By Omar Khattab in Lahore
Yesterday Pakistan’s People’s Party once again gave evidence of its unflinching faith in democracy and peaceful co-existence. Despite the fact that egged on by the likes of Nawaz Sharif, the Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his fellow judges have been flouting one constitution provision after another, the People’s Party showed immense maturity by deciding not to take on the Supreme Court even if it had all the legal and constitution justification to do so. Why?
It appeared that Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry et al were hell-bent upon destroying the democratic set-up in Pakistan for whose restoration the People’s Party has made countless sacrifices. Many legalistic minds will not be happy with the People’s Party because it has given in to the blackmail and bullying of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his fellow judicial goons. But the point is that the People’s Party wanted the system to continue and decided to pay some price, a price which will affect it adversely but will save democracy from destruction. It is not for the first time that the People’s Party has made a sacrifice for democracy and the people of Pakistan; for sure, it will not be the last time either. This is why, the People’s Party is the only party which can be regarded as the party of the masses.
In 1997, the then government headed by Nawaz Sharif had a disagreement with Justice Shah, then the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, over the establishment of special judges by Nawaz Sharif. Nawaz Sharif who champions the Supreme Court today asked his party workers to invade the Supreme Court. He also bribed some of Supreme Court judges to rebel against Justice Shah. Justice Shah had to run away to save his life. He was forcibly removed from his office. To this day, Justice Shah has been asking for justice for himself, but he remains unheard. Nawaz Sharif and his scoundrels were never even tried.
But it took the People’s Party’s prime minister to go uninvited to Justice Chaudhry’s home and resolve the matter. Pakistan’s corrupt Urdu media is not willing to appreciate the People’s Party over this great respect for law and democracy.
The Pakistan Army and Nawaz Sharif are trying to destroy the People’s Party. Justice Chaudhry should realize that he cannot continue to play in their hands. If the People’s Part is destroyed, Pakistan will cease to exist because it is People’s Party which in the past has saved this unfortunate country from destruction just like it has done now. Without the People’s Party, Pakistan will lose it raison d’etre.
Those Muslims [particularly Pakistanis] who talk of Quran and Islam and living in the West under “Infidel Kaafir Secular System which is made by man not Allah” should leave West and should live in “Jinnah’s Paradise” or stop defending Pakistan and Secular Jinnah’s Ideology through Quran.
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَوَفَّاهُمُ الْمَلآئِكَةُ ظَالِمِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ قَالُواْ فِيمَ كُنتُمْ قَالُواْ كُنَّا مُسْتَضْعَفِينَ فِي الأَرْضِ قَالْوَاْ أَلَمْ تَكُنْ أَرْضُ اللّهِ وَاسِعَةً فَتُهَاجِرُواْ فِيهَا فَأُوْلَـئِكَ مَأْوَاهُمْ جَهَنَّمُ وَسَاءتْ مَصِيرًا
Lo! as for those whom the angels take (in death) while they wrong themselves, (the angels) will ask: In what were ye engaged? They will say: We were oppressed in the land. (The angels) will say: Was not Allah’s earth spacious that ye could have migrated therein? As for such, their habitation will be hell, an evil journey’s end; [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 -Verse 97]
Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I disown every Muslim who settles among the mushrikeen.” [Sunnan Abu Dawood]
It is obligatory to migrate from the kaafir lands to the Muslim lands for those who are able to do that, if they are unable to practise their religion openly. Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Maaliki said: Hijrah (migration) means leaving dar al-harb [non-Muslim lands] and going to dar al-islam [Muslim lands]. This was obligatory at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and remains so after his time for those who fear for their lives. From Nayl al-Awtaar, 8/33, by al-Shawkaani. Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said concerning the hadeeth, “I disown every Muslim who settles among the mushrikeen”: This is to be understood as referring to those who are not safe to practise their religion there. Fath al-Baari
How about some very Explicit Verses in Quran itself.
On Hadith a noted Political Maulvi of the Sub-Continent Ubaidullah Sindhi couldn’t teach Bukhari because of certain ‘explicit Hadiths’ [as per him but he was and is not Hujjat - Proof] then why didn’t he feel any shame while teaching Quranic Verse like these, which are quite explicit and Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi should have discarded these verses from Quran due to Maulana Illogical and absurd shame.
