so to speak. And yet, I am very glad indeed to be a Muslim. It would be silly for me to be proud to be Muslim - did I chose Islam, or was I not chosen by Allah to revert to His religion? Consequently, I feel quite at home in the Muslim world. In fact, whenever I am not there, I feel homesick for Makkah.
Am I torn between two cultures and two modes of behavior? Is there something puzzling about being a Western Muslim? Is being Occidental by birth and upbringing incompatible with being Muslim? I can answer all these questions in the negative:
Islam from its very beginning was considered a universal religion, valid for all times and all places. Why else would Muhammad (pbuh) have approached all potentates around Arabia, even before the conquest of Makkah, inviting them to adopt Islam? Why would the early Muslims have branched out like bush fire? This was the beginning of the globalization of Islam which only now, in the 20th and 21st centuries, is becoming a reality.
By Murad Hoffman,former German Ambassador
shahzad1924
member
@sheikh sahab
let me lay it straight on to you. there is no freedom of belief in Islam. period
unlike you guys, we Muslims have a purpose in life. and that purpose is to act according to the commands and prohibitions in this life. and we believe that our actions in this life have a direct effect in the hereafter. this very point (hereafter) changes the way we look at the world.
Islam gives commands and prohibitions for each and every action in our life and it is not left up to our choice. its as simple as that.
shahzad1924
member
@gv
"Muslims worldwide unanimously believe in the infallibility of the quran being the word of God. The hadith do not enjoy that distinction and by definition(being the word of man) are fallible."
that is not true. and ive already said enough towards this point.
"Even if you choose to believe otherwise the fact remains that mortal men who are inherently fallible are required to interpret the quran and sunnah to make islamic law. "
so?
"There has not been a system of khilafat (as you define it) since Ali died in 661AD (to answer our friend Zia's question)"
what did i define? what are you talking about?
"So if you can go around preaching the benefits of an ideal khilafat i can equally go around extolling an ideal democracy"
go ahead, be my guest. nobody is stopping you. its a free forum.
"the point remains there is no incompatibility with democracy and islam."
yeah, the point you have failed to prove.
gv
Member
@shahzad
you keep denying my points without providing any reasoning beyond 'it isnt so'. I at least provided some reasoning for my arguments.
As i said before you obviously do not subscribe to independent research or independent thought so there is no point in arguing with you.
Thank you all the same for your time and effort it reminded me why i gave up trying to debate with the hizbos to begin with.
shahzad1924
member
you never ask for a reason. you just give me a questionnaire to fill out.
1. About all the abstract Social Sciences such as Politics, History, Ethics, Religion, Sociology and Economics, there is a difference between theory and practice.
2. Religion is not an end n itself but a mean to an end.
3. Religion is for Humanity and Humanity is not for Religion.
4. Why someone should be forced to put on overcoat where he is comfortable in shorts and sleeveless shirt?
5. One of my favorite leaders, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was declared as the 'Greatest Muslim of 20th Century' by Maulana Shabbeer Ahmad Usmani, (at his funeral in 1948).
6. Allama Iqbal has been acknowledged as Hakeem-al-Muslim Ummah.
Do you know how much portion of Ahkam-i-Elahi (as you preach), they practiced?
7. It is not possible to practice 100% of Islam but also not wise to reject 100% of Islam.
SufiSoul
Member
No one can follow 100% of the rulez.This is as according to Quran,
Likulle Insane Zaeefaa....
The problem is not this one.The problem is that if some one chooses to follow some of the rulez according to his chemistry and rejects/Refuse/Drop delibrately the remaining rules..
Actually this is not allowed and throughs you out of the circle of Islam..
NO CHOICE TO FOLLOW BUT TO OBEY ALL.....
This topic has been closed to new replies.
