Islam being a divine religion is undoubtedly panacea for all the woes and worries afflicting the entire humanity. But this system demands , among other things, sincerity of those whom the authority is vested in. While discussing such sensitive topic , one should be broad enough to view the facts in broader spectrum and emotion not serve as stumbling block to proceed the discussion.The logic based upon facts should dictate the conclusion.

To substantiate my premise lets turn back the pages of history. Khilaft-e-Rashda is unopposedly believed to be the System based on Islamic Principals. Afterwards , the Islamic rulers were , by all menas, nothing short of monarchs of medieval age. Now during Khilaft of Hazrat Ali , there were two wars amongst muslims that claimed hundreds of innocent Muslim Lives.These wars were fought between Once Hazrat ali and Bibi Aisha and then Between Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Moavia. Was it fault of Islaimic System? Obviously not! What i want to prove is that system perfection is not assured by the system per se rather people who constitute the system determines its fate.So ther human fault may lend an ideal islamic system to maneuvered and misused.

Then one of the most significant incidence took place in 61 Hijrah when Hazrat Imam Hussain along with his companions Was martyred by the sitting caliph, Yazid. At his time , many of the companions of Holy Prophits ,Sihaba Kiram, were alive. Yazid is said to be one of the worst person but did any one raised the standard of revolt against him , other than Imam Huassain? So again human error not the Islam is at fault.

If we look at the indian Muslim Rulers, Say Mehmood Ghaznawi, he professed the religion of islam. he was belived to be a staunch Muslim observing all the "Ibadat" and rituals regualaraly. we idealize him. But why he came to India? Just to plunder its wealth and killed thousands of Human beings including Muslims (In my view life of a non -mulim is as much precious and sacrosant as that of a Muslim). However , following Mehmood all Indian Muslim Rulers barring few exceptions vowed to base their governance system on Islamic Lines.

What i want to say that mere branding the System or state to be Islaimc lend it self to hypocracy as it has been done in Pakistan.

What are the basic features of An Islamic State? To my understanding it should be

1- People of High Moral Values strictly abiding by Shariah should be the rulers
2- Laws entirely based on Shairiah( Not as is the case with our current System entirely based upon western Legal System)
3- Socio-Economic System based upon Islaimic Injuctions
4- Foreign Policy entirely dictated by Islamic Values

Is it possible in society tainted by corruption, moral depravity , emburdened with debts and heavily dependent upon other nations for its survival? Obviously Not

So mere branding the state as Isalmic, making some of legislation on the name of Islaim and preventing Minorities to hold the Position of President or PM serve nothing but fan extremism- that we are facing today.

We are part of global community. state tilt towards religion of majority is something very obvious and practiced accross the globe as holiday on religious festivals,etc. But to greater extent state dont discriminate on the basis of religion aomgst citizenry. This is what we call Secularism.

Will branding the state as secular will take us away from Islam? Even it will not prevent us to enshrine golden Principal of Islam in our constitutional and legislative framework.

Does the restrictions we have put on minorities or naming the state as Islaimc Republic serves Islam bring us closer to Islam? No it is not. How many of those who want to see Pakistan as Islamic state will be ready to attain nationality of some western country even if they are required to relinquish the nationality of Pakistan? I can bet that more than 99 percent would be ready.

I believe that at least in current circumstances, the many of the Islaimc provions in our legal framework have nothing to do with Islam and there should be done away with. Declaring the State as secular will cause no harm to Islam and Islamic values and will not put the society away from Islam. Rather, it will be a welcomed by the global community and serve to eradicate extremism from our society.

Sincerity can be induced into people through checks and balances but from Secularism there is no return.

The war between Hazrat Ali R.A and Hazrat Ameer Muwiya R.A were not for acquisition of land or authority. The fact that some of the people in Hazrat Ali R.A army were khwarij whom Hazrat Ali R.A later maimed shows you that these were exceptional circumstances and Hazrat Ameer Muawiya's statements are on record that if the Qasas-e-Utman R.A matter was resolved, he'd be first on to say bayah at the hands of Hazrat Ali R.A. Bibi Aisha R.A did not intend to fight Hazrat Ali R.A as wrongly put by many, she was there to mediate between Hazrat Ali R.A and Hazrat Ameer Muawiya in light of the Quran that asks muslims to mediate between each other.

It is a misconception to state that the Sahaba did not fight yazeed. After the Shahadat of Hussain R.A some very old in age sahaba rose up and gave Yazid's forces a fight and were martyred.

