Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
sherafghan, there are neumorous fatwa-e-takfeer aganist sunis from shias and from shias from sunnis. If all you need is a fatwa, to discriminate, persecute and kill others, there will be very little left of the ummah.
In response to your website of irshad dor org, here are a couple for you to go through:
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
I have refferred to that site and have read the lies and false propaganda set forth by them, they simply use quotes out of the context, and desire themselves not to be guided, as wll as dissuade and misguide others from finding the trruth.
Again I lay the challenge of the Holy Quran itself in Ch 69.
Also here are a few Ahadith which are relevent and whose authenticity is accepted worldwide.
1. “There is no Mahdi except Isa (as)” the Arabic transliteration is: “Lal mahdiyyu illa ‘isaab na maryama” This is from the authentic source of Ibn Majah, and Bab Shiddatuz Zaman. Both of whose authenticity and validity have been universally accepted by Islamic scholars and divines.
*2. “It is possible that he who lives among you might meet Jesus the son of Mary (as) WHO IS THE IMAM MAHDI and a just judge. He will break the cross and kill the swine. *The Arabic transliteration is: ‘…isabna maryama imaaman mahdiyya wa hakaman etc…” Again this Authentic Ahadeeth is recorded in the book Musnad Ahmad page 156/2. Every scholarly Muslim knows that Musnad is a Sahih Book, meaning one of the most authentic books of Hadith. **
*Hadith recorded in Sahih Bukhari: Hadhrat Abu Huraira (rah) himself reports that the Holy Prophet (saw) said: “ how will it fare with you when the son of Mary (as) descends among you? Who is he? Indeed he is none other than your own Imam, your Mentor, who will be born among you as a Muslim.” The Arabic transliteration is; …izaa nazalabnu maryami feekum wa Imamukum min kum.” This is recorded in the most authentic hadeeth book i.e. Bukhari under the chapter Kitabul Anbiya and is the Hadeeth no. 3449. *
There is a Hadith in Sahih Bukhari, the most authentic book of Ahadeeth in the world, which relates the Miraj of the Prophet (saw) and his description of the TWO Messiahs! *The first he mentions as medium height, REDDISH COMPLEXION, CURLY HAIR and a broad chest, but in the same book, in fact the very next hadeeth, he describes the physical looks of a different Messiah, and says that he is the second Messiah and says about him that he is of LIGHT COMPLEXION THE COLOR OF WHEAT (BROWN), and having, NOT CURLY, but STRAIGHT BLACK HAIR reaching down to his ears. It is recorded in Bukhari under the chapter of Kitabul Anbiya, Hadith No. 3437, 3438, and 3440. *
While I was asleep, I saw myself (in a dream) making tawaf (circling) around the Ka`bah. I saw a brown-skinned man with straight hair being supported by two men, and with water dripping from his head. I asked: "Who is this?" They said: "The son of Mary." (Sahih Bukhari).
Your inability to raise to the challenge of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's success, long life, increasing jamaat worldwide, the fact that we are the only Jamaat, not sect, with a Divinely appointed Khalifah, and these numerous Quranic references and Ahadith show that you are avoiding them outrightly and unjustly. Please consider them.
Also your objection to the translation of one verse in Surah Al-Baqarah, does not nullify the several other Quranic verses that I had quoted. Also if you are attempting to support the persecution of Ahmadi's then you have yourself seperated yourself from the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (saw) as well as the teachings ofthe Quran, please re-read CAREFULLY the verses that I presented here and before, jazakAllah, may Allah cool your anger and hatred against a peace-loving Jamaat whose humanitarian works have saved lives as well as afford shelter to those in need. For my other brothers and sisters out there, know this that however sherafghan wants to translate that specific verse, persecution is seen as an abomination in the sight of Allah, and that supporting it would lead to deviation from Allah's path, Who sees and knows all that you do. Those who have even an iota of fear of Allah know that persecution is a means of creating disorder in the earth, yet those who say they are Muslims support and even dish out all sorts of crimes against Ahmadi's whose only crime is attesting faith in the descent of the Promised Messiah.
Woe, on that Day unto those who reject the Truth! Surah Al Mursalaat Ch. 77
**
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Okay, NuzululMasih I'll admit I wasn't serious before. But now I have taken the time to go through the above posts in more detail.
First, your Ayaat about persecution, you translated Fitnah as persecution in all of those Ayaat except for [6:34] and I can't figure what word in that Ayaah was translated as persecution. So you have been twisting the words in the Quran to suit your own purpose.
By the way, what do you say about Huroob ar Ridda? Was Abu Bakr radiAllahuanhu also persecuting "muslims"? Actually everyone opposed Abu Bakr in that, even Umar radiAllahuanhu. Umar said to Abu Bakr, that you are declaring war on those who say the shahadah, and later Umar admitted that Abu Bakr was correct.
And the Ayaat, you have used to justify the prophethood of mirza ghulam, I've read them before and again you are twisting the meanings to suit your own purpose. I suggest you go read a book of Tafsir and see what the early mufasireen had to say about those Ayaat, instead making your own interpretations.
