Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » PTH editor Raza Rumi and Co-editor Yasser Latif Hamdani discuss Jinnah with Samson Simon Sharaf
PTH editor Raza Rumi and Co-editor Yasser Latif Hamdani discuss Jinnah with Samson Simon Sharaf
Raza Rumi and Yasser Latif Hamdani discussed Jinnah’s life, vision and ideas with Brigadier (retired) Samson Simon Sharaf on 11 September 2012 in Brig Sharaf’s show “Insight and Foresight”.
Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: Jinnah, PTH, Raza Rumi, Samson Simon Sharaf
88 Responses to "PTH editor Raza Rumi and Co-editor Yasser Latif Hamdani discuss Jinnah with Samson Simon Sharaf"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- Rex Minor
said Tajender,
Your name is getting very popular. I sho... - tajender
said rex i cannot awnser u last 2 posts are not mine. - LV Outlet Paris Address
said Louis Vuitton Outlet Replica - Do Louis Vuitton Have Outlet Stores said Fake LV Outlet Online
- Maggu
said REXIE, so when are you moving to Afghanistan to be... - Rex Minor said Tajender,
Your two posts have less to do with Isla...
- Does LV Outlet Exist
said are Louis Vuitton Outlets Real - Genuine Louis Vuitton Online Outlet said Louis Vuitton Outlet Real Bags
- atap fiberglass
said I think that is one of the most vital info for me.... - Tajender said KABUL, Afghanistan: An Afghan legislator says cons...
An absolutely fascinating discussion. I hope we can see more discussions like this.
I agree with most of the points, and disagree with a few, but appreciate Raza Rumi and Yasser Latif Hamdani’s perspective on Pakistan and Quid E Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
We need to have more dialogue, and discuss conflicting narratives.
@Raza: You mentioned Objectives Resolution and August 11th speech. You said that they both contradict or differ to an extent. I disagree , is it not the message of Islam and Quran that Muslims and Non Muslims dont discriminate each other and live in harmony?
Though there are some controversies in Islamic history, but is it not a tradition of Muslim Empires, to incorporate Non Muslims with Muslim society? The Jews had thier Golden Age during Ummayyad Spain Era. Christians and Hindus were free to share knowledge in Baghdad and other centres of knowledge in the Islamic world?
From my understanding minorities did live in peace and harmony and Islamic laws do protect the spiritual and physcial needs of Non Muslims as well.
Another interesting point was the definition of the words secular and liberal. These words have many definitions and need to be clearly defined.
I am also a big fan of Brig Samson Sharaf, he is an excellent analyst and I respect him as he is part of the Christian minority playing a big role in his own way.
What a caricature of an anchor. How did the two guests link up with him? Is the army taking over the channels now?
@ ahem
What a tawdry idiot you are!!
@Mustafa Shaban
secular ,liberal and atheist have different meanings but pity here even religious bigots like YLH use it in the same sense.
Aurangzeb is much maligned by the Hindus and so-called liberal merrymakers mainly because he laid jizya on non-Muslims. Wonder if they know why jizya is imposed??? Let me help them out of their misery. Jizya is imposed to guarantee full citizen rights to non-Muslims living in a Muslim state. The jizya payers are totally EXEMPT from army service during times of war!! What more do non-Muslims expect from a Muslim ruler against the petty tax they are supposed to pay???
YLH
good discussion but one where you go into greater detail( which is your forte) would be very welcome.
@Fingolfin
Dabee Rakh!!
.
Dialogue between an Atheist Professor and a Muslim Student ( English )
.
http://www.islamhouse.com/p/401506
AKB
???
“Jizya is imposed to guarantee full citizen rights to non-Muslims living in a Muslim state.”
Would you appreciste if muslims were to slapped with Jiziya in non muslim countries to become full and equal citizen of that state?
“Jizya is imposed to guarantee full citizen rights to non-Muslims living in a Muslim state.”
It is like paying Hafta to goondas of the area for our safety.
@NDelhi
@Mohan
I am puzzled by your notes. You are aware that Muslims have to pay a higher tax?
@ahem
Are you NDelhi or Mohan?
@ahem
Whether they are busy or not, nobody asked you to interpose yourself in their place. They didn’t. So why use them as an excuse for what you do unprovoked anyway?
Vajra,
I am puzzeled at your question ?
Are you sure you are Vajra ?
@NDelhi
You have me there. I am no longer certain. Am I Vajra after all? Would he have made such a daft, Islamophilic remark? Or am I Vajra possessed by a djinn, and therefore not responsible for my actions?
This needs deep thought.
Meanwhile, the point is that both Muslims and Dhimmi were taxed. The names of the taxes were different. I wanted to know if you were aware that this was not a discriminatory, asymmetric tax, as is very wrongly understood.
Vajra,
Please tell me why their was a need to name it differently and charged at differnt rate?
Vajra
You might have already done that but if you want to understand Islam learn from Muslims – here is one guy that knows his Islam – google Ali sina and read his debates…
We have had extensive discussion on Jinnah, Gandhi partition – what is the conclusion?
I am not a scholar but here is how I will approach the problem.