Mehmood Ghaznawi had brigades of Hindu fighters who fought for him against his Muslim opponents. Let us not even discuss such men as a model to be discussed in the light of Islam.

The biggest mistake you've made is to confuse society as being a collection of Individuals where individual behavior changes the society. But Islam does not believe in that, Islam believes in a top down approach. Where the system changes the lives of human beings not the other way around and this is a fact. We've seen it with the riots in England where the system failed once and we saw what the men and women of that country were made out of.

If we are not able to do the right thing, it doesn't mean we should start doing the wrong thing. That is what you want us to do by following secularism. This wasn't the method of Nabi S.A.W and shouldn't be our method.

You are mistaken brother, with due respect. No mechanism has been invented as yet that can instill sincerity among the masses. It is something that arise out of ones inner self primarily. Yes external environment , beliefs , thoughts , ethos, values, norms, culture etc influence ones attitude .For example , if you go to a police station-no matter who the incharge is- you will find the attitude of police officers alike in most of the cases-barring few exception. If you find an honest SHO , its something that his inner self compel him to follow honesty otherwise System of Check and Balance favors more to other way round..Like wise attitude of people in University will be different. Why ,because of interplay of many factors that constitute environment. Contending that check and balance instill sincerity implies that sincerity i is a kind of mechanical object , so easy to change.

As for as backing from Secularism , before promulgation of 1956 Constitution Pakistan wasnt an Islamic republic. Did it mean that our society , before this was not Islamic?

I can say and prove one thing. Most of the legislation made in Pakistan on the name of Islam in Pakistan, has been done only to be-fool the people and has been misutilised. When Bhuttoo Sb's govt was losing popularity , he announced friday as public holiday and decalred Qadianis as Non Muslims. Afterwards, Qadianis have been persecuted by the society.How come our text book narrates the words like Qadiani Fitna etc against the people who are citizens of Pakistan? Is state providing equal rights to people?

Secularism is nothing but just and indiscriminate treatment towards all religions by the state. What system we are living in is neither secularism nor Islamic . It is hypocritical one where more emphasis is placed on rituals and appearances rather than on ones inner self. I prefer a Secular State where all people are dealt alike and no discrimnation is made on the basis of religion. If i prefer to get nationality of Canada, Australia or UK so as to live there with out thinking for a moment that such states are not Islamic -why because it serves my own purpose. I prefer Secularism over this hypocracy.

__________________
Hoee hay jab say mukhalif hawa zamanay key......
Humain bhee dhun see hoee hay diaa jalaanay key

No sister, you are mistaken. Gravely at that too. Islam is that mechanism that instills sincerity among men. It was Islam that taught the Aws and Khizraj not only to give up their infighting but to accept people from Makkah as their own. It was Islam that instilled such sincerity among men that they gave up drinking. I was Islam that made them lay down their lives in implementing Islam. You are wrong dear sister. Islam is that "system" that instills sincerity.

Society wasn't Islamic, isn't Islamic and will not be Islamic until we move away from this secularism that haunts us to date.

Secularism is not the merry boat ride that you want it to be, it is a complete rejection of religion, go and look up how the founder of secularism defined it. He thought human intellect was sufficient to frame laws and it didn't require a divine source of knowledge, like the Quran.

The Qadiyanis are Murtids i.e. Traitors, they can not be treated equally to those who have faith in the constitution i.e. Quran.

Please kick away the liberal tirade that blinds you from the truth, secularism is evil! Look at all the secular countries and what they've done and continue to do. If secularism was such a bed of roses, there would be no niqab ban, no minar ban, no strip searches, no racial profiling, no economic marginalization and no WARS!

Okay you give me an example of current Islamic state in the world ????

I am unfolding the practical picture of the world to you while you are all focused on the theoretical stuff....

Please correct yourself.You said that Check and Balance can instill sincerity not Islam. I am sorry to say i withdraw myself out of this discussion because it more centers around emotions , rigidity instead of being based on logic.

__________________
Hoee hay jab say mukhalif hawa zamanay key......
Humain bhee dhun see hoee hay diaa jalaanay key

any perfect islamic state in the world today ?

Here is what I mean by checks and balances. The Qadhi Ul Qudha (or Cheif Justice) has the power to remove the Caliph if he deviates from "Islam". The punishments prescribed for bribery, theft and traitors are the checks and balances that keep a person sincere.