With regards to Ahadeeth of the 30 false prophets. Those ahadeeth refer to false prophets that actually have a following. I am pretty sure that I can find 100s of insane people claiming to be prophets, the hadith does not refer to just anyone claiming to be a prophet. Also, Musaylamah and Aswas Al Ansi and a few others claimed prophethood, now all the arguments that you have used to justify the prophethood of mirza ghulam can also be applied to those other false prophets and their prophethood can be justified in the same manner. Maybe the evidences that you have used were the same evidences used by those apostates to justify their following of those false prophets. These arguments of yours are too vague, and they do not hold. I mean I can use the same arguments to justify that elijah muhammad or other false prophets were prophets too.
The Ayaat of [69:44-47] refer specifically to Muhammad salAllahualaihiwasallam, and it isn't referring to mirza ghulam.
So, with respect to the Ahadith you mention where Mahdi and Isa alaihisalaam are the same person. I know of ahadith which are contradicting to that opinion. Specifically the hadith says that Isa alaihisalaam will descend upon the white minaret in damascus, and the Mahdi will be about to start the salaah and upon noticing Isa he will move back but Isa will push the Mahdi back to the front and follow the Mahdi for that salaah.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Forgot to mention the ahadeeth about Mahdi and Isa.
They can be found here
http://www.irshad.org/islam/prophecy/messiah.htm
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Salamvalekum NuzuluMasih.
*Can you please describe to me the distinct features for the declaration of Prophethood, by Ghulam Ahmed, since its horses sense to learn from the horses mouth. *
I am here for a healthy discussion, because I want to understand the Phenomenon behind the fastest growing jamaat statistically.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
NuzululMasih, I could not varify the hadiths that you posted. What is your source? Link?
Plus, your reply (quoted above) to hadiths about 30 Dajjals/LIARS that will claim prophethood is absurd. Here are the **holes **to patch:
YOU (NuzululMasih) said, those hadiths APPLY to those who came BEFORE the prophet Mohammad Bin Abdullah (pbuh) who was born in Makkah and QURAN, the book of Islam was revealed on him.
What is the logic/reasoning behind the last, most important, the most dear, the final prophet telling us about 30 dajjals that came **before **him who claimed prophethood? How is that beneficial to the Muslims living at that time when prophet mohammad bin Abdullah (pbuh) was alive and those who came after their generation?
-Why would he tell us about the past? Why are those dajjals not in the Quran?
-Generally all such hadiths are considered warning for the future of the MUSLIM ummah of the Prophet Mohammad bin Abdullah, who was borning Makkah.
-With YOUR LOGIC and twisted reasoning to fool us even more, Please tell us about the 30 prophets that came BEFORE Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and claimed prophethood? Are they part of the 30 dajjals too? I would assume they would be because you said those hadiths apply to 30 liars who claimed prophethood *before *advent of Islam.
That means, if Quran which was revealed on Prophet Mohammad bin Abdullah who was born in Makkah and it is the book of Islam, completed at the time of the Prophet Mohammad(Pbuh) - If quran says that there were prophets before Mohamamd (pbuh) than using your logic and reasoning and absurd explaination, those 30 prophets are liars? Wrong? After all, according to you, Prophet Mohamamd did not mean dajjals of the of the future but dajjals/liars who came in the PAST and claimed prophethood. You are also saying that Quran is wrong to call those 30 men who came before Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as prophets?
This is how you respect the prophet? By misleading, twisting and turning his words and presenting them in different form to please your cause without slightest sense of logic and reason?
Following my drift here? And you also mention that those 30 dajjals met with evil end… what evil end? What were those 30 dajjals that came before the prophet Mohammad bin Abdullah called? Didn’t Mirza Ghulam Qadiyani met with an evil end too? Is dying in bathroom/toilet an evil ending?:halo:
HOW EVIL is it to PAY people and mislead them and to confused them so they will convert to Qadiyanism? How many hopeless individuals left Islam to Qadiyanism because someone was there to take advantage of their situation with money?
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Wonderful…Love it 
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Assalamualaikum all,
Here are the verses I quoted as proof of the evil of persecuting others solely based upon their religious beliefs:
2:192, 2:194, 2:218, 6:35, 8:40, 29:11
sherafghan’s misunderstanding of the Arabic word Fitnah has led him to hold an unjustifiable grudge against its English translation into meaning persecution or oppression.
Fitna means: 1. trials, 2. torture and persecution, 3. divergence of views among men and the disputes and fighting that take place as a result thereof. (Aqrab al-Mawaarid by Sa ‘id al-Khauri al-Shartuti)
If you somehow cannot get or refer to the above source, then please refer to the USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts where you will find the translations into English of three well known and famous translators, i.e., Yusuf Ali, Pickthal, and Shakir, non of whom are Ahmadi Muslim, and all of whom have translated the word Fitnah as specifically meaning persecution or oppression in the above 6 Quranic verses that I had used.
You are right that Fitnah does mean trials by which one may be led to disbelief, but why do you insist upon rejecting the wider connotation of its meaning? The famous lexicon: Arabic-English Lexicon by E.W. Lane, also supports the view that Fitnah also means persecution, and in the context of the verses mentioned above this indeed is the most appropriate meaning, which the three translators, i.e., Yusuf Ali, Pickthall, and Shakir all agree upon.