Do Pakistanis want Pakistan? If yes, then who ever gave them Pakistan should be their hero or at least they should be grateful to him.
Now the next question and that’s the real question.
Do Pakistanis want more Pakistan? I think the answer is yes because they think that will somehow magically make them sane. Here is the reality though. They will not have any more Pakistan – not at least in near future. World in general does not like more Pakistan.
Now some Pakistanis may want less Pakistan – like east Pakistanis. Now that is one potential solution to pakistan’s problems. Less Pakistan is better for everyone.
Pakistani – Hindus responsible hai partition ke liye.
Hindu – kyu tumhe Pakistan nahi chahiye kya?
Pakistan – nahi nahi – Pakistan to chahiye. Pakistan to Allah ki meharbani hai.
Hindu – to fir Hindu ne banaya ya Allah ne banaya – kya farak parta hai?
Pakistani – nahi lekin Hinduo be him musalmano ko tor diya teen hisso me
Hindu – to tumhe hindustan ke musalman chahiye – to bula lo unko pakistan
Pakistani – nahi nahi mera matlab tha ke Hindustan ke baki musalmano ko bhi ek aur Pakistan Milna chahiye.
Hindu – hmm – that make sense – so you want more partition.
Pakistani – nahi matlab partition to Hinduo me force kiya tha lekin Pakistan Allah ki den hai aur baki musalmano ko unke haq Milne chahiye.
Hindu – I got it. It’s crystal clear now. Thank you.
Sometimes scholars need to come down to the level of common sense.
Vajra puttar, sorry total nonsense you spoke. JAZIYA WAS ON A VARIABLE SCALE. FOR PEASANTS IT WAS UPTO 25 % of income for ministers it was only 10 %, surprise, surprise. Muslims never paid more than 10 %. Ever.
Use common sense Vajra, when cruel men like Aurangzeb and Sikandar butshikan could barely conceal their muslim nature like ban music, could barely conceal hatred for sikhs like burning our beloved Guru with torture, then why the hell would they tax both quom equally.
The more the families converted to Islam, the happier the muslims. Another 500 years and I would have been Badruddin and you Vajahat khan. Vajra u want links to Jaziya ??
folks, some people think that since everyone has to pay taxes in society, and since muslims and infidels are not equal, so they should be charged with taxes which are different in name. like zakat for pious muslims, jaziya for wretched infidels. novel idea indeed.
and, since infidels are protected in a society of macho believers, so they should be charged more heavily. nothing wrong.
afterall, it has the advantage of some wretched impious pagans seeing the beauty of islam.
but some cynics have pointed out, that after large number of pagans saw the ‘noor’ of ISLAM due to jaziya in a short span, the state treasury reported steep decline in tax-collection. indeed, so large the deficit ran, that some even suggested some recent converts were not pious enough, and so must go back to their previous faith.
and, this is the reason alone, why majority of india remain unislamic even after 1000 year rule. heck, the reasons were all eonomics. and, some people suggest it has something to do with the resistance of coward hindus, and despicable sikhs.
so, before criticizing jaziya, evaluate it. it’s just a different name for different subjects of state.
why this censoring?
Dear Balvinder,
did vajra post anything , at least i did,nt see any post from him. How did you arrive at the conclusion what vajra intended ?
don’t ever read ALI SINA.
HE,if cannot shake your foundation in ISLAM, may force you to think rationally, and their goes all your belief in organised religion, flying out for mars, never to return back.
@NDelhi
The two were different in nature. Zakat was by way of a contribution to the equalization of economic status. It was calculated based on wealth, classified in different ways, and with a base amount excluded. Jizya was an acknowledgement of acceptance of Muslim authority. It brought exemption from military service, and the protection of the state.
Vajra for poor hindu farmer jaziya was 25 %, for poor muslim peasant it was 5% usually. Still trying somehow to equate the two? That is being dishonest VAJRA. PL read my detailed report above
Sirji your reply awaited
Jizya, was most of the time hardly a gold coin. It was such a small sum it was almost negligible. Also when Muslims left a place they gave all the Jizya back.
vajra writes:
“Jizya was an acknowledgement of acceptance of Muslim authority. It brought exemption from military service, and the protection of the state.”
That is how italian mafia also works. If you pay “voluntarily” you will be protected (=your house won’t be burgled or burnt down or your restaurant vandalized etc.).
How come Jinnah said islam taught us democracy and secularism 1300 years ago?
I have to pay as a non-muslim not to serve in a troop of muslim bandits who are out to rob/vandalize non-muslims. What’s this logic?
Miles To Go,
Absolutely spot on !
why has ahem been axed? why this censor-fascism?
@human
Would you not otherwise have the obligation to serve in the national muster?
You are aware, of course, that apart from its reference in the Quran, in terms of implementation, the jizya often took the form of the kharaj, the poll tax imposed by Persians on all their subjects.
The mail at 11:28 is by another false flag, the idiot who writes in from Germany, unaware that his flag of origin gives him away. He has also posted at 11:18, as “human”, and at 7:36 as “hylh”.
Why he fails to get the hint is beyond me.
