You wrote:

We do not acknowledge Bangladesh.

It is East Pakistan and always will be! There was no discord, no disharmoney. No violence. Infact the whole year does not exist. (1971? what 1971!)

So according to Pakistan, Bengali's are actually Paki's.

Hmmm....

Do you feel insulted enough yet?

MuslimBro wrote:

You wrote:

We do not acknowledge Bangladesh.

It is East Pakistan and always will be! There was no discord, no disharmoney. No violence. Infact the whole year does not exist. (1971? what 1971!)

So according to Pakistan, Bengali's are actually Paki's.

Hmmm....

No not according to pakistan and its only YOU who thinks that way and its not Paki's its pakistanis or sub-continental asians, we live in a politically incorrect world, i would like to change that.

Funzo wrote:

we live in a politically incorrect world, i would like to change that.

You will have to go through me first.

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

Allahumma anta Rabbi la ilaha illa anta, Anta Khalaqtani wa ana abduka, wa ana 'ala ahdika wa wa'dika mastata'tu, A'udhu bika min Sharri ma sana'tu, abu'u Laka bini'matika 'alaiya, wa Abu Laka bidhanbi faghfirli innahu la yaghfiru adhdhunuba illa anta

love to live bu... wrote:

Benazir did a lot of things that she shudn't hav n some were cos of her husband... now that she's gone n her hubi's chairin the party who has jus won elections.... altho there r alot of expectations from them ... i really doubt that he will refrain from temptations and i really fear that the future of pakistan is doomed? erm its betr than Pervaiz much much much better! dats dat wud her son follow in her footsteps jus like benazir followed in her father's footsteps? or wud he follow his father's footsteps? its frightenin wen u think abt wot cud happen keepin in mind that world peace is literally impossible (altho it is possible if Allah wills obviously!)

Even the most harden Pakistani nationalist would openly admit that Benazir Bhutto sounded more pro Indian then pro-Pakistan. This feeling was cemented when she gave an interview for an Indian News channel, and she openly spoke up against Pakistan Nuclear program, and as we know Pakistani Nuclear weapons is an issue of national pride much like it's cricket. Her political activism is only ignited when world opinion is against Pakistan on a particular issue, as they say she jumps on the wagon.

I guess the leadership of a country reflects the people!

love to live bu... wrote:

if ther's somethin i'm proud of benazir abt is dat she was the first n mayb the last female president a muslim country will ever see in power! (o btw hav u seen how many women ther r in the parliament now??) she went beyond the box but then it was coz of her father! like her son is gna run the party after a couple of yrs coz it was his mother's?! nyways she was good n bad in her own manner!

If you want to argue that Pakistan is a Muslim country then you are hopelessly astray as the planners in the Muslim league under the umbrella of the Indian Congress. If Pakistan is the century’s benchmark on a Muslim/Islamic country, then its 160 million supporters can have it, and live in ignorance. The creation of Pakistan demonstrates that under no circumstance in the Shariah; when you are occupied you separate from the mothers womb, Pakistan is not a Muslim country. Muslim in population doesn’t equate to it being a Muslim country in the sense of following Shariah. It’s creation separated more Muslims then it actually united, and as a result of partition many thousands of innocent Muslim, and Hindus died horrible death.

Lets look at the name of Pakistan- a state designed to give Muslims of Hind a homeland, and remember Kabul was apart of glorious Hind. Stan means Land (I think Stand means land in Polish as well), and PAKS is an acronym for:

P= Punjabis

A = Afghani

K= Kashmiris

S = Sinds

Bangladesh was apart of Pakistan (East Pakistan) where is the B to represent Bengalis in Pakistan?

Can you name me one ethnic Muslim group in India? Shouldn’t their ethnic tiles be included in “Pakistan”

Are these the only four major Muslim ethnic groups found in the Indian Subcontinent?

Once again if Pakistan is an Muslim country, then why adopt Urdu and not Farsi before the British phased it out it was spoken by the majority including Hiduz.

There is a Hadith by Prophet sal Allaahu Alayhi wa Sallam where my master forbade a person speaking his language if by they will be excluding people from that conversations who are unable to speak that person language. Language was used as buffer to divided Muslim of Hind, and it did greater damage.

Thus, we can only say that while it is debatable that the very creation of Pakistan was harmful for the Muslims of the whole sub-continent, at least the attempted Islamic reassertion of Pakistan is nothing but the tending of the majority by Political parties, much like the towing of Hindutva lines by the political parties of India like the BJP or even the Congress (with its mild Hindutva approach).

You wrote:

I will spell it out. We do not acknowledge Bangladesh.

It is East Pakistan and always will be! There was no discord, no disharmoney. No violence. Infact the whole year does not exist. (1971? what 1971!)