In conclusion, I’m not sure exactly which translation you (sherafghan) read but most translations into English agree upon the fact that the Arabic word Fitnah could and does mean persecution, especially in the above six verses, including 6:35, or 6:34. JazakAllah.
May Allah have mercy upon you for judging that the translation of Fitnah to mean persecution amounts to twisting the words of the Noble Quran to suit our own purpose, the truth is that your lack of knowledge of that Arabic word and your blind hatred towards the Ahmadi’s has caused your narrow mindedness in this respect. Please be sure to study with more caution before you declare a meaning of an Arabic word as ‘twisting the words of the Quran’.
Now about the Ridda Wars of 632-633
I shall present an extract from the book “Punishment of Apostacy in Islam” by Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Khan:
“HAZRAT ABU BAKR AND APOSTATES"
Nevertheless, the cases cited by those who differ with us, do not uphold their thesis. The first case cited is that of the widespread apostacy which followed upon the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him. It is argued that Hazrat Abu Bakr's fighting the apostates is conclusive proof that simple apostacy is punishable with death.
Our naive divines who cite this instance assume that those apostates were harmless people" whose only fault was that they did not consider themselves bound to pay the zakat to the Khalifa and had given up salat. It is imagined that they had committed no wrong beyond this and that they did not fight the Muslims, nor hurt anyone. It is supposed that they had no quarrel with the Islamic state, that indeed they were obedient to the Khalifa and supported him and were eager to live peacefully, and obediently under the authority of the Islamic state. Had that been so, then it would be doubtful whether they were apostates at all. But the case was not as our divines imagine. Those apostates had repudiated their allegiance to the Islamic state and had taken up arms against it. Those of them who continued to adhere to Islam were killed, and forces were got ready to wage war with the Islamic state. In fact, they advanced upon Medina and laid siege to it in their effort to destroy the Muslims altogether. Therefore, Abu Bakr took up the sword against them and defeated and subdued them. This lends no support to the thesis that the punishment of simple apostacy is death. If the apostates had no rebellious designs, then why is it that leading Refugees and Helpers urged Hazrat Abu Bakr that he should detain the force which was ready to march north under the command of Usamah bin Zaid, as the security of Medina was threatened by the apostates? Also, why had Usamah begged Hazrat Umar , may Allah be pleased with him, to go to Hazrat Abu Bakr and to persuade him to permit Usamah to return to Medina? The -reason given by Usamah for his request was that the force under his command contained all the leading Muslims and he had serious apprehensions that the Khalifa and the wives of the Holy Prophet and the Muslims in Medina might find their security in danger from the apostates.
Tabari has recorded: Abs and Zeeban were the tribes Who were the first to attack Medina and Hazrat Abu Bakr fought them before the return of Usamah (Tabari, V 01. IV, p.1873).
Ibn Khalladun has recorded: Abs and Zeeban were the first to attack Hazrat Abu Bakr and the others collected together at Zil Qassah (Ibn Khalladun, Vol. II, p.65).
Khamees has recorded: Kharajah bin Hasan, who was one of the apostates, advanced upon Medina with some mounted men of his tribe so as to deliver his attack unexpectedly before the Muslims emerged from Medina to oppose him. Thus he attacked Abu Bakr and those Muslims who had been left in Medina and took them unawares (Khamees, Vol.lI, p.237).
Some of the apostates sent delegations to Medina begging the Khalifa to release them from the obligation to pay the zakat and to observe salat. When Hazrat Abu Bakr rejected their request categorically , they went back to prepare their people for an attack on Medina. After they left, Hazrat Abu Bakr called the Muslims of Medina together and addressed them as follows: The whole country has reverted to disbelief. Their delegation has observed the smallness of your numbers in Medina. You do -not know whether they might attack you by night or by day. Their vanguard is only at the distance of one stage from Medina. They had desired that we should accept their proposals and make an agreement with them, but we have rejected their request. So, make ready to defend yourselves against their attack. Within three days they attacked Medina at night, having left some forces at Zil Hussay as their support (Tabari, Vol. IV, p.1875).
Thus it is clear that the apostates were the first to advance against the Muslims of Medina and they conceived that they would occupy Medina as the number of Muslims in it was small and they were weak. But God Almighty, according to His promise, supported the Khalifa and frustrated the designs of his enemies.
The apostates had not only made preparations to advance upon Medina, they had, immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet, slaughtered the sincere Muslims among them who persisted in their adherence to Islam. Ibn Khalladun has said that on receiving the intimation of the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, Banu Zeeban and Abs attacked those among themselves who were Muslims and the same was done by the other tribes who had become apostates (Ibn Khalladun, Vol. II, p.66).
Tabari has said: As soon as intimation was received of the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, Banu Zeeban and Abs attacked those who still adhered to Islam and slaughtered them in diverse manners and so did the other tribes around them (Tabari, Vol. IV, p.1817).