Sincerity is also induced when doing the right thing becomes easier and doing the wrong becomes difficult. For example, In an Islamic state interest based transaction will be impossible and interest free economy would prevail, women and men would not be allowed to intermingle without reason and hence abuse of women would subside the list is endless.

I have not been emotional this far, I have presented facts and nothing less. I pride myself at being rigid where rigidity is synonymous with standing firmly upon the truth.

Meri behen I have, in the beginning, explained the perfect concept of an Islamic state and how that can be achieved and I have also explained why that is not possible.

And I am sure you know there are so many interpretations of verses of Quran and various hadiths. There are hadiths that have been fabricated. Who is going to tell us that? Was the situation same in times of Prophet (P.B.U.H) or even in that of rightly guided caliphs? I have already stressed over the need of a society that could promote tolerance and free thinking.

Do you know why I gave example of Hiz ut Tahrir? They are staunch champs of Caliphate. I quoted their example because they are the ones who have an ideology but how they are going to implement it, they have no road map. Whats the end result? Where in England you get to see Salafis, Wahabis, Malikis etc establishing mosques and Islamic centers, these people are the ones who are still stuck in debating with people that there can only be a single entity caliph, the caliph should not deviate from Islam etc etc. I have already explained to what extent your beliefs have nothing to do with state or individuals, and this is where we need freethinking and tolerance. I am getting your point that we have Quran and Sunnah for our guidance. Lakin meri behen agar Quran aur Sunnah har cheez par itnay he clear hain then why do we have so many sects? Where was it that I said we cannot implement Shariah? Did you carefully read my post? Because I have clearly mentioned "Its His law that is supreme and not the ruler."

When did I say that its impossible to reunite a billion Muslims? (What I meant was that you cannot REFORM a billion Muslims, reform them like Prophet (P.B.U.H) reformed Companions) The example of Muslim Union I have given in my post should have told you what would it take to get united.


Let me give you an example now. If you carefully read the posts that were made by Pureapak and me, you'll get a hunch what all was going around. Can any common law penalize me or him for that? No (because at the maximum, it has something to do with morality and nothing else). Now if it comes to an Islamic state, even then both of us cant be penalized. No. Why? Because its not a kind of transaction for which he or I can be held liable. For this I'll advise you to read the kind of acts we have in Islamic law. My friend, thats the problem. We all are humans. We all have our limitations. I'll never back off from demanding an Islamic State because I know that I am transgressing Allah's hudud owing to this system.

No, everything will not be alright but most of them will get fixed. At least the poor Muslims who are being persecuted might find a way out. At least, we will get rid of a riba-based system and will no more be at war with Allah and His Prophet (P.B.U.H). At least, people will know that they every law that governs transactions is binding on them. At least, we'll have common foreign policy and common military.

Again, that was a concept of an ideal system. Where was it that I pointed problems? The ethnic, cultural, sectarian problems that I pointed out do exist in today's world. How can we get rid of them by reforming people?


Plus, Khuda nay aaj tak us qoum ke halat nahi badli, na ho jisko khayal aap apni halat k badal janay ka. Prophet (P.B.U.H) did dawah for 23 years and then established a state. Muslim scholars have been doing the same for more than 1200 years now, whats the result? On the other side, if I assume that all Palestinians, all Iraqis, all Afghanis, all Chechens, all Bosnians, have reformed themselves, what should they do now? Keep getting killed or what? Do you disagree that we are at war with Allah and His Prophet (P.B.U.H)? Do you believe that a state, no matter how much Islamic, cannot do anything alone in this regards? Do you believe that its only the concept of Muslim Union that can help us from getting rid of this riba-based system? Do you agree that Muslims are being victimized all over the world? So, should we wait for reforming ourselves and reforming one billion people or should we be a little practical and accept that dawah and political concept of state etc are all good but they alone cannot and will not suffice. Seven centuries have passed, another seven will pass and we still will be here discussing things which even do not matter.

Unfortunately, I feel that the unity you are looking for never existed after Prophet (P.B.U.H). Prophet (P.B.U.H) committed certain mistakes. Companions committed certain mistakes. We all are humans and have our tendencies. I personally believe that giving theory of an ideal islamic state, totally overlooking the contemporary world dynamics is like living in a bubble.
Every concept seems perfect as regards to theory, every concept tells you its limitations when it comes to implementation.

__________________
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."