I don’t appreciate it when any Proud Pakistani debunks, and is insensitive to the contributions in the socio-cultural, political, historical and religo-philosophical spheres of the land of my Muslim forefathers. Further, regarding Islam, no matter how much a Pakistanis may try to impose on the world, Islam is not unique to Pakistan! There are all kinds of heretical off-shoots of Islam working successfully in Pakistan. At the same time, there are wonderful Muslims and scholars in the whole of the subcontinent, be that India or Bangladesh.

Most of the people writing here have not studied about Bangladesh, nor the reasons of its formation. Bangladesh was East Bengal much before the formation of Pakistan. And it was a vibrant economic structure on its own. In fact, the textile exports of East Bengal suffered heavily after its joining into Pakistan. And during the war in the 1970s, India's jute exports overtook Bangladesh's for the first time in history. It is amazing to see that the Bangladesh economy is coming back on track.

Muslim Bro wrote:

So according to Pakistan, Bengali's are actually Paki's.

Hmmm....

I think ‘You’ is just being provocative, reading post like his; reminds me why I hate people. The difference between Pakistanis, and Bengalis is the same difference as day and night in this age, but it always wasn’t like this, but then bani Pakistan came and ruined it for everyone.

May Allah unite the Muslims against the Kuffaar, and remove the hatreds and differences amongst us, and May Allah grant us victory over the oppressors of Muslims all over the world. May Allah SWT grant us wisdom and knowledge of the correct path and make us adherent to it, and thus grant us Al-Falaah, the true success in this world and the hereafter

love to live bu... wrote:

apologise for not knowin that bangladesh had a female prime ... i kno its a stupid Q but is it considerd as a muslim country?

Have not the Bhuttos, Khaleda Zia and the Sharifs squandered countless Muslim lives and their wealth in corrupt policies?

Yet these women dont even have the Gheerah of Hind in her Jahiliyah

As for the Bhutto’s the apple does not fall far from it’s tree.

It’s not something as a Muslim I’m particular proud of; having a leader that cant even cover herself, why place does she have leading a nation?

Wa alaikum assalam wa rahmatullah

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

Funzo wrote:

Brother rashid ghazi please dont bring Shaykh ul islam professor tahir ul qadri into this, ive seen enough people slander him on this website. He holds huge amounts of knowledge and i will not tolerate any disrespect towards him, especially not on this website if you want to disrespect him go elsewhere please

Noor posted an article , which Tahir ul qadri had taken the time to write, and I took the time to read it, and much to my disgust the self proclaimed ‘Shaykh ul Islam’, and before I get to writing about the title I will first deal with the infallible status of ‘mash’Allah Shaykh ul-Islam’. Firstly if one dears to write about sensitive matters then equally there would be objections. From myself I was objective enough to criticise the lack of any real understanding of political history of this cursed Bhutto’s , instead he tries to portray them as saintly folks when history proves that have been nothing short of an abomination unto man. In what capacity does he have writing about Politics, he has avoided this matter for the length of his illustrious career?

I will continue to refer to ‘Shaykh ul Islam’ as self proclaimed and use inverted commoners where I see fit, if this is slander, then cut of my tongue and tell me how such a title was awarded to him?

Ever heard of Shaykh ul-Hind (ra), well Shaykh ul hind title was earn and given to him! On the past It is given to a scholar who is accepted by the majority of the scholars in India to be the top.

This was in the past, now the barelwi's call nearly every one of their shaiykhs shaykh ul Islam.

What would people think of me if I added a Doctrate to my title, something like Dr Rashid ul Avionics and applied for a position at Zimbabwe University and tried to teach Optoelectronics, would it fair if they called me a charlatan?

It’s a title given to him by his loyal followers and not the Ottoman sultans as amir ul mu'mineen.

Wa alaikum assalam wa rahmatullah

@ RashidGazi - if you aer not the same person as Shazan then I apologise.

if you are, then I don't.

As my word may have been offensive, but that is pretty much what I was accused by him of. (also of carrying out genocide and being responsible for not getting justice for the victims)

If you think I am a proud pakistani national, then you are entitled to that view.

@the post above mine, what does have to do with Benazir?

If you want answers about Tahir ul Qadri, it would be best you go to one of his or his followers forums/sites.

RashidGhazi wrote:

I will continue to refer to ‘Shaykh ul Islam’ as self proclaimed and use inverted commoners where I see fit, if this is slander, then cut of my tongue and tell me how such a title was awarded to him?

Minhaj Rafiq wrote:

As-salâmu `alaykum dear all

This is something for the 57th birthday of Sayyidi
Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri
(hâfizahullâh).

