DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Against modernism and "Islamic reformism"!

**Qauunet** · 09-04-2012, 04:22 AM

One more point Maripat,i would be very interested to read your views on it.There is a question of MUSLIM NATIONALISM vs ISLAM AS A RELIGION ; Under political pressure from the west,the Umma produced a particular breed of leadership,who considered Muslims as a Party/hizb,who needed to be defended,uplifted,positioned back to their glorious past,but who had no or little interest in Islam as a Din OR they did have an interest in Din,but were misguided.Some examples : Sir syed Ahmad Khan ,Muhammad Ali jinnah......and the recent past Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto etc.Many more example may be found if we think.These were honest and sincere people ,but the their prime objective was Muslims....not Islam.

I am there with you on this. By the Grace of Allah(SWT) then problem has been solved already at the analytical, philosophical and abstract level. The solution is that one should be wary of any ism. An ism is an opinion and a slave of God is a slave and is supposed to submit his will completely to Allah(SWT) and thus anybody holding any ism dear to his heart is resisting complete submission.

Of course the problem is not solved at the practical level. Nearly all the isms adopted by Muslims are still present in some form or the other and it is difficult to bring people around to your way of looking at the situation. Being an Indian Muslim some of these isms have practical consequences for me and others here. Personally I find it difficult to refute Jinnah's theory because he is not the person who invented Ummah-it was already defined. The problem in his case, as I see, was the decision that we will not live with the others. The end result is that some of us were left to live with those others with the added resentment on part of the latter. This problem itself is not solved in its physical manifestation. The evidence to this effect is the oft repeated Indo-Pak type friction filled discussion here at SF itself. (I'll not wish the present discussion to spill out into another round of that in this thread.) Then there is the case of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. This of course is even earlier. This is a case which is not at all amenable to Ta'weel ( reconciliation oriented explanation). (To be contd.)

09-04-2012, 04:22 AM	#27
Qauunet Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 538 Senior Member	One more point Maripat,i would be very interested to read your views on it.There is a question of MUSLIM NATIONALISM vs ISLAM AS A RELIGION ; Under political pressure from the west,the Umma produced a particular breed of leadership,who considered Muslims as a Party/hizb,who needed to be defended,uplifted,positioned back to their glorious past,but who had no or little interest in Islam as a Din OR they did have an interest in Din,but were misguided.Some examples : Sir syed Ahmad Khan ,Muhammad Ali jinnah......and the recent past Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto etc.Many more example may be found if we think.These were honest and sincere people ,but the their prime objective was Muslims....not Islam. I am there with you on this. By the Grace of Allah(SWT) then problem has been solved already at the analytical, philosophical and abstract level. The solution is that one should be wary of any ism. An ism is an opinion and a slave of God is a slave and is supposed to submit his will completely to Allah(SWT) and thus anybody holding any ism dear to his heart is resisting complete submission. Of course the problem is not solved at the practical level. Nearly all the isms adopted by Muslims are still present in some form or the other and it is difficult to bring people around to your way of looking at the situation. Being an Indian Muslim some of these isms have practical consequences for me and others here. Personally I find it difficult to refute Jinnah's theory because he is not the person who invented Ummah-it was already defined. The problem in his case, as I see, was the decision that we will not live with the others. The end result is that some of us were left to live with those others with the added resentment on part of the latter. This problem itself is not solved in its physical manifestation. The evidence to this effect is the oft repeated Indo-Pak type friction filled discussion here at SF itself. (I'll not wish the present discussion to spill out into another round of that in this thread.) Then there is the case of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. This of course is even earlier. This is a case which is not at all amenable to Ta'weel ( reconciliation oriented explanation). (To be contd.)
	Quote