By paying jizya non_muslims are exempted to go to war!!
By paying Zakat, Ushr and Khairaat no Muslim can refuse to go on war (if the state declares so)
This shows too much leniency by the Muslims towards non-Muslims, what do they want more?? death?
and………..in the going I must clarify the stupid notion held by a poster here who tries to equal Jizya with Bhatta!! Jizya makes the safety and security of the payer incumbent upon the Muslim, who is responsible if any harm is done to him (the payer) This is not so with bhatta….a bhatta khor will not protect you against other transgressors.
I hope some guys here will try to grasp the true meaning and essence of Jizya and stop making loose gestures!
@ human
Comparing Mafia with an Empire is prima facie foolish. Mafia can betray you but the govt edict will not.
/
Even if it be taken for granted that the Muslims didi whatever they wanted yet those who paid jizya were not supposed to join them in their campaigns. They could happily rest at their homes, milk their cows, drink booze and wank. Nothing better than that for a little price while Muslim were out warring to protect them!
On the contrary the Muslims were bound to pay more taxes which the jizya payers didn’t have to.
BTW how much do you have to pay to use public urinals nowadays?? Don’t curse your govt if it charges you 2 anna’s per pee and 4 anna’s per poop!
I don’t recall Jinnah ever having the word ”secular’ used in his writings or speeches. If he was for SECULARISM he must have said so in clear cut and unambiguous way rather than going round in one of his odd speech wherein his words are interpreted as the so called secularism. Will someone here post citation of Jinnah having said that Pakistan will be a SECULAR state????In not, the cry for secularism is misinterpreted by the Mirjai lot ….no Hindu or Christian is so ferociously arguing in favor of secularism as the Mirjai’s are.
Dear All
I am grateful to countless commentators who have provided extremely rich debate in recent days. Vajra, Kaal, Romain, No Communal, Bade Miyan, Chote Miyan, Finglfin, Hayyer, Myth Buster, Heavy Petting, Sandhu sahab, Mishra Sahab, AKB, Rex Minor ( I may disagree with them but they are not trolls), even Rajtoo (after all he has aprespective and is not a troll)..the list goes on and on..( i apologize if I missed any name)
At the same time, trolls like Ahem and MTG are constantly trying to derail the thread by their needless and often irrelevant comments.
I will be removing their comments but if I am not able to all the time, please ignore them.
Regards
Raza
Vajra,
You say”Jizya was an acknowledgement of acceptance of Muslim authority”. In a way you accept the nature of tax and discrimnation.
Differences of taxation demonstrate distinctions in citizenship. As a symbol of subjection, it signifies that the state is not really the common property of all its permanent residents, but only the Muslims. The non-Muslims are conquered outsiders. It demonstrates their inferior condition. It also punishes them for their disbelief in Islam. Islamic law makes it very clear that the Jizyah is punitive in character & it is to levied with humiliation.
I understand you know all the above and i am sure you shall come back with more play of words.Tell me honestly why intellectuals like you are willing to bend over backwards to sugar coat the ills of islam and islamic societies. is their really a cumpulsive reason to do that?
@NDelhi
Your post is puzzling. I stated the facts as they are, as they were. There was no attempt to justify or to denigrate the conditions described. It is a known historical fact that non-Muslim residents of a state under Muslim rule which imposed jizya were not considered citizens but mere residents of that state. That is not a mystery, far less a secret. Why do you keep trying to tease mysteries, conspiracies and plots out of perfectly plain things?
Vajra,
I beg to differ from your facts please Refer to Your post of “September 14, 2012 at 1:15 pm”. As i understood you equated Jizya as just another tax levied at different %age on different communities and came with some percieved benifits . Whereas my facts state that Jizya was more about humiliation and subjugation of conquered non muslims than token %age difference in amount.
Isaw it as conscious attempt on your part to highlight not so relevant part of Jizya and dismiss the more deeper meaning.
The above is my understanding of your posts and if it was not what you meant, please ignore the question it wasn,t for you!!
@NDelhi
Consider it ignored. We are not well acquainted, as otherwise you would have known that diffidence is sadly not one of my few virtues.
Vajra,
If it is a threat than let me tell you i am no saint either!!
i look forward to knowing you better and i have been reading your comments on this forum for many years now and i shall continue to pick holes whereever i can find one and engage you with more questions.
Vajra,
Sorry sirjee could not reply you earlier as I could not visit this website for last two days. This is what AKB wrote in his post.
”
“Jizya is imposed to guarantee full citizen rights to non-Muslims living in a Muslim state.”
I saw similarity in this quote with the goondas and policemen – goondas in uniform – collecting hafta from the businessmen of their
area for running their business smoothly. Sort of a protection money.
rhr is against hindu commentators whom he does not like. What about drona, tajender, akb etc. Why are they not censored? (not that I wish that they should be censored).
I have always written specific to the article and showed the connection to islam’s fascism.
the article is about rhr and ylh discussing Jinnah (the scoundrel) and these fellows are discussing jizya anf vajra’s infinite virtues!!!
If that is not derailment?
But I am accused of derailment by rhr! so judge for yourself if that is fair.