On the 20th of October 1994, Sayyidi Shaykh-ul-Islam
led the janâza (funeral) prayers of a great saintly
figure, al-Mu`ammar Hadrat Sayyid Rasûl Shâh Khâkî of
Chakwâl (Pîr Khâkî Shâh Sâhib) who had died at the age
of 130 years! He was a direct student of Imâm al-Hind
Mawlânâ Shâh Ahmad Ridâ Khân al-Barêlwî and was among
the main khalîfas (spiritual successor) of
Naqîbul-Ashrâf Sayyidunâ Ibrâhîm Sayfuddîn of Baghdad.
He would give the title of “Shaykh-ul-Islam” to Shaykh
Tahir-ul-Qadri and desired only for him to lead his
janâza prayer. `Allâma Muhammad Mi`râj-ul-Islâm
narrated that he said:

“mujhe Hadrat ghawth a`Zam sayyid `abdul-qâdir jîlânî
raHmatullâhi `alayh ne hukm diyâ he ke logo kô batâdô
ke muHammad Tahir-ul-qâdrî shaykh-ul-islâm hê.

“Hadrat Ghawth A`zam Sayyid `Abdul-Qâdir Jîlânî
ordered me to tell the people that Muhammad
Tahir-ul-Qadri is Shaykh-ul-Islam!”

He sent a flag to Shaykh Tahir-ul-Qadri with the
following written on it: “Shaykh-ul-Islam Professor
Doctor Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri”. This flag was gifted
by Shaykh-ul-Islam to `Allâma Muhammad Mi`râj-ul-Islâm
who still has it among his possessions. So he was the
first to give the title of “Shaykh-ul-Islam”.

Among others, Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri was also declared
as “Shaykh-ul-Islam” in a gathering at Jâmi`a
Muhaddith al-Akbar (Damascus, Syria) in 2004 by its
head-master, ash-Shaykh Abul-Khayr Shukri, the head
imam of the famous Jâmi`a Masjid Umawi ash-Shaykh
As’ad Muhammad Sa`îd as-Sâgharjî and ash-Shaykh
`Abdur-Razzâq ash-Shurafâ’. I personally had the fortune
of being present with 300 other brothers and sisters
to witness this, al-Hamdulillah.

May Allâh allow us to benefit from him and support his
mission, which is the mission of the Holy Prophet
(sallallâhu `alayhi wa âlihî wa sallam), âmîn!

Ma`as-salâma
Rafiq

You wrote:

@the post above mine, what does have to do with Benazir?

If you want answers about Tahir ul Qadri, it would be best you go to one of his or his followers forums/sites.

Better still, Huzoor Shaykh-ul-Islam is in london on the 26th of this month, why don't you come down and speak to them yourself? If you have the guts that is.

Yeah, that would be best, Go right to the source, find out if your opinions on the person are correct without the bias one way or the other of the internet or other people.

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

Have You ever wondered how it feels when a person starts without a salaam, and then top of that addresses you by your first name? Sorry to be blunt but I don’t appreciate your post, it puts me off any knowledge that is beneficial in it, I couldn’t even take the time to fully read and understand what you have written, if what you said is wrong or right it doesn’t matter to me

Wa alaikum assalam wa rahmatullah

Assalamu Alaikum

So you will ignore useful information if it is not preceded by Salaam? Which fiqh book is this from? None that I know of.

Or are you hiding from truth by way of excuses? I am certain that would go against your adaab.

Wasalaam.

PS forum discussions are "continuous" there is no arriving, or ending within a topic. What you propose is like starting every sentence with salaam and ending every sentence with it too. not necessarily bad, but some may see it as a hindrance.

If someone disagrees with something our shaykh says, and argues it properly, I don't see the problem. By doing so they are acknowledging he is not an infallible being. The response should not be "don't disagree with anything he says!" because that looks really silly.

Noor wrote:

RashidGhazi wrote:

I will continue to refer to ‘Shaykh ul Islam’ as self proclaimed and use inverted commoners where I see fit, if this is slander, then cut of my tongue and tell me how such a title was awarded to him?

Minhaj Rafiq wrote:

As-salâmu `alaykum dear all

This is something for the 57th birthday of Sayyidi
Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri
(hâfizahullâh).

On the 20th of October 1994, Sayyidi Shaykh-ul-Islam
led the janâza (funeral) prayers of a great saintly
figure, al-Mu`ammar Hadrat Sayyid Rasûl Shâh Khâkî of
Chakwâl (Pîr Khâkî Shâh Sâhib) who had died at the age
of 130 years! He was a direct student of Imâm al-Hind
Mawlânâ Shâh Ahmad Ridâ Khân al-Barêlwî and was among
the main khalîfas (spiritual successor) of
Naqîbul-Ashrâf Sayyidunâ Ibrâhîm Sayfuddîn of Baghdad.
He would give the title of “Shaykh-ul-Islam” to Shaykh
Tahir-ul-Qadri and desired only for him to lead his
janâza prayer. `Allâma Muhammad Mi`râj-ul-Islâm
narrated that he said:

“mujhe Hadrat ghawth a`Zam sayyid `abdul-qâdir jîlânî
raHmatullâhi `alayh ne hukm diyâ he ke logo kô batâdô
ke muHammad Tahir-ul-qâdrî shaykh-ul-islâm hê.

