Our Beacon Forum Index Back to Homepage
Our Beacon
Salamun alaikum!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Jinnah and the Islamic State

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Our Beacon Forum Index -> Q&A
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dr. Shabbir
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 1328
Location: Florida, USA

PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:41 am    Post subject: Jinnah and the Islamic State Reply with quote

M.A. Jinnah, Founding Father of Pakistan, said:

"In Islam, the ultimate obedience belongs to God alone. The only way to follow His Guidance is the Holy Qur'an. Islam does not preach obedience to a king, parliament, person or any institution. The Islamic government means Rule of the Qur'an. And how can you establish Rule of the Qur'an without an independent state? In this state, legislation will take place in the boundaries drawn by the Qur'an."

Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Daily Inqalaab, Lahore 8th Feb. 1942. (Husn-e-Kirdaar ka Naqsh-e-Tabinda by Allama G.A. Pervaiz)
_________________
Wassalam,
SA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dr. Shabbir
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 1328
Location: Florida, USA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:53 am    Post subject: Ilam Din, Iqbal, Jinnah Reply with quote

Was Iqbal a supporter of killing blasphemers?

http://pakteahouse.net/2010/11/30/view-the-ilam-din-fiasco-and-lies-about-jinnah/

The relevant case — in which Jinnah appeared — cited as Ilam Din vs. Emperor AIR 1930 Lahore 157 — makes interesting reading. It was a division bench judgment with Justice Broadway and Justice Johnstone presiding. Jinnah’s contention was that the evidence produced before the trial court was insufficient and the prosecution story was dubious. To quote the judgment, “He urged that Kidar Nath was not a reliable witness because (1) he was an employee of the deceased and, therefore, interested. (2) He had not stated in the First Information Report (a) that Bhagat Ram (the other witness) was with him, and (b) that the appellant had stated that he had avenged the Prophet. As to Bhagat Ram it was contended he, as an employee, was interested, and as to the rest that there were variations in some of the details.”

http://pakteahouse.net/2010/11/30/view-the-ilam-din-fiasco-and-lies-about-jinnah/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Our Beacon Forum Index -> Q&A All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group