Creation of Pakistan Prophecies on negative results

India

2,117

Brother

#31 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 13:42

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

Quote:

You do understand that quoting someone directly from their book i.e. their own words is different to quoting a book about them.

What is your opinion about someone quotes a person in his book. Are these words unreliable? Like, here shorish kashmiri quotes abul kalam Azad's words in his book named "Abul kalam Azad".
Now, lets move to Question 2

Quote:

Islam is a failure.
Muslims are a failure.

Do you understand the difference between these two statements?

Yes or No?

yes, they are different statements.

Let me quote "Islam alone can't unite", do you understand that this is a third statement. This doesn't claim Islam is a failure.

Just stick to this point and do not change topics.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

Unspecified

2,341

Brother

1,111

#32 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 14:08

Did you use to go by a different username on this site, @akbar703? There used to be many Indian users here who are no longer active, and I was just wondering if you are one of them from the past.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Winner x 1

Rajab

11,869

Brother

334

#33 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 17:07

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

Here you admit that you understand the difference between quoting someone directly from their own words.

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

Here you admit that you understand the difference between criticizing Islam and criticizing Muslims.

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

Here you quote the passage yourself.

Question:

Here is Maulana Azad (RA)'s own book:

dn720001.ca.archive.org/0/items/india-wins-freedom/India%...

Quote:

Mr. Jinnah and his followers did not seem to realize that geography was against them. Muslims in undivided India were distributed in a way which made it impossible to form a separate state in a consolidated area. The Muslim majority areas were on the north-west and the north-east. These two regions have no point of physical contact. People in these two areas arc completely different from one another in every respect, except only in religion. It is one of the greatest frauds on the people to suggest that religious affinity can unite areas which are geographically, economically, linguistically and culturally different. It is true that Islam sought to establish a society which transcends racial, linguistic, economic and political frontiers. History has however proved that after the first few decades, or at most after the first century, Islam was not able to unite all the Muslim countries into one State on the basis of Islam alone.

This was the position in the past and this is the position today.

Please use AI and all other tools at your disposal and take your time in explaining as to how this passage is talking about Muslims and not Islam.

I don't want what is your head, I want to know from Maulana Azad (RA)'s own words that he is talking about Muslims and not Islam.

From Maulana Azad (RA)'s own words, please explain that he is not saying that...after the first century, Islam was not able to unite all the Muslim countries into one State on the basis of Islam alone

Again, not what is in your head but Maulana Azad (RA)'s

Maulana Azad (RA) is using the words religion and Islam
Maulana Azad (RA) is also using the words after the first century
Maulana Azad (RA) is also using the words This was the position in the past and this is the position today. meaning that from first century on wards, Islam has been failing...
If you do not understand or have command of English language
If you do not have knowledge of Qur'aan and Sunnah
If you did not understand what you were posting
If you did not read this properly...

Back out and say that I was merely posting a prediction about Pakistan and didn't realize that this says...after the first century, Islam was not able to unite all the Muslim countries into one State on the basis of Islam alone

OR even say that he could have written it more clearly that it is not Islam but Muslims who failed to follow Islam could not overcome establish a society which transcends racial, linguistic, economic and political frontiers.

I am giving you every excuse under the sun to save yourself.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

India

2,117

Brother

#34 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 17:23

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

1. What is wrong in this statement:

History say; Islam was not able to unite all the Muslim countries into one State on the basis of Islam alone.

2. Today, the territory that was once under the rule of Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz (RA) has been divided among several countries.

Did muslims after first century stopped practicing Islam?

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

11,869

Brother

334

#35 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 17:49

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

Forget Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz (RA) and even Ottomans until 1924! Let me take you in the middle of Islamic history

Salahuddin (RA):

Nuruddin Zangi (RA): Turkoman Muslim who followed the Hanafi Madhab and Maturidi Aqeedah
Salahuddin Ayyubi (RA): Kuridsh Muslim who followed the Shaf'ae Madhab and Ashari Aqeedah
Qadi al-Fadil (RA): Arab Egyptian Muslim who either leaves Shiasm or was a Sunni but leaves the Fatimid regime
Baha' ad-Din ibn Shaddad: Arab-Iraqi Scholar, followed Shaf'ae Madhab and Ashari Aqeedah
Ibn Qudamah (RA): Arab Palestinian Scholars who followed the Hanbali Madhab and Athari Aqeedah

If you have doubts about my quotes, ask me for evidence and I will also ask you for your evidence for your quotes.

Please explain what made all these people join up to defend Al-Aqsa and fight against Crusaders when they came from dustant lands, ethnicity, languages, color, etc?

Take your time, use every tool at your disposal including AI and then explain this as it seems to be completely against

Quote:

Clearly Islam was not failing to unite in 1187!

Thanks

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

India

2,117

Brother

#36 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 17:54

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

I am not good in history. When did single islamic khilafath fell apart into small countries. Iran, Iraq, bahrain, syria, etc.

Quote:

Please explain what made all these people join up to defend Al-Aqsa and fight against Crusaders when they came from dustant lands, ethnicity, languages, color, etc?

