Sorry NadiaH, I was being sarcastic, reffering to how white ppl said everyone is free in this country, and when it came to slavery, they just pushed it aside.
NYAhmedi,
Ahmedis would not be considered Kaffir by the Muslim world, if they were in control of a powerful country like the Wahabis of those slave states in the middle east. All you guys need to do is get some American money, take over some country, and be slaves of America and the Muslim world will welcome you with open arms.
I see, so this is the reason Shias are not considered kafir by virtue of being in control of Iran, just like Wahabies ruling over Saudi Arabia.
Otherwise both these groups would been long time kafir.
[This message has been edited by analyze it (edited September 09, 2001).]
you , do you see the Iranians today prostrating to the United States like your beloved Wahabis do? Even in the time of the Shah, millions of Iranians died because of their hate for the USA.
Note from Admin: Please mind your language. Abusive personal attacks are not permitted here.
[This message has been edited by Admin (edited September 10, 2001).]
Mr Akif
Your definition of Islam is totally wrong and absurd.Are you trying to say that anyone who Believes in the oneness of Allah Almighty may then go and do whatever he pleases with the religion?And distort it,and still hope that it's alright as long as I believe in the oneness of Allah Almighty?You always try to be evasive,and are bent upon proving that sunnis,shias and wahabis etc are wrong, they too have not the right to be called muslims.What if they are wrong?Let us suppose for a moment that none of them is right.Will that render Qadianism right and acceptable?
Islam kay kuch buniyadi aqaaid hain.Amongst them is to believe in the oness of Allah Almighty, to believe in the prophethood of Muhammad(p.b.u.h), to believe in the books revealed by Allah, to believe in the day of judgement and to believe that the good and bad fate is from Allah.This is the true criteria of Islam.And, it was not set up by any sunni or shia or wahabi,it was set up by Allah Almighty himself.Anyone who denies one of these thing cannot be considered a muslim.This decree was not issued by me or any wahabi state,but,it is the decree of Allah Almighty himself.
In the holy Quran Allah Almighty has repeatedly said"Agar tum momin ho to Allah aur uskay Rasul(p.b.u.h)ki attat karo".(Al-Anfaal:1)
So,a true muslim should always obey Allah and his prophet(p.b.u.h).
You argued that if a person does not believe in a single ayah of Quran,does he become non-muslim.What I would like to know is,What in the name of the heaven prevents him from believing certain Ayahs of Quran?I think you should go and read Quran carefully,then you will know what is the judgement of Allah for those who believe in some parts of the book(Quran)and refuse to believe in some of it.
Respecting others religious belief is a commendable thing and is highly recommended in Islam."Deen main koi jabar nahi". But,that does not mean that you cannot gently preach to them what is right.Nor does it say that if somebody passes something else as Islam,we should not protest against it.
Guzar Ja Aaqal Say aagay Ke Yeh Nur
Chiragh-e-Rah Hai Manzil Nahi Hai
[quote]
Originally posted by Akif:
**
And regarding the verse in the Quran, in Surah Ahzaab, it says, Muhammad SAW is the seal of Prophets. true. But the Holy Quran contains 114 Suras, that are filled with orders, commandments, and statements from Allah SWT. If we are to pick the above ayat from Surah Ahzab, and say that whoever denies this ayat is a non-muslim, then shouldnt we say the same for deniers of any other ayat as well?
**
[/quote]
Exactly! thats what I am saying, being a muslim you cant deny the surahs and ayats of Quran, can you? how can you deny the statements of your own Holy Book? whoever denies any of the Quranic verse is not a muslim as well, for sure! though its not a definiton of Islam but thats the another fact which you cant refuse to believe. I hope you know the five pillars of Islam in which one is the "One ness of Allah and finality of Prophethood" infact its the very first pillar of Islam!
That’s right. Muslims donot have the option of picking and choosing from the teachings of Islam or from Ayats of Quran.
Not acting upon something is a sign of weakness and is a completelty different thing from not believing in the same thing!!
Weakness of Iman is not the same thing as absence of Iman.
You cannot pick and choose what to believe in and what not to…
It will be pertinent here to remember that No one understood the definition of Islam better than the first Khalifa of the Prophet(pbuh) Hazrat Abu bakar (R.A.) and what did he do when a group following a false leader decided that they weren’t going to pay zakat?
He did jehad against them. Yes, he entered into battle with them. That should be an eye-opener.