Thus it is clear that those tribes had rebelled openly against the authority of the Islamic state, they slaughtered the Muslims and were determined to wipe them out and to destroy the Islamic state and Islam itself. The advocates of the penalty of death for simple apostacy can derive no support from such instances. Their recourse to these instances shows that they can find nothing relevant in support of their thesis.
There were two considerations that held back the greater part of the apostates from advancing upon Medina. One was that Hazrat Abu Bakr and his companions had, with great courage and bravery, repelled those who had attacked Medina and this discouraged the rest. Secondly, the departure of the force under the command of Usamah for the north created an impression among the disaffected Arab tribes that the Muslims were very strong in Medina inasmuch as, despite the revolt of the tribes, they had been able to dispatch a large army to the north.
The author of Tarikhal Kamil has observed: The dispatch of the army under the command of Usamah was an event which proved of the greatest benefit for the Muslims, inasmuch as the apostate tribes imagined that if the Muslims had not been in a position of great strength, they would not have dispatched the army to the north in the situation with which they were faced. Under this impression, they held back from putting their evil designs into effect (Tarikhal Kamil, V 01. II, p.139).
This also shows that all the apostate tribes had designs against Medina but they held back under the impression that the dispatch of the army under Usamah was an indication of the strong position of the Muslims in Medina. A study of the situation with which Hazrat Abu Bakr was confronted at the time makes it clear that the Arab tribes had not only repudiated Islam, but they had all rebelled against the Islamic state and they were determined to wipe out the Muslims altogether. Their design was frustrated only by the timely and courageous action of Hazrat Abu Bakr .Had he not moved quickly against the first batch of rebels, who were advancing upon Medina, the position of the apostate tribes would have grown stronger, they would have slaughtered all the Muslims in their respective localities and would then have attacked Medina. It was, therefore, necessary that the Muslims should have acted quickly to break up their ranks and to put out the fire that was spreading in all directions and spelt danger to the very existence of the Muslims. Had Hazrat Abu Bakr not used force against the apostate tribes, there would have survived no Muslim and no Islam. As Aini has observed: Hazrat Abu Bakr fought those who had refused to pay the zakat because they had taken up the sword and had started hostilities against the Muslims (Aini, Vol. XI, p.236). This shows clearly that the apostates were the aggressors. They not only refused to pay the zakat, but took up the sward against the Muslims and thus commenced hostilities."
Islam teaches freedom of conscience and never was there any war waged by the Holy Prophet (saw) or any of his Companions (rahm) to force people into accepting, or for that matter, staying in Islam. It is against the Islamic code of conduct to use force in converting others into the fold of Islam, but permission was granted to those who had been wronged, to defend themselves (22:40).
“There is no compulsion in religion. Surely, the right way has become distinct from error; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing. All-Knowing.” (2:257)
“And if thy Lord had enforced His Will, surely, all who are in the earth would have believed together. Wilt thou, then, force men to become believers?” (10:100)
The Holy Quran declares that using force to convert the hearts of men is not permissible, and that it is up to men to accept or reject, and is recorded in the following verses:
2:257,10:100, 11:119, 18:30, 76:4.
It is a completely wrong view that Hazrat Abu Bakr (rah) waged the Ridda War or War on Apostacy simply because they turned back upon their faith under the tribulation of the Holy Prophet (saw)’s death, the fact was that not only did they hold back zakat and repudiate Islam but they had all rebelled against the Islamic State and were in fact the first to take up the sword and went against the Muslims by force and hostility with the determination to wipe out the Muslims altogether, to which Hazrat Abu Bakr (rah) took up the responsibility to defend Islam, and secure its teachings for future generations. So why you (sherafghan) brought this situation up shows me that you have a complete misunderstanding of what actually was the scenario of that account. JazakAllah.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
I am still awaiting some answers to questions/concerns/points in the above quote…Stop copy pasting lengthy text from Qadiyani websites and answer some questions here. :halo:
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
NuzuluMasiha, waiting for answers in #46. I am willing to learn.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Volume 4, Book 55, Number 649:
Narrated Abdullah:
The Prophet mentioned the Massiah Ad-Dajjal in front of the people saying, Allah is not one eyed while Messsiah, Ad-Dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a bulging out grape. While sleeping near the Ka'ba last night, I saw in my dream a man of brown color the best one can see amongst brown color and his hair was long that it fell between his shoulders. His hair was lank and water was dribbling from his head and he was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Kaba. I asked, 'Who is this?' They replied, 'This is Jesus, son of Mary.' Behind him I saw a man who had very curly hair and was blind in the right eye, resembling Ibn Qatan (i.e. an infidel) in appearance. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of a person while performing Tawaf around the Ka'ba. I asked, 'Who is this? 'They replied, 'The Masih, Ad-Dajjal.'
Volume 4, Book 55, Number 650:
Narrated Salim from his father:
No, By Allah, the Prophet did not tell that Jesus was of red complexion but said, "While I was asleep circumambulating the Ka'ba (in my dream), suddenly I saw a man of brown complexion and lank hair walking between two men, and water was dropping from his head. I asked, 'Who is this?' The people said, 'He is the son of Mary.' Then I looked behind and I saw a red-complexioned, fat, curly-haired man, blind in the right eye which looked like a bulging out grape. I asked, 'Who is this?' They replied, 'He is Ad-Dajjal.' The one who resembled to him among the people, was Ibn Qatar." (Az-Zuhri said, "He (i.e. Ibn Qatan) was a man from the tribe Khuza'a who died in the pre-lslamic period.")