وَمَرْيَمَ ابْنَتَ عِمْرَانَ الَّتِي أَحْصَنَتْ فَرْجَهَا فَنَفَخْنَا فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِنَا وَصَدَّقَتْ بِكَلِمَاتِ رَبِّهَا وَكُتُبِهِ وَكَانَتْ مِنَ الْقَانِتِينَ
Wamaryama ibnata AAimrana allatee ahsanat farjaha fanafakhna feehi min roohina wasaddaqat bikalimati rabbiha wakutubihi wakanat mina alqaniteena
Arabic Word in the verse: Farjaha or Farj means Vagina [should I say it in Chaste Urdu]
Translation:
And Mary, daughter of ‘Imran, whose body was chaste, therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient. [AT-TAHRIM (BANNING, PROHIBITION) Chapter 66 - Verse 12]
وَالَّتِي أَحْصَنَتْ فَرْجَهَا فَنَفَخْنَا فِيهَا مِن رُّوحِنَا وَجَعَلْنَاهَا وَابْنَهَا آيَةً لِّلْعَالَمِينَ
Waallatee ahsanat farjaha fanafakhna feeha min roohina wajaAAalnaha waibnaha ayatan lilAAalameena
English Translation:
And she who was chaste, therefor We breathed into her (something) of Our Spirit and made her and her son a token for (all) peoples. AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 – Verse 91]
Arabic Word in the verse: Farjaha or Farj means Vagina [should I say it in Chaste Urdu]
قَالَتْ أَنَّى يَكُونُ لِي غُلَامٌ وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ وَلَمْ أَكُ بَغِيًّا
Qalat anna yakoonu lee ghulamun walam yamsasnee basharun walam aku baghiyyan
English Translation:
She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste? [MARYAM (MARY) Chapter 19 - Verse 20]
How would you define the touching by a man? What kind of a touch makes woman pregnant? Please define or would you prefer silence because of the shame like Ubaidullah Sindhi!
قَالَتْ رَبِّ أَنَّى يَكُونُ لِي وَلَدٌ وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ قَالَ كَذَلِكِ اللّهُ يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَاء إِذَا قَضَى أَمْرًا فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ
Qalat rabbi anna yakoonu lee waladun walam yamsasnee basharun qala kathaliki Allahu yakhluqu ma yashao itha qada amran fainnama yaqoolu lahu kun fayakoonu
English Translation:
She said: My Lord! How can I have a child when no mortal hath touched me? He said: So (it will be). Allah createth what He will. If He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is. [AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 47]
Dear Sir, What kind of a Man’s Touch makes women pregnant? Wouldn’t we explain this just because of Ubaidullah Sindhi’s type of shame!
حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمْ أُمَّهَاتُكُمْ وَبَنَاتُكُمْ وَأَخَوَاتُكُمْ وَعَمَّاتُكُمْ وَخَالاَتُكُمْ وَبَنَاتُ الأَخِ وَبَنَاتُ الأُخْتِ وَأُمَّهَاتُكُمُ اللاَّتِي أَرْضَعْنَكُمْ وَأَخَوَاتُكُم مِّنَ الرَّضَاعَةِ وَأُمَّهَاتُ نِسَآئِكُمْ وَرَبَائِبُكُمُ اللاَّتِي فِي حُجُورِكُم مِّن نِّسَآئِكُمُ اللاَّتِي دَخَلْتُم بِهِنَّ فَإِن لَّمْ تَكُونُواْ دَخَلْتُم بِهِنَّ فَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ وَحَلاَئِلُ أَبْنَائِكُمُ الَّذِينَ مِنْ أَصْلاَبِكُمْ وَأَن تَجْمَعُواْ بَيْنَ الأُخْتَيْنِ إَلاَّ مَا قَدْ سَلَفَ إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا
Hurrimat AAalaykum ommahatukum wabanatukum waakhawatukum waAAammatukum wakhalatukum wabanatu alakhi wabanatu alokhti waommahatukumu allatee ardaAAnakum waakhawatukum mina alrradaAAati waommahatu nisaikum warabaibukumu allatee fee hujoorikum min nisaikumu allatee dakhaltum bihinna fain lam takoonoo dakhaltum bihinna fala junaha AAalaykum wahalailu abnaikumu allatheena min aslabikum waan tajmaAAoo bayna alokhtayni illa ma qad salafa inna Allaha kana ghafooran raheeman
Forbidden unto you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your father’s sisters, and your mother’s sisters, and your brother’s daughters and your sister’s daughters, and your foster-mothers, and your foster-sisters, and your mothers-in-law, and your step-daughters who are under your protection (born) of your women unto whom ye have gone in – but if ye have not gone in unto them, then it is no sin for you (to marry their daughters) – and the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins. And (it is forbidden unto you) that ye should have two sisters together, except what hath already happened (of that nature) in the past. Lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful. [ [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 23]
Would Ubaidullah Sindhi’s shame stop us to define even the Explicit Quranic Verses?