What is the meaning of the words "join up to defend". Does that mean there was no single khilafath.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

India

2,117

Brother

#37 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 18:17

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

I am compelled to write this with tremors in my fingers.
kindly explain the following:

We are not supposed to discuss this. But nothing wrong in taking lessons from history, without targeting both the opponents.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

11,869

Brother

334

#38 [Permalink] Posted on 4th August 2026 19:04

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

You haven't answered the question!

If you don't understand, say that you don't understand the question.

Don't change the topic.

What made all these people join together for a common cause in 1187?

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

Forget Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz (RA) and even Ottomans until 1924! Let me take you in the middle of Islamic history

Salahuddin (RA):

Nuruddin Zangi (RA): Turkoman Muslim who followed the Hanafi Madhab and Maturidi Aqeedah
Salahuddin Ayyubi (RA): Kuridsh Muslim who followed the Shaf'ae Madhab and Ashari Aqeedah
Qadi al-Fadil (RA): Arab Egyptian Muslim who either leaves Shiasm or was a Sunni but leaves the Fatimid regime
Baha' ad-Din ibn Shaddad: Arab-Iraqi Scholar, followed Shaf'ae Madhab and Ashari Aqeedah
Ibn Qudamah (RA): Arab Palestinian Scholars who followed the Hanbali Madhab and Athari Aqeedah

Quote:

Clearly Islam was not failing to unite in 1187!

Thanks

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

India

2,117

Brother

#39 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 08:27

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

I Read from a book "khutbat e azaad"

A lecture on Islam demands unity of its followers, pan islam.

However, the followers of Islam are divided among themselves. When someone points this out by saying, "The Islam within you has not united you; therefore, you are not adhering to pure Islam," they become extremely furious.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

Unspecified

1,172

Brother

1,175

#40 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 09:56

Quote:

The disintegration of Pakistan—based on factors such as ethnicity, region, and language—has proven Azad right.

Proven Azad right about what? That Allah was na'auzbillah unable to foresee the problems of different cultures when creating Islam and hence Islam cannot unite people of such differences?

Or was he right in recognizing that the Muslims' practice of Islam is so flawed in the modern times that their belief that Islam will unite them is erroneous? If this was what he meant, then his suggestions to the Muslims of the subcontinent should have been to become proper Muslims first, whether partitioned or not partitioned. There was no need to suggest that Islam cannot handle such differences.

Also, if the latter was what he meant, it's no feat of hikmat that he recognized the failing of Muslims. Even a five-year old could have told anyone that the Muslims are not practicing their deen.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Winner x 1

fod1083

India

2,117

Brother

#41 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 10:41

fod1083 wrote:

View original post

What was the common element between East and West Pakistan? Islam—specifically, the interpretation of Islam to which they adhered.
They believed that the particular interpretation of Islam they followed would keep them united.
Azad could not make them understand this point, he stated simply that "Islam would not keep them united ."
Had he said that "your interpretation of Islam" would not unite them, Muslims would have immediately retorted by telling him not to question their interpretation of Islam.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

Unspecified

630

Brother

139

#42 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 13:23

Loading Qur'aan Verse

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Winner x 1

mSiddiqui

India

2,117

Brother

#43 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 14:04

fod1083 wrote:

View original post

It dents our Aqeedah when we discuss:

Shahadath of Hazrath Usman RA
Battle of Siffin
Battle of Jamal
Battle of karbala
Hajjaj bin yusuf's attack on Makkah etc.

Without citing them Azad cannot be defended.

We give priority to safeguard our Aqeedah over defending Azad.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

India

2,117

Brother

#44 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 14:08

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

Quote:

Let me speak to you like a 5 year old child.

Islam alone cannot unite.
Islam disunites.

Are the above 2 statements offer different messages?

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

....

11,869

Brother

334

#45 [Permalink] Posted on 5th August 2026 14:12

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

I realize that you are not very smart and you are also not able to process multiple concepts. None of us are discussing these topics at all!

I am a Muslim and to the best of my ability, I have never broken my word. It is my promise to you that we will have this conversation.

For now, I want you to discuss what is being asked and don't bring XYZ into the conversation when not being discussed. This is the 3rd time I am asking you to read and respond to this.

Read and tell me your analysis.

Forget Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz (RA) and even Ottomans until 1924! Let me take you in the middle of Islamic history

Salahuddin (RA):

Nuruddin Zangi (RA): Turkoman Muslim who followed the Hanafi Madhab and Maturidi Aqeedah
Salahuddin Ayyubi (RA): Kuridsh Muslim who followed the Shaf'ae Madhab and Ashari Aqeedah
Qadi al-Fadil (RA): Arab Egyptian Muslim who either leaves Shiasm or was a Sunni but leaves the Fatimid regime
Baha' ad-Din ibn Shaddad: Arab-Iraqi Scholar, followed Shaf'ae Madhab and Ashari Aqeedah
Ibn Qudamah (RA): Arab Palestinian Scholars who followed the Hanbali Madhab and Athari Aqeedah

Quote:

Clearly Islam was not failing to unite in 1187!

Thanks

akbar703 wrote:

View original post

ISLAM CAN UNITED. ISLAM CAME TO UNITE. ISLAM HAS UNITED, CAN UNITED AND WILL UNITE

This is the belief from Qur'aan and Sunnah, if you think opposite what is your evidence?

The reason of incidents which you are quoting is because they went away from Islam and not because of Islam.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

Creation of Pakistan Prophecies on negative results

Font Size

Font Weight