I sincerely appologize to Jaan Leva who misunderstood what I meant by saying:
"You have brought up the Ahadith of the 30 liars to which i respond that there where exactly 30 muslims before him who cliamed Prophethood for themselves but where not prophets and met with an evil end."
When I said "him" I meant Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) and not the Holy Prophet (saw). It is clear that the Holy Prophet prophecied that 30 liars would come after him and before the coming of the Messiah (as), and what I thought I made clear was that there where exactly 30 muslim liars who came before Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as). May your anger be cooled by my straighhtening this miscommunication. JazakAllah.
Jaan Leva said:
"...Didn't Mirza Ghulam Qadiyani met with an evil end too? Is dying in bathroom/toilet an evil ending?
HOW EVIL is it to PAY people and mislead them and to confused them so they will convert to Qadiyanism? How many hopeless individuals left Islam to Qadiyanism because someone was there to take advantage of their situation with money?"
Jaan Leva please tell me how Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's demise was an evil ending, while he did so much for Islam. Also, where did you get the wrong idea that the Messiah (as) died in the toilet or bathroom? He was surely upon his bed, and was heard to repeat: "Allah, my beloved Allah." At about 10:30 am on May 26 1908 his sould departed from his body. To Allah we belong and to Him shall we return (2:157). This was exactly a day after the Promised Messiah had finished his pamphlet entitled: "Pegham-e-Suluh" or "A Message of Peace", which was written to bring about an understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, whereby both parties might be enabled to live together in peace and amity, and all bitterness and rancor might be entirely excluded from their mutual peaceful relationship.
Is this the an evil end, or a praiseworthy end?
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) was 73 years of age when he passed, had ammassed a gigantic following of devout Muslims the number of which exceeded 400,000, and had written and published over 80 books in propogation of Islam and in upholding its sanctity.
To what evil do you refer to when you say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad met with an "evil end".
Everyone of us will pass away and no one has been given an everlasting life, or even an unusually long life (21:35), the fact that Ghulam Ahmad (as) passed away is only proof that he was mortal, and his demise proves nothing else.
The fact is that you say that Muhammad Mustafaa (saw) who is the most beloved of God, is buried in the sand of the earth in Medinah and passed away at the age of about 62 or 63, yet you dare say that Hadhrat Isa (as) never died and was never buried in earth, but was uniquely carried up to Allah Ta'Alaa in his physical body and is now around 2006 years old.
Is this how you respect the Holy Prophet of Islam (saw). It truly shows that you honor Jesus (as) above the Holy Seal of the Prophets (saw), who is Allah mercy for all the worlds (21:108), whereas Jesus (as) was only a Messenger for Israel (3:50), (43:60), (61:7).
And what do you mean by:
"HOW EVIL is it to PAY people and mislead them and to confused them so they will convert to Qadiyanism? How many hopeless individuals left Islam to Qadiyanism because someone was there to take advantage of their situation with money?"
What sources are you readyto refer to by concocting such lies about the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community?
Peace be upon Those who follow Allah's guidance, Ameen.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
In response to brother yo_wasim, I will shortly post the claims of Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as).
Allah bless you.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Asslamualaikum wa Rahmatullah,
I appologize most sincerely to Jaan Leva who misunderstood what I meant to convey.
What I thought I said clearly was that, of course, there were 30 liars after the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) and not before him, when I said that they had already come before "him" I was reffering to the Promised Messiah (as) and not to the Holy Prophet (saw).
Forgive me for the miscommunication on my part, if any.
Also, I don't see the wisdom behind ceasing to quote the writings of Scholars and knowledgeable men who succeeded in an awe-inspiring manner both in worldy affairs as well as spiritual affairs.
Another aspect which I don't understand is why people call us 'Qadiani'. Qadian is a small villiage in India where the Promised Messiah (as) came, it is not the name of our world-wide Community, whose Jamaat, not sect, has been named Ahmadiyyat, by its holy founder (as). The name Ahmadiyyat is in praise, not of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as), but of the Holy Prophet (saw) whose alternative name was Ahmad Mujtaba. The name Ahmadiyyat was used for the purpose of connecting ourf Jamaat with the the Holy Prophet (saw) whose name is mentioned at one place in the Quran as Ahmad (61:7).
Now comming to what you claimed about the demise of Ghulam Ahmad (as). Tell me exactly how his end was evil?
He was 73 years of age, and had ammassed 400,000 followers in only 19 years, and wrote and published over 100 books in support of Islam as the Supreme religion and in rejuvinating and upholding the lost sanctity of Islamic values and teachings. His Jammaat is statistically the fastest growing faith upon the faith of the earth, and our humanitarian works under the organization of Humanity First is one of the leading humanitarian relief organizations in the world. Our Jamaat is priveledged with the unique distinction of having a divinely appointed Khalifah, under whose guidance we are united more than any religios group in our beliefs.