No one could know what a muslim is more tan the Sahabas, and when a nmumber of false prophets emerged after the Prophet(pbuh) left this world, they were called Murtadeen i.e. those who have relinquished Islam and are no longer muslims.
They were all people who never said they don’t believe in one God. But the Sahabas killed them.
I remember Akif resenting earlier that the people and scholars of today’s age seem to think they have more knowledge than the prophet(pbuh) and the people around him.
I wonder who that applies to now?
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/hoonh.gif
If someone doesn’t pray he is a sinner. But what if someone said hey Prayers are not part of Islam. That would be brilliant , wouldn’t it? People can even say that prayers are not part of Islam, one of the most important signs of Islam by which Islam is characterized and recognizrd, but by the definitions given here that’s all changeable! because we would still be muslims!
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/hoonh.gif
Those who keep telling us to remember the warning the Prophet(pbuh) gave about sects, and about clling people kaffirs etc, somehow forget that we also need to remember the warning that the Prophet(pbuh) gave us about the false prophets(claimants) that were to come after him. How about remembering that?
Last but not least, let me repeat for the umpteenth time that Allah in his mercy, can forgive non-muslims and award them paradise.
That Allah can forgive them does not mean they are muslims, that is just a RIGHT that Allah has that he can forgive anyone. The only sin HE won't forgive is shirk.
Allah's right to forgive a non-muslim and read my lips i said non-muslim does not and can not define Islam.
But as I keep saying this is a luxury that Allah will provide to select beings. Don't pretend to know how many but just to give some idea 1 out of a million maybe?
A luxury is something very very very few people will get to have. And that will be based on thier deeds.
This obviously applies only to a particular individual and not to set of beliefs or a faith.
An athiest and a Mushrik are both non-muslims , are they not? Yes they are both by Akif's definition and by mine.
But can Allah forgive the athiest? Yes
Will he? who knows
But can Allah forgive the Mushrik, No because Allah said he won't.
So both are non-muslims but Allah can choose to forgive one. But as already said they are both non-muslims. But then we know as a rule athiests end up in hell. So if a particular, 1 out of thousands/millions could(emphasis on could, not necessarily will) go to heaven doesn't mean that the qadiani faith is part of islam.
Because of that Right of Allah, we do not point to an individual and say thet he/she is going to hell. This is for an individual not a faith or a set of beliefs.
So in conclusion, what effect does this Right of Allah (ie to forgive non muslims who didn't do shirk) have?
The answer is that it has the effect of us not being able to pin point an individual and say he/she is going to hell.
It has no bearing on who is a muslim.
It has no bearing on who is a non-muslim.
It is ir-relevant to this diescussion.
Actually , in my earlier posts I have already said this at different times but I just repeated it one last time.
[This message has been edited by Ahmed (edited September 09, 2001).]
[quote]
Originally posted by Salman:
you idiot, do you see the Iranians today prostrating to the United States like your beloved Wahabis do? Even in the time of the Shah, millions of Iranians died because of their hate for the USA.
[/quote]
===========================================
You to comprehend that prostrating to USA is not the point. Point is only the control of a country which theses fanatic shias have done and they are considered kafir by many hardliner muslim scholars regrdless of their rule over Iran. And by the same token why Agakhani shia, Bohri shia and Nussairy shia not considered kafir? This kafir kafir discussion is totally ludicrous.
Ahmadies are no less muslim than an other group. No one has a right to call them kafir. Calling Kafir itself does not mean anything. Main thing is to hurt someones feeling about his religion in order to ridicule him by calling him kafir.
Note from Admin: An attack from another member does not give you license to launch your own attack. Mind your language.
[This message has been edited by Admin (edited September 10, 2001).]
Can you tell me what these fanatic shias have done other than aid the Palestinian cause(Palestinians are sunnis by the way) and what the Saudis have done for the Palestinians. Of course you can't because you are an imbecile whose brain serves no other purpose other than keeping his head from caving in.
Can you also explain why the Saudi Wahabi diaspora does not protest against their own nation like the Iranian Shia diaspora did under the Shah rule. (In case your little brain doesn't know, diaspora are the country's citizens living in another country. For example I am Pakistan's diaspora living in America. Comprende?)
One plain simple reason. The Saudi Wahabis whole-heartedly support their hateful country. It is in their ideology to hate others who are not them. Ahmedis, Shias, and most Sunnis don't believe that. They are the ones that should be labelled a rascist state with Israel.