نِسَآؤُكُمْ حَرْثٌ لَّكُمْ فَأْتُواْ حَرْثَكُمْ أَنَّى شِئْتُمْ وَقَدِّمُواْ لأَنفُسِكُمْ وَاتَّقُواْ اللّهَ وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّكُم مُّلاَقُوهُ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ
Nisaokum harthun lakum fatoo harthakum anna shitum waqaddimoo lianfusikum waittaqoo Allaha waiAAlamoo annakum mulaqoohu wabashshiri almumineena
Your women are a tilth for you so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad). [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 223]
If we would have to rely on Mullah Ubaidullah Sindhi’s so-called Shame then every men would have turned his wife into a catamite. Hadith regarding this verse explains that Intercourse with wife is only allowed in Vagina means Anal Sex is unlawful and forbidden [Strictly Haraam] even with one’s wife what to talk of male.
أَلَمْ يَكُ نُطْفَةً مِّن مَّنِيٍّ يُمْنَى
Alam yaku nutfatan min manayyin yumna
Was he not a drop of fluid which gushed forth? [AL-QIYAMA (THE RISING OF THE DEAD, RESURRECTION) Chapter 75 - Verse 37]
Arabic Mani means Sperm [in chaste Urdu Mada Manwiya and to make it thick [Garha] for which these Indo Pak Mullah would sell their soul to get Kushta/Tilla – aphrodisiac] but AH! their so-called shame. Allah is discussing it and these Shameless Mullah [Bayghairat] avoiding the discussion.
وَأَنَّهُ خَلَقَ الزَّوْجَيْنِ الذَّكَرَ وَالْأُنثَى
مِن نُّطْفَةٍ إِذَا تُمْنَى
Waannahu khalaqa alzzawjayni alththakara waalontha Min nutfatin itha tumna
And that He createth the two spouses, the male and the female, From a drop (of seed) when it is poured forth; [AN-NAJM (THE STAR) Chapter 53 - Verse 45 and 46]
Now where has gone the shame of Obaidullah Sindhi? What is being discussed here if not the Intercourse between Man and Woman and word Sperm i.e. Nutfa in Arabic is in the Quranic Verse and men emit Sperm through Penis [Should I use chaste Urdu]
أَفَرَأَيْتُم مَّا تُمْنُونَ
أَأَنتُمْ تَخْلُقُونَهُ أَمْ نَحْنُ الْخَالِقُونَ
Afaraaytum ma tumnoona Aantum takhluqoonahu am nahnu alkhaliqoona
Have ye seen that which ye emit? Do ye create it or are We the Creator? AL-WAQIA (THE EVENT, THE INEVITABLE) Chapter 56 – Verse 58 and 59]
وَالَّذِينَ هُمْ لِفُرُوجِهِمْ حَافِظُونَ
إِلَّا عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ غَيْرُ مَلُومِينَ
Waallatheena hum lifuroojihim hafithoona Illa AAala azwajihim aw ma malakat aymanuhum fainnahum ghayru maloomeena
And those who preserve their chastity Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy; [AL-MAARIJ (THE ASCENDING STAIRWAYS) Chapter 70 Verse 29 and 30]
Again Furooj [Vagina] is used in Quranic Verse! I wonder how the women protect their Vagina [Furooj]?
Dear Aamir Mughal,
From time to time I come across a piece of writing which has the effect of making me feel physically sick. Your string of posts yesterday had that effect on me – it is with some effort that I am responding to your comments. Let me tell you a hypothetical story.
I assume you are a married man with children. Let us say you have a son, three years old, and you say to him: “Son, you play here in this room while I go and lie with your Mum in the next room – shan’t be long, you understand?” The boy says, “yes, fine”, and you enter the other room. After a while the little boy takes a peek into the room and he finds Dad clinging to Mum so he says, yes, I understand, Dad is lying with Mum.
Now then, Aamir Mughal Sahib, the boy says he understands it all but does he have the understanding? It is the same with the Qur’an. It is easy to understand but the “understanding” is not guaranteed. If you wish to acquire understanding you will have to discard your practice of quoting selectively from the Qur’an to support your pre-conceived ideas. You will have to act in accordance with those verses which tell you to think hard over the aayaat of the whole Qur’an. In other words, see things with the eyes of a grown up, not those of a child.
