The Urge To Go Back 1400 years

By YLH

Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has promised to bury the current system and bring in its place the system of the Holy Prophet PBUH.
This is a highly misleading statement but one which needs to be discussed in detail so that we may stop this mockery of our religion.

References to revered religious figures and their principles is a common technique. Jesus Christ is invoked as the prophet of love and religion by all of the west.
Thomas Jefferson is said to have written a book on the principles and teachings of Jesus Christ. In India Mohandas Gandhi invoked the name of Rama for Ram Rajya which was supposed to mean “just rule”.
Similarly during the Pakistan movement Jinnah invoked on occasion Islamic principles of equality, fraternity and justice to convince his followers that modern democracy was intrinsic to Islam.
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a remarkable figure and clearly the most influential figure in history. His immutable principles were honesty, integrity and sincerity of purpose. The immutable principle of Islam was social justice. These are principles that are as useful today as they were in any time in human history.

It is disturbing however when Shahbaz Sharif, the brother of Nawaz Sharif speaks of burying the current system and replacing it with the system brought 1400 years ago. The truth is that Islam’s immutable principles cannot be limited to a system. Essential Islamic principles regulate individuals who then are free to form systems suited to their time. Given the sordid history of the 15th Amendment, Shahbaz Sharif is well advised to stay away from this confusion vis a vis system and principles. Even in the period of the rightly guided Caliphate, the system was fluid, changing its shape according to times which is why each succession/election was through a different method.

So what does “system” denote and more importtantly what is it that people really mean when they speak of an Islamic system? The masses mean an egalitarian classless society based on social justice. Therefore the political system need not be buried, it is the rigid class system which stands in the way of the true lessons of Islam.

38 Comments

Filed under Pakistan

38 responses to “The Urge To Go Back 1400 years

  1. Ummi

    Nothing but political stunt by Shahbaz. Every one know how sincere he is about Islam. He’a aligning himself with Kyani. After all GHQ is the center of every thing.

  2. Anwar

    This from my journal of school days: “Road to progress is blocked by angles stationed to guard the past…”

    Won’t it be nice if the nation replaces this entire set of political bastards…?

  3. Good post. The problem is that masses feel happy at such statements and they are often surprisingly optimistic whenever such things are said.

  4. What a Farce……….
    Changing situations….where US wnat to negotiate Taliban and made an offer them to impose shariat on 6 provinces….Pak tribal areas will be loosely bounded with it.Is it the new AfPak strategy….???
    PPP fell short to the expectations
    SS is aligning himself with the new requirements
    Smart Politics…..as always from Muslim League(A to Z)

  5. Milind Kher

    If Pakisatn were to genuinely go back 1400 years to the ideals of the Holy Prophet (SAWA),

    It would become no 1 in the world in seeking knowledge (there are entire books dedicated to the importance of knowledge in Islam, using sources like the Qur’an and Hadith)

    Nobody would divorce their wife, as it is the most hateful permissible act in the eyes of God.

    Women would occupy an extremely exalted position (“Best amongst you is he who is best to his wife”)

    I could go on and on – the bottom line is: a very sincere effort has to be made if you want to adhere to the ideals of the greatest proponent of women’s empowerment and the greatest thinker this world has seen.

  6. YLH

    Ali Arqam,

    6 provinces … in Afghanistan I assume?

    You are right ofcourse and I agree with you.

    Ultimately the Americans are going to muscle into the cities in Afghanistan and then negotiate with the Taliban coming to an arrangement along the lines that you’ve suggested.

    What a strange and ironic end to the great war on terror and evil that started 7 years ago.

  7. Milind Kher

    What even America will realize is that only somebody who commands a following amongst the Pashtuns can rule Afghanistan.

    Therefore, neither Hizbe Wahadat nor Rashid Dostum can rule Pakistan. As the Afghan army also does not have adequate representation of Pahtuns, they too cannot fit the bill. Thus, by process of elimination, it is only the Taliban who can do so. We are back to square one..

  8. Rabia

    can anyone provide a reference to SS’s statement?

  9. Majumdar

    There seem to be two distinct schools of thought in Pakistan- one which wants to have a Western style democracy, largely secular but with some amount of Islam thrown in. The other wants to have a shuddh Islamic system in Pakistan. Pakistan needs to decide one way or the other once and for all if it has to move on. The best thing to do is to have referendum with two clear choices thrown in and then be done with it. The loser will have to accept the winner’s system or if not, he shud be free to do a hijrat.

    Regards

  10. YLH

    Dear Majumdar,

    Most Pakistanis want a marriage of western secular democracy with Islam … some like most of PML-N want Islam to have a decisive upper hand in the marriage… others like PPP want it to be an evenly matched marriage… people like me would like western secular democracy to dominate the equation…. i.e. fundamental rights, equality, rule of law and freedom of religion should be absolute and above any religious consideration.

    In comparison …pure secularists – who want or consider a purely secular system to dominate – and pure Islamists – who want a purely islamic system whatever that means- are very small in number.

    Between the two schools of thought you’ve mentioned… it is quite clear that the people of Pakistan have tried to bring forth an Islam-compliant democratic system time and again … and have always rejected a “shuddh” Islamic system.

  11. YLH

    I think Dr. Javed Iqbal and Allama Ghamidi have worked extensively on this ….

  12. karun1

    Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a remarkable figure and clearly the most influential figure in history.

  13. Majumdar

    Yasser,

    Then maybe some clear options need to be identified, debated upon publicly and then put to vote.

    Regards

  14. Mustafa Shaban

    @Milind: I totally agree with you, Pakistan would become no. 1 if we adopted Prophet Muhammed (SAWW) principles and created an Islamic system. However I do not trust these crooks like Shahbaz Sharif, and thier version of Islam is probably twisted and only use it to take advantage of thier positions and to benefit themselves.