Now what part of his life was an evil end?
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
I shall soon post the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (as) in reply to yo_wasim's peaceful and open minded inquiry.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
I do not understand what Jaan Leva means by claiming:
"HOW EVIL is it to PAY people and mislead them and to confused them so they will convert to Qadiyanism? How many hopeless individuals left Islam to Qadiyanism because someone was there to take advantage of their situation with money?"
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
I know exactly what Fitnah means, and it doesn't necessarily translate to persecution.
Fitnah in arabic is referred to the process of purifying gold, when impure gold is put through some oven so that the impurities come out of the gold and what is left is pure gold. Similarly fitnah in Islam refers to trials that purify the believer.
Persecution is narrowing the meaning of fitnah down to a specific case.
I don't read the translations of Yusuf Ali, Pickthall or Shakir.
You didn't even know what these Ayaat actually said until I pointed out.
The conclusion of your Huroob ar Ridda article is totally incorrect. The fact is that the punishment for apostacy in Islam is death and that is why Abu Bakr radiAllahuanhu fought the apostates. Obviously you don't agree with this opinion. And there is no compulsion in religion, but one cannot apostate after accepting Islam. This punishment is supported by the actions of the Prophet and the Sahaba. When one converts to Islam, they should keep in mind that they are not allowed to go out of it.
Now, there's a big flaw in your article. The delegates that came from the tribes wanted to not pay Zakat, and were seeking approval of this. The Sahaba, including Umar, said to Abu Bakr to not start any hostilities because the muslims were weak at that time but Abu Bakr refused their opinion and told the delegates that their proposition will not be accepted and that the muslims will fight you.
After the attack from these delegates, Abu Bakr himself led the army in the attack on the tribes at Abraq.
And after that Abu Bakr sent out armies against all those who had apostated.
He sent out 11 armies to attack the apostates.
Specifically Khalid bin Waleed was dispatched to engage the forces of Tulaiha al Azdi. Ikrimah bin Abi Jahl was dispatched to engage the forces of Musalaimah. Amr bil 'As was sent to the Shaam aread. 'Ala bin Hadrami was sent to the area of Bahrain. And so on. These other tribes did not attack Madina, but it was Abu Bakr who decided to attack them.
The delegates whose tribes attacked came from the tribes surrounding Madinah. But Abu Bakr sent armies out to all of Arabia to attack any tribe that had apostated.
So again, stop twisting the stories to suit your own needs.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Twists and turns and we are back where we started…
So, Prophet Mohammad bin Abdullah who was born in Makkah also claimed prophethood… was he a liar too? Is that what you are saying? So was Prophet Isa son of Marry a liar too as he claimed prophethood too? Both came BEFORE “HIM” Mirza Qadiyani? Why do you keep on twisting and turning the stories and contradicting your self to so that story and tale meets your need?
Also, the HADITHS that we are talking about are of PROPHET Mohammad bin Abdullah who was born in Makkah and upon whome QURAN was revealed and ISLAM was completed when he was alive back in the 7th century. Those hadiths TELL us about 30 DAJJALS and LIARS who will come **AFTER **Prophet Mohammad bin ABDULLAH and will claim to be PROPHETS when in fact the line of PROPHETS ENDed at Prophet Mohammad bin Abdullah who was born in Makkah. They were not said by Mirza Qadiyani and that is the reason they ended up in Bukhari and muslim hadith books. 
ACCORDING TO those hadiths, Mirza Qadiyani is one of those 30 dajjals/liars who would claim prophethood as foretoled by PRophet Mohammad bin Abdullah, the last true prophet upon whome QURAN was revealed and religion of ISLAM, favor of Allah was completed.
You are quoting hadiths from Muslim and Bukhari, give me the links where you are getting those. Also, if you use them as TRUE reference for us what is your problem with accepting the haadiths about 30 dajjals and liars who will come AFTER prophet Mohammad and claim prophethood? :halo:
Your buck starts and stops at Mirza Qadiyani… everything before him and after him doesn’t matter to you. Who created Qadiyanism?
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Assalamualaikum,
Here is the post I promised yo_wasim in relply to his inquiry about the position of the Messiah, Ghulam Ahmad (as), about his mission, and I have also included what his Community members regard him as, just in case there should be one who claims that the Ahmadi's do not believe in what Ghulam Ahmad (as) has claimed.