Ahmed
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/ok.gif
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/ok.gif
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/ok.gif
but whats the point mate? Its you vs the mods buddy
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/tongue.gif
We are the Taleban-Resistance is Futile
Sin: Osama Bin Junior
Oh please…get serious. Keep the discussion to what it is and don’t try to create animosity where it isn’t.
[quote]
Originally posted by Muzna:
** Oh please.....get serious. Keep the discussion to what it is and don't try to create animosity where it isn't.
**
[/quote]
Day by day, I am lead to believe that this forum is all about the above notion! That is ... 'animosity where it isn't'
What will it take to make the change?
can all of us who wants definition of "Muslim" refer to al-Baqara:285 ? I think it'll be helpful.
for those who pick meanings of ayats differently, shall be judged by Allah SWT.
We oughta be Changez like, don't we?
hi broz,
do u know that the GOVERMENT OF PAKISTAN have declared the ahmadis NON-MUSLIM in the case which where held in 1971.
so why r u waisting ur precious time.
the are kafir and mirza was ma.....
Besides respecting other people's belief (which is what this thread was about). Everyone seems to talk about judging others, the first that is needeed is clarification on what makes someone muslim or not muslim.
This is clearly taken from the text quran and hadith. Which states that someone is a muslim if they believe in the aqeeda (belief)
which includes things that are definite such as the quran, the angels, muhammad (saw) is the last prophet, heaven, hell and so on... as well as tawheed (the oness of Allah).
Not only does shirk make someone kafir, but so does denying or rejecting any definitive judgement such as saying salaat(namaz) does not have to be prayed, (not i don't want to pray - that would just be sinful).
since muhammad(saw) is the last prophet is definite in meaning and is also from definite text (with no other possibilities that can be taken from this) than anyone who denies this is kafir. you do not have to look to someones heart and hence their intentions, because only Allah (swt) can do that, you can see from someones actions.
(if anyone wants to know more about this i can give you the info for this).
other points- also anything that is kuffar will lead to shirk.
so if shirk is unforgiveable what about athiests and mushriks or any other non muslim who reverts back to islam?
they will be forgiven.
also most people are confusing sects and groups such as wahabbis, hanafis, sunnis and so on...
a sect is people who differ on the aqeeda but believe in Allah (swt), where as the groups do not differ on aqeeda but on the method to accomplish something.
[quote]
Originally posted by paranoid:
*hi broz,
do u know that the GOVERMENT OF PAKISTAN have declared the ahmadis NON-MUSLIM in the case which where held in 1971.
*
[/quote]
which government? And if jamaat-e-islami were to come into power today, how would you like it if they declared the shias as kafirs as well? Would that go in line with the Ahmedis being kafir too? Or how about the Taliban taking over, and declaring shias as kafirs?
Running around in circles is whats going on in this thread. Noone seems to directly touch the issue. Either folks are more interested in a mod-member matchup, or are just interested in missing the point of this thread altogether.
A muslim is one who believes in the kalima...the popular opinion. Now if you ask 'muslims' about the kalima point blank, they immediately respond
"La ilaha ill Allah, Muhammad ar Rasool Allah"
There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is His Rasool.
Fair enough. Now where you folks have heard the notion that Ahmedies dont believe in the above is beyond me. Yes, they believe that there is another prophet after Prophet Muhammad SAW. Now that doesnt match with my belief, but then again, that is not mentioned in the kalima cited above either.
When you mention that, folks come out with ayats from the Quran where it says Prophet SAW is the last messenger. Fine..its mentioned in the Quran, but is it mentioned in the kalima cited above? Or is there another version to the kalima that I havent heard?
And though everyone agrees that apart from the finality of Prophethood, there are so many other orders in the Quran that are equally stressed in the Quran, noone is willing to give those orders the time of day. Everyone wants to latch on to this one belief, and base an entire faith on it. pettiness at its worst.
Fact is, even your faith in the oneness of Allah SWT is useless you follow his commandments. Fact is, our priorities are so messed up, we are more interested in calculating other peoples faith than our own. Fact is, we are so petty, that we gain victory by proving others as non-muslims, as if somehow someone elses 'kufr' automatically equals jannat for ourselves.
We need to leave the classifications to Allah SWT. We need to mind our own faith. Our faith does not grow at the expense of someone elses faith. It grows by our own actions.
