From: jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
Subject: Re: Pakistan
Reply-To: jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 21:42:44 GMT

In article <ljs2nkINN8vu@pageboy.cs.utexas.edu>, hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan
Hyder) writes:
> In article <1992Dec25.153416@IASTATE.EDU> jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed
Khan) writes:
> >
> >
> >Now what I didn't understand is whether one can imply from these quotes that
the
> >Quran explicitly enjoins upon all muslims to kill and drive out non-muslims
from
> >their homeland.
> 
> I don't know from where you started on the notion that "to kill and drive
> out non-Muslims from their homelands", is the stated objective of Islam.
> As was very clear from the Quranic verses that I reproduce below,
>  the objective was to end the "mischief" (in Urdu "fasaad").



I never claimed that it was the explicit objective of Islam to "kill and
drive....". 

On the contrary  I always asked rhetorical questions in support of my belief
that Islam *does not* advocate the explicit establishment of Islamic  political
states and the resultant misery the establishment may cause to non-muslims.

The whole idea of Pakistan was based on the premise that muslims must strive
for an Islamic "political" state and the inspiration for such a premise was
said to be derived from Islam. Hence I wanted someone to give me some evidence
for the premise being made.



> 
> >
> >   And continue the fight against them until all mischief is effectively 
> >   destroyed and the only DEEN holding sway is Allah's DEEN and none 
> >   other. [Al Anfaal 8:39]
> 
> >
> >You will now jump on me and say that the hadith is therefore necessary to
> >explain the circumstances under which these quotes are to be used. 
> >
> >I will say sure but the events in the "accepted hadiths" are open to
> >interpretation and even their authenticity may be suspect.
> 
> The  authenticity of Ahadiths we are talking about is more "solid"
> from a historical view point, then most events of even the last century.
> >
> >I would rely more on my judgement and my experience to interpret the Quran
than
> >to rely on hadith whose validity can be challenged.
> 
> Who is talking about Hadiths whose validity can be challenged?
> We are only talking about the Hadiths whose "validity" can not
> be challenged. For your information, challenging the authenticity
> of suspected Hadiths has already been done by Muslim scholars more
> than a thousand years ago. It would really be a great service to
> Islam if you can furnish some new insight in this area. 
> 



I'm not that qualified to furnish such evidence but I reserve the right to
believe/disbelieve the "accepted" hadiths as genuine.




> >
> >However it is the prerogative of other muslims to believe that the hadith
are
> >genuine. 
> 
> Yes, the prerogative is entirely between a Muslim and Allah (not with
> other...). It is only Allah who knows what is in our hearts. The
> ultimate prerogative is entirely HIS.
> 	
> >>
> >WHY WAS PARTITION NECESSARY? (finally coming back to the central subject of
this
> >thread)
> 
> A good time to come back to the discussion. 
> I will agree, that we can very well say that Partition was NOT necessary. 
> In fact, we can venture out and say about any event in the past whether
> it is necessary or not. 



Its not my objective to pass judgement on the intention of the leaders/people
for the sake of hating/liking them. The objective (as I had stated in one
earlier post) is to analyse history and events to be better able to face the
present and plan for the future. The effort is purely academic.




> 
> The important point easily forgotten in such conjectures is that
> the people of that time FOUND it necessary. Now the real question
> is what we find necessary today. Is there any thing we find necessary
> today. If there is such thing, what are we doing about it?
> My objective through out this thread had been that the only
> reasonable objective in front of us is this:



I agree with you (see the previous para).



> 
> An event happened. We can not turn the clock back by our estimation
> of the necessities that compelled the event. The only alternative
> is how to turn that event to our maximum advantage today.
> >
> >
> >Seeing your attitude I don't think its fruitful to continue this thread
> >with you any further.
> >
> >
> 
> I am sorry for writing some thing that I should not have.
> Please accept my sincere apologies.
> 


No hard feelings :)

--Javed.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.pakistan:18698 soc.culture.bangladesh:7024