The claim of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (upon whom be peace) is that God has raised him for the guidance and direction of mankind; that he is the Messiah foretold in the Traditions of our Holy Prophet and the Mahdi promised in his Sayings; that the prophecies contained ill the different religious books about the advent of a Divine Messenger in the latter days have also been fulfilled in his person; that God has raised him for the advocacy and promulgation of Islam in our time; that God has granted him insight into the Holy Quran, and revealed to him its innermost meaning and truth; that He has revealed to him the secrets of a virtuous life. By his work, his message, and his example, he has glorified the Holy Prophet and demonstrated the superiority of Islam over other religions. The purpose of his advent was that God's love and concern for Islam should become manifest, that it preliminaries should become clear how improper it is to neglect God and to keep at a distance from Him. He claimed also that his coming had been foretold by almost all the prophets and founders of religions in the past. This, because the Holy Prophet of Islam had been sent by God as a teacher of all mankind. He was to collect mankind in one fold to unite them in one faith. If this design was to be fulfilled, it was necessary that national and traditional divisions and hatreds should be swept out of the way, so that the Holy Prophet could be accepted as the Seal of Prophets by all the peoples of the world. Therefore, under God's design, the prophets and religious teachers of the past had each foretold his own second coming in the latter days. These prophecies pertained to a follower of the Holy Prophet, ho was to be commanded by God to affirm and propagate the truth of the Holy Prophet, and was to unite the followers of different religions into an acceptance of Islam. He was to do so by declaring himself to be the Promised One of each religion. The prophecies in the books of other religions which foretold the coming of a teacher all met their fulfilment in him. He was the Messiah for Christians and Jews, the Masiodarbahmi for the Zoroastrians, and Krishna for the Hindus. His coming in fulfilment of prophecies contained in the ancient books is evidence of his truth. As he himself is a witness of the religion of Islam, his coming is an invitation to the followers of other religions to come and enter the universal brotherhood of Islam.
One notion that is put forward is that by claiming to be a prophet, the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, put himself outside the pale of Islam inasmuch as his claim was inconsistent with the verse of the Holy Quran which describes the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, as Khataman Naibiyyeen (33:41)
It should be clearly grasped that the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement has certainly not claimed to be a prophet in accordance with the concept of prophethood which is entertained by some of the Muslim divines and is commonly current among Muslims. It is considered that a prophet is one who brings a new law or is not the Follower of a previous prophet, but is a prophet in his own right.
The Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has clearly and emphatically denied being such a prophet. For instance, he has said:
All prophethoods, except the Mohammedi prophethood, are now closed. No prophet can arise even without a law but only one who is a follower of the Holy Prophet. (Tajalliat Ilahiyah, p 25)
He has repeatedly announced that he is not a law-bearing prophet and that he is a follower of the Holy Quran. He has disclaimed being a prophet in his own right and his claim is confined to being the Mahdi and the Messiah. He affirms his being a servant of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and his follower and that all grace bestowed upon him is on account of his devotion to the Holy Prophet and that he has been raised in accordance with the prophecies and promises of the Holy Prophet. For instance, he has said:
It is not permissible to apply the title prophet to anyone after the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, unless such a person is also described as a follower of the Holy Prophet, which means that he has been bestowed all bounties on account of his devotion to the Holy Prophet and not directly on his own. (Tajalliat Ilahiyyah, p. 9)
Again, he has said:
I cannot acquire any degree of honor or excellence, nor any station of exaltation or nearness to God except through sincere and perfect obedience to the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, Whatever is bestowed upon me is by way of reflection of, and through, the Holy Prophet. (Izlah Auham, p. 138)
He has declared:
All windows opening on to prophethood have been closed except the window accessible to a siddique, that is to say, the window of complete and perfect devotion to the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him. (Ek Ghalati Ka Izalah, p. 3)
Again, he has declared:
By the pure grace of God and not by any merit of my own, I have been bestowed a perfect portion of the bounty which was bestowed before me on the Prophets and Messengers and the elect of God. It would not have been possible for me to be bestowed this bounty unless I had followed my lord and master, the pride of the prophets, the best of mankind, Hazrat Mohammed Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Whatever I have been bestowed has been bestowed upon me on account of this obedience. I know through my true and perfect knowledge that no human being can approach God or acquire perfect understanding of the Divine except through following the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. (Haqeeqatul Wahi, p. 62)
Again, he has declared:
God, Who was aware of the secret of the heart of the Holy Prophet, exalted him above all the Prophets and all mankind who were before him or might come after him and granted him all his objectives in his lifetime. He is the fountainhead of all grace and anyone who claims any excellence without confessing his obligation to him is not a human being but is progeny of Satan, for the key of every excellence has been bestowed upon him and the treasure of all understanding has been granted to him. He who does not achieve through him is deprived forever. What am I and what is my reality? I would be ungrateful if I were not to confess that I have discovered the true Unity of God only through the Holy Prophet, and have been bestowed the understanding of God only through this perfect Prophet and through his light. (Haqeeqatul Wahi, p. 115)
It is thus clear beyond doubt that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, did not consider himself a prophet in his own right, but believed that God Almighty had bestowed upon him the title of prophet for the purpose of establishing the perfect law brought by the Holy Prophet, in his capacity as his follower and servant and that he was not given any new law.