“Hadrat Ghawth A`zam Sayyid `Abdul-Qâdir Jîlânî
ordered me to tell the people that Muhammad
Tahir-ul-Qadri is Shaykh-ul-Islam!”

He sent a flag to Shaykh Tahir-ul-Qadri with the
following written on it: “Shaykh-ul-Islam Professor
Doctor Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri”. This flag was gifted
by Shaykh-ul-Islam to `Allâma Muhammad Mi`râj-ul-Islâm
who still has it among his possessions. So he was the
first to give the title of “Shaykh-ul-Islam”.

Among others, Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri was also declared
as “Shaykh-ul-Islam” in a gathering at Jâmi`a
Muhaddith al-Akbar (Damascus, Syria) in 2004 by its
head-master, ash-Shaykh Abul-Khayr Shukri, the head
imam of the famous Jâmi`a Masjid Umawi ash-Shaykh
As’ad Muhammad Sa`îd as-Sâgharjî and ash-Shaykh
`Abdur-Razzâq ash-Shurafâ’. I personally had the fortune
of being present with 300 other brothers and sisters
to witness this, al-Hamdulillah.

May Allâh allow us to benefit from him and support his
mission, which is the mission of the Holy Prophet
(sallallâhu `alayhi wa âlihî wa sallam), âmîn!

Ma`as-salâma
Rafiq

I'm not being rude, but I honestly don't understand a word of this.

I always thought that you appreciate a person by what they say or do, not by their lineage.

(If I'm completely wrong in thinking this is about lineage, then I apologise. As I said, I saw a list of names I don't understand and assume its about lineage).

Ya'qub wrote:

If someone disagrees with something our shaykh says, and argues it properly, I don't see the problem. By doing so they are acknowledging he is not an infallible being. The response should not be "don't disagree with anything he says!" because that looks really silly.

Neither do I.

Just do it in the right topic, or in the right place.

do you know how much effort I went to originally to bury this topic and get it off the first page?

Ya'qub wrote:

I'm not being rude, but I honestly don't understand a word of this.

I always thought that you appreciate a person by what they say or do, not by their lineage.

(If I'm completely wrong in thinking this is about lineage, then I apologise. As I said, I saw a list of names I don't understand and assume its about lineage).

yes you are wrong, it is nothing about lineage, its about how shaykh ul islam got his title and the list of names are the names of the mayshaykh who gave qibla the title.

"mayshaykh who gave qibla the title"

what does that mean?

I think it is a plural of "shaykh". But would a plural not be "shaykhs"? or even "Shuyuk"? I prefer the first one.

(I also assume that Shaykh = scholar, not spiritual healer. Could be both. or either. or none if it is preceded by "fake".)

It either is talking about scholars who taught him, or scholars who "recognised" him. or scholars of scholars who did either in case that post is about scholarly lineage.

But she said that the different Shaykhs gave the qibla its title. But I thought qibla is mentioned in the Qur'an.

Qibla means direction, and can also be used in the "right honourable" sense. (someone you follow is giving you the direction sort of thing.)

Blame it on urdu. It can be a weird language.

You wrote:

Blame it on urdu.

Don't worry, I always do.

I think I get it now. But it would have helped if I'd heard of at least one of those shaykhs that were mentioned.

It says they were famous. In Pakistan? Or world-wide?

lol, what i meant was that different shayukh/pirs have given the title 'shaykh-ul-islam' to the shaykh.

qibla huzoor is a name that minhajis (members of MQ) use when referring to shaykh ul islam out of adab and love for them.

Ya'qub wrote:

It says they were famous. In Pakistan? Or world-wide?

I would suspect that they are all (long?) dead by now...

EDIT just skimmed through and there is one mention of Syria and of 2004 so probably not.

Ya'qub wrote:

It says they were famous. In Pakistan? Or world-wide?

who?

Noor wrote:

Ya'qub wrote:

It says they were famous. In Pakistan? Or world-wide?

who?

O sorry, it says the mosque was famous.

But the fact that it even mentions the names of shaykhs at all suggests they are famous.

They're not likely to talk about Mrs Davis from down the road, are they?

yah, they are well known in the arab world.

RashidGhazi wrote:

if what you said is wrong or right it doesn’t matter to me

So what does matter to you? how the person looks whether he's an ignoramous like yourself?