Though I mildly disagree with the shameless self glorification of the authors by displaying their names in bold

While presenting information about back-biting (which I contend does not apply to the famous personality here but I am not going to argue it), it would be nice to share some benefit of doubt. After all, that too is from the ikhlaaq of a Muslim, isn’t it?

There is no “shameless self glorification going on here”. The wordpress theme automatically enhances the names of the website authors. Amazing how we identify and attack on the most trivial of thing, even before asking for explanations.

We are closing comments. No point in continuing, what has become a thread of trivialities.

Many confusing and disturbing things have been said in the comments section. Fingers have been pointed to and fro, and passions have run high. This discussion is very quickly turning into a shouting match.

In my humble opinion, one should try to stay focus on the core subject under discussion. I am taking this opportunity to make three points that I feel are very important and relevant to the article as well as the comments given.

Point # 1

Let me start by presenting the main premise of the article, and my arguments against it . I have done it before, but please bear with me as I want to point to anther prevalent problem that has also manifested itself in the comments section also:

The main premise of the article is the following:

1. Jinnah was a secular muslim, and by looking at his character, one can deduct that his intentions may not have been purely towards an Islamic state. He may have wanted a secular state.
2. Due to him supporting/practicing such secular ideas ( as made abundantly clear in the article ) , Is it possible that due to his ( corrupt/impure/ ) niyyah, we, the people of Pakistan are in the such a mess.

My argument has been the following:

The philosophical justification, and hence the “intention” of having a separate homeland for Muslims was supported by different Islamic scholars and thinkers of sub continent well before Quaid-e-Azam mobilized the Muslims to make it a political reality. He implemented the intentions of the others. He surely agreed with (or if one wants to disagree: he used ) the religious justification to demand a separate homeland.

This clarification refutes the argument that:
A) Pakistan is a direct outcome of the intentions of Jinnah, and Jinnah alone. This connection has been directly implied by tying the current situation to Jinnah’s intentions only. As mentioned in my previous posts, the sentiments of millions of muslims ( leaders and workers ) were not taken into account.
b) The writer has tried to deduce point #2 directly on the basis of point #1. In the light of clarification of #1, this deduction has no leg to stand on. Academically this is a poorly researched article as some of you have pointed out also.

The biggest problem with the whole article and its aftermath is not getting the facts wrong; everyone is human and makes mistakes etc. What I found to be most troubling is the following:

This article has tried to justify the main argument by appealing to our religious sense of right and wrong. The irony is that this ill written article may be considered as an attempt in itself to slander and do ghibah (backbiting ) against MA Jinnah.

Let me again explain how:

1. Any secular behavior of MA Jinnah mentioned is based on either hearsay or own deductions. No concrete proof has been provided for the assertions made. Secondly the rational argument that runs throughout the article is based on a false premise.

2. Even (hypothetically) if one considers that the article was based on facts, these revelations have no genuine need, academic or otherwise in the current times.

Now here is one explanation of what backbiting and slander is :
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=212&CATE=13

and let me quote a hadith mentioned in the same source:

Meaning of ghibah

It has been defined precisely by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) as,
“Your mentioning your brother with something about him that he dislikes [being spoken about].” Someone asked, “How about if my brother contains that [characteristic which I am mentioning]?” He replied, “If he possesses that which you mention, then you have [indeed] backbited him. And, if he does not contain that which you say, then you have slandered him.” [Muslim in al-Birr, 4/2001, #70; Ahmad in Al-Musnad, 2/230,384]

Now if one reads further, it is explained:

Cases in which ghibah is permissible

1. Injustice. One who has suffered injustice is entitled to mention the one who has committed injustice to someone who is capable of restoring his rights to him, such as a legitimate Muslim ruler or judge.
2. Seeking help to change an evil, or to reform the wrongdoer. If the intention in telling the ghibah is not to change the wrong, then it is forbidden to relate it.
3. Asking for a fatwa. A person may say, ‘My father/brother/wife has done such-and-such to me. What can I do about it?

Please tell me under which of the above mentioned category this article falls under. ?

Most shocking thing is that same slandering is going on in the discussion thread. Though some of the commentators seem to be bursting with religious fervor, no one seems to mind the endless character assassinations of so many long dead scholars and people.

Point # 2

I was also disappointed with the behavior of some of the authors of this site. I found that some of them replied to the poster in the same tone as the posters. Though I mildly disagree with the shameless self glorification of the authors by displaying their names in bold , I do hope that they should uphold superior manners than the visitors to the site. After all, this website promotes Islam.

Point # 3
Looking at how the discussion threads have evolved may have some hidden benefit after all.
We are too passionate even to the extent of letting go of sense of religious right and wrong. There lies the root cause of the problems that we are facing. Note that we have been privileged to carry the word of Allah Karim to non muslims. We do not own Islam. Any discussion done should be based on mutual respect of the other party. Only then one can start benefiting from the wisdom of others. Do take a step back and think about the arguments presented.

Assalamoalaikum

Looking back over the last 20 or so posts, i am saddened by how much sarcasm and mockery there is in the various posts

Br Gohar, you mean in the last 20 or so comments right, not posts?

You are right in one further regard though. Looking back over the last 20 or so posts, i am saddened by how much sarcasm and mockery there is in the various posts. Perhaps we arn’t actually mature enough to discuss such weighty issues after all.

Indians (Muslims) and Pakistanis – same crap, different pile
I dont know which blogs you visit nor do I care
Oh really?
You find my reasoning amusing? Look at yours.

And apologies to Irum for continuing to take the thread off topic.

w/s

Yes, I admit that my analogy was extreme but wouldn’t you agree we have yet to mature as an ummah?

I just realized I did not live upto my promise of “This will be my last post on this topic.”.

OK – this will be my last, insha’Allah.

We are all adults, so the example of the toy is not a good analogy, literally and even metaphorically. We need to learn to control our emotions and be able to discuss things in a calm and logical fashion.

w/s

1. I agree that it is not reasonable to demand that opinion pieces equally represent all sides of a story.
2. I agree that the author has the right to hold and express an opinion contrary to mine.

Our difference is that you’re expecting commentators to behave in an ideal way and I’m saying that is not going to happen in reality. It’s like buying only one toy for my 4 children and asking them to ‘share’ it with their siblings. Of course, ideally they should share it politely, take turns playing with it, RIGHT? But all I’ve done is create the perfect situation for them to get into a fight.

Similarly, when you post a controvertial, sensationalist article like this one the conversation will quickly degenerate into name-calling, ego-busting rants. That’s because it forces ppl to defend something they hold to be sacred out of emotion rather than cold, objective analysis. This applies to both sides. As I said earlier, I’ve had these discussions adnauseum with my elders and I realized they were of no benefit. I asked myself, what was I trying to do? Convince them that ‘Quaid-e-Azam’ was a charlattan and an insincere muslim who conned millions of Muslims for some selfish political gain? That the entire concept of Pakistan was a fraud, a big lie? To what end? Will it make them better Muslims? Will it make Pakistan better Islamically? Will it improve the lives of the Muslims in Pakistan? NO, NO, and NO.

As one brother pointed out, it brings out the ‘worst in us’. So my argument is simply why post something that will bring out the worst in us?

I have benefited from many of the posts here myself. May Allah reward all fo you for your intentions and efforts.