Critique of Free Will in Western Liberal Democracy

[Maiwand]

You fail to use Islamic sources to back any of your points up.

And western democracy is actually quite practiced *in the west.* (As a friend of mine once said, the west isn't so west when it's in the east! I agree with this. When the west is in the east, it forgets about its ideals of humanism and liberty for all, but in the west, it fights to keep these same ideals -- and quite successfully almost all of the time.)

However, I must remind you that this Ummah you speak of is very unrealistic. You want the entire Muslim world to unite, but you don't seem to realize that Pashtuns ARE Muslims - first unite them. Take it one step at a time, bro, will you? Uniting Pashtuns will mean uniting Muslims.

Then, you also don't seem to have a plan for how to achieve universal unity of all Muslims. I doubt anyone will disagree with you that unity is the most important thing for the survival of humanity, including Muslims. We can't be guaranteed a safe future if we keep killing each other -- but you know what the problem is, wrorai? This:

We can't agree on what defines a Muslim! We think all Muslims who disagree with us are heretics. Why should anyone agree with this? Why should someone who doesn't know how to judge properly be even ALLLOWED to speak of an "Islamic state"? Why should the rest of the world listen to her/him?

So, yeah, as long as we keep this low a mentality, we'll never be united.

It's not very difficult to define a muslim. A muslim is someone who has submitted himself to the Almighty Allah (swt). That means that you have to believe in the Quran and the sahih hadiths. It's that simple. And if there are people who call themselves muslim. but don't believe in the Quran or the hadith, they are only making fun of themselves. Because as a muslim we believe the Quran is the word of God. So when we Pashtuns and muslims agree on that, then we are a achieving unity.

[Roshina]

It's not very difficult to define a muslim. A muslim is someone who has submitted himself to the Almighty Allah (swt). That means that you have to believe in the Quran and the sahih hadiths. It's that simple. And if there are people who call themselves muslim. but don't believe in the Quran or the hadith, they are only making fun of themselves. Because as a muslim we believe the Quran is the word of God. So when we Pashtuns and muslims agree on that, then we are a achieving unity.

You see, Maiwand wrora, whenever you say "this means," it means you're *interpreting* something. So, ALLLLLLLLL Muslims certainly agree that being a Muslim means the person is submitting to the will of God. The disagreement becomes apparent when discourses on the "will of God" are held, kana. To most Muslims, Islam = Quran + hadith, but not to all. To you, it's simple, but not to all Muslims is it this simple. And what does it mean to beleive or not to believe in something (e.g., the Quran and/or hadiths)? To you, it might mean accept all of them without question; to others, it might mean accept some of them but critically only--that's to say, be careful about what you accept just like that.

You say that once we agree on this, we achieve unity. I agree that when there are agreements, there is more unity ... BUT... is that all there is to unity? Or is unity more than that? And do you believe that we can be united with people, particularly Muslims, who don't believe our way or with whom we don't agree on everything? I think the problem is that we havne't yet learned how to tolerate Muslims with different views than our own, and we're fooled into believing that the only way to achieve unity is to have 100% the same beliefs, accept 100% the same interpretation of the Quran/hadiths, and accept/follow 100% the same scholars/leaders. THIS, I totally disagree with. We don't have to be the same to be united.

And I also think that unity goes far beyond just having the same beliefs. We need to show that we're united as well, and one way is by appreciating and respecting and tolerating each other in spite our differences, be they languages, cultures, interpretations of Islam, dressing style, religious/non-religious attitude, and so on.

Last I checked somewhere, we have no right to decide who's Muslim and who's not; if someone says he's Muslim, then we must treat him as such. We also can't decide who's a "true" Muslim and who's not, because just as you and I can label someone as a "fake" Muslim, someone else can label us fake as well -- and just as you and I might not care who labels us what, especially when their opinion doens't matter to us, OUR opinion might not matter to those we label either.

Get what I mean?

[Maiwand]

You see, Maiwand wrora, whenever you say "this means," it means you're *interpreting* something. So, ALLLLLLLLL Muslims certainly agree that being a Muslim means the person is submitting to the will of God. The disagreement becomes apparent when discourses on the "will of God" are held, kana. To most Muslims, Islam = Quran + hadith, but not to all. To you, it's simple, but not to all Muslims is it this simple. And what does it mean to beleive or not to believe in something (e.g., the Quran and/or hadiths)? To you, it might mean accept all of them without question; to others, it might mean accept some of them but critically only--that's to say, be careful about what you accept just like that.

You say that once we agree on this, we achieve unity. I agree that when there are agreements, there is more unity ... BUT... is that all there is to unity? Or is unity more than that? And do you believe that we can be united with people, particularly Muslims, who don't believe our way or with whom we don't agree on everything? I think the problem is that we havne't yet learned how to tolerate Muslims with different views than our own, and we're fooled into believing that the only way to achieve unity is to have 100% the same beliefs, accept 100% the same interpretation of the Quran/hadiths, and accept/follow 100% the same scholars/leaders. THIS, I totally disagree with. We don't have to be the same to be united.

And I also think that unity goes far beyond just having the same beliefs. We need to show that we're united as well, and one way is by appreciating and respecting and tolerating each other in spite our differences, be they languages, cultures, interpretations of Islam, dressing style, religious/non-religious attitude, and so on.

Last I checked somewhere, we have no right to decide who's Muslim and who's not; if someone says he's Muslim, then we must treat him as such. We also can't decide who's a "true" Muslim and who's not, because just as you and I can label someone as a "fake" Muslim, someone else can label us fake as well -- and just as you and I might not care who labels us what, especially when their opinion doens't matter to us, OUR opinion might not matter to those we label either.

Get what I mean?

Unity in diversity is oke with me. As long that they believe in the fundamentals of the religion. But besides that, you don't have to be a muslim to be allowed entry in the Islamic state or reside in it. There will be freedom of speech, freedom of thought and freedom of religion. As God says in the Quran: There is no compulsion in religion. But in the Islamic state we are going to rule with the Shairah, that means Quran, Sunnah and consensus of the scholars, so it's oke to have different interpretations of secondary issues, but the muslims should agree on the fundamentals of the religon.