It is a pity you refuse to learn from the knowledge and wisdom of others. The fact is the Qur’an does sub-divide its verses between the Muhkemaat and the Mutashaabehaat verses. Please do read my article on Islam to understand the difference between the two and the reason why the meaning of the Mutashaabehaat may not be clear to you. As for the Muhkemaat, the biggest stumbling block to our understanding is the simple fact that the Qur’an was revealed in Arabic which was in use 1500 years ago. A language – any language, its proverbs, the meaning of words – changes enormously over such a long period. Try reading an English text written 500 years ago or an Urdu text just 300 years old – you will have a hard time making sense of what you are reading. Therefore, not all translations of the Qur’an are equally reliable. You need to read several different versions and arrive at your own conclusions.
The story I have told you above also serves to bring out the difference between a matter of fact statement and a pornographic description. If, for example, the little boy looking into the room were to be replaced by your favourite author Harold Robbins, you would be guaranteed to read a titillating account which would make you drool at the mouth. Is teaching of biology “pornographic” because it specifically mentions the private parts of men and women? Do you now understand the essential difference between the Quraanic descriptions and the vulgar stories attributed to the greatest man who ever walked on earth?
Many repellent stories – “ahadees” – were dreamed up by the muftis of the time to provide a justification for the vile deeds of the reigning khalifah and members of the aristocracy. Child abuse was made acceptable by “discovering” ahadees some 250 years after Allah’s Messenger had passed on, which gave his wife’s age at nikaah as 6! Al-Quran says a marriage is a contract between a Muslim man and a Muslim woman which they enter into freely. Only a mullah’s mind can think of treating a child of 6 as a grown up young lady who understands the nature of the contract she is entering into.
The next bombshell you drop is: “If Shaan-e-Nazool is not important [as per you] then please follow all those Verses which are quoted as Violent Verses of Quran and start hacking the heads infidels”.
This is pure mullahism! There are verses in the Qur’an which tell you how you need to defend yourself in wartime from treacherous enemies. There are separate Quraanic passages which tell you to be kind and fair to all human beings irrespective of who they are provided they are living in peaceful co-existence with you. It is an insult to Allah’s Book to imply that you are ordered to “hack off heads of infidels”. The “shaan-e-nazool” thing is nowhere mentioned in the Qur’an – it is simply the product of our mullahs’ fertile imagination.
According to the Qur’an there is nothing wrong with living in peaceful co-existence with one’s fellow human beings. If you dig up stories which contradict the Qur’an then I shall have to reject them out of hand. In any case, do point out to me where you can see an Islamic society anywhere in the world. Take Pakistan, dominated as it is by the twin evils of mullahism and westernised fascism. It is, as this website keeps reminding us, a land where corruption, lies, deceit, injustice and oppression are widespread, and where we get the leaders we deserve – Zardari, Musharraf, Nawaz Sharif! Tell me what is Islamic about this society? You need to create one before you stand on high moral ground and let off hot air into the atmosphere. The sad fact is that what we have in Pakistan today is the Age of Jahiliyyah masquerading as Islam.
I have shown you how close to the spirit of Islam Quaid-e-Azam was but you continue in your stubborn refusal to acknowledge the truth. I shall not go over ground I have already covered.
You have at least got one thing right when you quote verse (4:97). The oppressed people of Pakistan have indeed migrated to countries all over the world where they have found relative safety and justice from the oppression which lies heavy over Pakistan. It is people in Pakistan who fear for their lives and their religions, not those who have found refuge elsewhere. Are you really unaware of the contradictions in your postings? You will sink deeper and deeper into the bog as you discard Allah’s Guidance in favour of the wild pronouncements of self-important mullahs.
Aamir Mughal, “to you your Deen, and to me mine”. Let this be the end of our discussion. I am not interested in prolonging this meandering “discussion” leading nowhere.
fii amaan Allah.
The Pakistani society today, according to Anjum Niaz:
http://thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=226901
Then don’t discuss and by the way a part of Quranic Chapter above from “Al Kafiroon – The Disbelievers” which you have quoted on me is meant for Non-Muslims and not for Muslims and till this post I am a Muslim and so you are.
Dear Sakib
Please do not behave like a member of Jamaat e Islami.
This is Number ” 6 ” from my view point….
No , this is Number ” 9 ” from my view point…
Dear Omar and Moderator,
My friend Wajahat Masood has tried to dig the “Islamic Past of Pakistan” kindly upload his Excellent Expose’ on Deobandi Calamity.
Objective Resolution and Secularism – Part 1
http://www.aajkal.com.pk/news/2010/3/6/editorial_n3.jpg
Objective Resolution and Secularism – Part 2
http://www.aajkal.com.pk/news/2010/3/7/editorial_n2.jpg
Aamir Sain
Thanks for the link. But people like Sakib will continue to argue to the contrary.
@Aamir Mughal
http://criticalppp.com/archives/6879
Thanks