[quote]
Originally posted by -asim-:
**......
This is clearly taken from the text quran and hadith. Which states that someone is a muslim if they believe in the aqeeda (belief)
which includes things that are definite such as the quran, the angels, muhammad (saw) is the last prophet, heaven, hell and so on... as well as tawheed (the oness of Allah).
Not only does shirk make someone kafir, but so does denying or rejecting any definitive judgement such as saying salaat(namaz) does not have to be prayed, (not i don't want to pray - that would just be sinful).
..........**
[/quote]
bro Asim, if you go and read sura Baqara, ayat 285, Allah SWT gives us definition of what a 'momin' beleives in, that does not talk about "last prophet".
people have different meanings for 'khatam-un-nabi', let Allah SWT be the judge.
for 'shirk', it may be shirk in your opinion, but they might be 'extrapolating' some hadith/sunna... bottomline is that in Quran, Allah SWT says that when you have argument over something let Allah be the judge. so lets wait, and not label anyone who says "la ilaha il-Allah Muhammadur rasool ul-Allah" as kafir/mushrik.
We oughta be Changez like, don't we?
New Qadiani Kalima:
“As the result of the advent of the Promised Messiah (Mirza Ghulam Qadiani), a difference has cropped up (in the meaning of Kalima). Before the appearance of the mission of the Promised Messiah, the words “Muhammad Rasurrollah” (Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah) included in their meaning only such messengers as had preceded him. But, after the mission of the Promised Messiah, one more messenger has entered into the meaning of “Muhammad Rasurrollah” (Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah).
Therefore, on account of the incarnation of the Promised Messiah, the Kalimah “La Ilaha Ellallah, Muhammad Rasurrollah” does not become abolished; it rather shines more brightly. In short, the same Kalimah is effective even now for embracing Islam, with the only difference that the incarnation of the Promised Messiah (Mirza Qadiani) has added one more Messenger to the meaning of “Muhammad Rasurrollah” (Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah).”
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, P. 158, by Mirza Basheer Ahmad Qadiani)
Scanned Image of above: http://www.irshad.org/idara/images/qdbooks/klfsl158.gif
“Moreover, even if we accept by supposing the impossible that the sacred name of the merciful Prophet has been included in the Kalimah because he is the last of the prophets, even then no difficulty arises and we do not need a new Kalimah because the Promised Messiah is not a separate entity from the Merciful Prophet as he (Mirza Ghulam) himself has said:’
My Entity has become his entity
He who makes a distinction between me and Mustafa has not recognized me nor has seen me.’
And the reason for this is that Allah Almighty has promised that He would reincarnate the last of the Prophets (Khatam-un-Nabieen) to this world once more as it is evident from the verse “Akhareen Menhom” (… others of them). Thus, the Promised Messiah (Mirza Ghulam) is himself Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah, who had come to the world again to spread Islam. We do not, therefore, need any new Kalimah. A new Kalimah would have been necessary, if some other person had been reincarnated instead of Muhammad, the Messenger (Rasul) of Allah. So contemplate!”
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, P. 158; Review of Religions, March-April, 1915)
Ponder on this verse:
…If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.
(The Holy Quran, Al-Maeda, 5:44)
“I am not playing with a full deck!”
That’s very interesting Basit, now when you say Kalima, “Mohammad ar-Rasoolallah” it probably means “Chicken has lips”, or .
Please note that I personally have nothing against Chickens or you.
Note from Admin: There is no need to attach someone personally to get your message across. One example served the purpose well. There was no need for the second one.
[This message has been edited by Admin (edited September 10, 2001).]
NyQadiani,
Read the my post again, its written in your unholy books, written by no one else but your British step child, Mirza Qaddiani.
The guy wrote what he meant and what he was hired to promote. Deal with the facts like a man, not like a B*****-then again you are one.
You whine and prattle about your rights and people calling you kafir, but you your self have no knowledge of your own beliefs, your own creed, your own Qadiani dogma and you cry like a girl when someone posts something from your own books-of which you have no knowledge of. Stop defending your useless, illogical, stupid belief in that British Prophet and watch-dog(not to mention stooge) and study your religion and if you have any sense of reason you will come up with a decision that Mirza Qadiani was a liar and a british ass kisser-and that is the truth-denying it doesn’t help invalidate the truth or the argument!
You can bark now…again.
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
“I am not playing with a full deck!”