  15. Hayyer

    Mustafa Shaban:
    There are many Muslim countries. If they all adopted those pristine principles surely they would all be competing to be No.1, not just Pakistan. Consider the potential for Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and even Bangladesh, let alone Pakistan.
    Where would the rest of mankind be though?

  16. Majumdar

    Hayyer mian,

    Where would the rest of mankind be though?

    Once they see what is happening they will all revert.

    Regards

  17. Bloody Civilian

    majumdar

    they will all revert

    … including the present no. 1? and those in fierce competition for the no. 1 slot right now? and the ones who may not be in the top league but are doing fine, nevertheless? are u sure the word you wanted to use was ‘revert’?

  18. vajra

    @Bloody Civilian d\\\”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””’aaaaaaaaaadssssssssssss0000000000000000000000fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

  19. vajra

    @Bloody Civilian

    The passage above, in Roman letters, reads:

    “I think ‘revert’ sounded like a nice word, nothing more than that.”

  20. Milind Kher

    @BC,

    It would appear Majumdar Saheb is referring to the “rest of mankind”. In that case, he is right.

  21. Bloody Civilian

    Vajra

    i guess you’re right, though i’m still a bit confused. well, at least ‘reversion’, in itself, is a neutral word. so the present no.1 would revert to being the future no.1? ok.

  22. Milind Kher

    The model proposed by YLH seems to be the best. Living with a Nizame Mustafa that has 100% fidelity in practice and precept both is well nugh impossible.

    So, it is better not even to attempt it. It is better to go for a system that leans towards secularism.

  23. Majumdar

    “Revert” as in revert to Islam. Just to clarify.

    Regards

  24. Junaid

    Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has promised to bury the current system and bring in its place the system of the Holy Prophet PBUH.

    Every time some one says that, Pakistan ends up getting screwed.

  25. Hayyer

    BC/Majumdar:
    Also, if one goes by the theory that everyone is born a Muslim then revert is the correct usage.

  26. Majumdar

    Hayyer mian,

    That was my point.

    Regards

  27. Bloody Civilian

    vajra, hayyer and majumdar

    i tried. but you are all determined not to let me get away with it.

    however since trying is only the first step on the long road to failure (per H J Simpson), let me try again. does the relevant quranic text not state that all are born ‘hanif’? in keeping with the ways of those who coined the ‘reversion’ theory, could that not be taken to mean that all were born hanafi = sunni-hanafi = sunni, and sunni-ism is what all or any must ‘revert’ to?

  28. Hayyer

    BC:
    In the light of that same logic your point should not be contested.

  29. Milind Kher

    @BC,

    “There is none born but is created to his true nature (Islam). It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian quite as beasts produce their young with their limbs perfect. Do you see anything deficient in them? ”

    This is the hadith on which any Non Muslim turning to Islam is called a revert.

  30. B. Civilian

    @MK

    how would it change the meaning or the spirit of the hadith, as you quote it, if it were to read, with a redundant change and without the added parentheses above: “There is none born but is created to his true nature. It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian or a Muslim quite as beasts produce their young with their limbs perfect. Do you see anything deficient in them? ”?

  31. Milind Kher

    @BC,

    It will change the spirit. Here the hadith is saying that a person’s true nature and Islam are one and the same thing. The change you are proposing shows them to be two different things.

    From an individual viewpoint, we may like to look at things the way you are proposing them, but we cannot change the hadith.

  32. vajra

    @Bloody Civilian
    @Milind Kher

    I urge you not to break your heads discussing religion and religious points thus.

    Milind is right insofar as the hadith is concerned. If I were to be interested in protracting this discussion, I would quote the passage that proclaims that a prophet has been sent to each people, contradicting this hadith fairly and squarely: if the innate nature of all who are born is Islamic, then there is no need, nor space for any prophet to be sent to other people who will preach a faith other than Islamic.

    Inevitably there will be a dozen springing up to defend the hadith and the innate Islamic nature of all, and this can go on infinitely, as long as men and women continue to have different faiths.

    In my humble opinion, this discussion, in a public forum given mainly to discussion of secular, democratic issues, is inappropriate.

  33. B. Civilian

    Vajra

    In my humble opinion, this discussion, in a public forum given mainly to discussion of secular, democratic issues, is inappropriate.

    i see what you are saying.. and hoping to avoid. i want to avoid it too. lets hope children don’t understand discussions such as this one and can carry on enjoying the spirit of freedom that is such a wonderful part of their innate nature. sadly, once they are adults, many are never able to revert to it.

  34. Punjabi

    “Most Pakistanis want a marriage of western secular democracy with Islam”

    What specifically does that mean?

  35. yasserlatifhamdani

    Punjabi mian,

    I think you can get a good idea by reading the fundamental rights chapter of the Pakistan constitution http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part2.ch1.html

    Pakistanis want a modern state with all its emphasis on due process, rule of law and freedoms …. but want to also hang on to their Islamic identity.

  36. aliarqam

    @YLH
    “Most Pakistanis want a marriage of western secular democracy with Islam”

    In this case who will be “Zauj” and who will be “Zauja”
    As most Pakistanis also think Man has a dominant position in case of marriage….and U know what they meant by Dominance….

  37. Milind Kher

    @Vajra,

    In deference to your view, I shall not continue the discussion.

  38. vajra

    @Milind Kher

    That was my humble opinion only, and I hope you are acting out of inner conviction. It is not my intention to censor your words, as your sincerity and goodwill is clear. Please do not misunderstand. I know that Bloody Civilian will not.