Only a day before his death he made the following public declaration:
The charge leveled against me that I claim to be a prophet who has no connection with Islam and that I consider myself a prophet in my own right, who has no need of following the Holy Quran, and that I have proclaimed my own credo, and have established a new qibla, and declare the Islamic law as abrogated, and go outside the following of and obedience to the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, is wholly false. I consider such a claim of prophethood as amounting to disbelief. Not only today but in every one of my books I have affirmed that I lay no claim to any such prophethood and that this is a false allegation against me. The only reason that I call myself a prophet is that I am honored with the converse of God Almighty and that He speaks to me frequently and responds to me and discloses much of the unseen to me and communicates to me the mysteries of the future such that are not disclosed to anyone unless he enjoys special nearness to God. It is on account of the multiplicity of these experiences that I have been made a prophet. (Akhbare Aam, 26 May 1908)
He has stated:
Had I not been a follower of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and had not obeyed him, then even if my good deeds had reached the tops of mountains, I would not have been honored with the converse of God inasmuch as all prophethoods except the Muhammadi prophethood have come to an and.(Tajalliat Ilahiyah, p. 24)
The type of prophethood claimed by the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, is mentioned in the ahadees and in the writings of righteous Muslim divines of the past. The Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has described the Promised Reformer who would appear among the Muslims as Allah's prophet and has repeated this four times (Muslim). According to the bulk of Muslims today, Jesus, who, according to them is alive in heaven with his earthly body, will come back again for the reform of Muslims. Assuming for a moment that this concept is justified, the question arises whether during his second advent he would be a prophet or not, for it is an accepted doctrine that a prophet is never deprived of his prophethood. If by his advent the Seal of Prophethood of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, would not be broken, then how is it broken by the claim of the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, that he is a prophet by way of reflection of the Holy Prophet' Indeed, the advent of Jesus who was a prophet in Israel for the purpose of the reform of the Muslims is a humiliation for the Muslims and is contrary to the purport of the verse that describes the Holy Prophet as Khataman Nabiyeen (33:41). In this context, the Promised Messiah has observed:
If it is asked that the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, being Khataman Nabiyeen, how can any other prophet arise after him, the answer is that without a doubt no new or old prophet can come after the Holy Prophet as you believe that Jesus, being a prophet, would come in the latter days. Your doctrine is that for forty years Jesus would continue to be a prophet and a recipient of divine revelation, a period that by far exceeds the period of the prophethood of the Holy Prophet. Such a doctrine is, no doubt, sinful and its falsity is borne witness to by the verse: 'But he is the Messenger of Allah and Khataman Nabiyeen' (33:41); and by the hadees: 'There will be no prophet after me.' I am utterly opposed to all such doctrines and I have firm belief in the verse: 'But he is the Messenger of Allah and Khataman Nabiyeen' (33:41). This verse contains a prophecy of which our opponents are not aware, and that prophecy is that after the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, all doors of prophecy have been closed and that it is not possible now that a Hindu, or a Jew, or a Christian, or a merely formal Muslim, should be able to establish the applicability of the word prophet to himself. All windows of prophethood are now closed except the window of complete obedience to the Holy Prophet. Therefore, he who approaches God through this window is reflectively clothed with the same cloak of prophethood which is the cloak of the Muhammadi prophethood. The prophethood of such a one is not apart and distinct from the prophethood of the Holy Prophet, inasmuch as he does not claim it in his own right but receives everything from the fountain of the Holy Prophet, not for himself but for his glory. For this reason he is named Mohammed and Ahmad in heaven. This means that the prophethood of Mohammed is bestowed upon Mohammed by way of reflection and not upon anyone else. This verse, therefore, means that Mohammed is not the father of any man from amongst the men of the world but is the father of the men of the hereafter because he is the Khataman Nabiyeen and there is no way of access to Divine grace except through him.
Thus my prophethood and messengership derives from my being Mohammed and Ahmad and not on account of my own self. These names have been bestowed upon me on account of my utter devotion to the Holy Prophet. Therefore, the concept of Khataman Nabiyeen has not been contravened by my advent, but it would certainly be contravened by the advent of Jesus a second time. (Ek Ghalati Ka Izalah)
He has also stated:
Many people are misled by the use of the word prophet in my claim and imagine as if I have claimed a prophethood which was bestowed upon the prophets in earlier times, but they arc mistaken in so thinking. I have made no such claim. The Divine wisdom has bestowed this grace upon me that I have raised to the station of prophethood through the blessings of the grace of the Holy Prophet, so that the perfection of the spiritual grace of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, might be established. Therefore, I cannot be designated only as prophet but as a prophet and a follower of the Holy Prophet at one and the same time. My prophethood is a reflection of the prophethood of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and is not a prophethood in its own right. That is why, both in the hadees and in my revelation, as I have been called a prophet, I have also been called a follower of the Holy Prophet so that it should be clear that every excellence that has been bestowed upon me has been bestowed through my following the Holy Prophet and through my obedience to him.(Haqeeqatul Wahi, p. 150)
Then he has said:
God is One and Mohammed, on whom be the peace and blessings of Allah, is His Prophet and he is the Khatamul Anbya and above all other prophets. After him there is no other prophet except one who is clothed in the cloak of Mohammed by way of reflection, for a servant has no identity apart from his master, nor is a branch distinct from its trunk. He who is bestowed the title of prophet on account of his complete absorption in his master does not contravene the Khatam-iNabuwat. When you observe your reflection in a mirror there are not two of you but only one, though there appear two; only one is the original and the other is his reflection. This is what God desired in the case of the Promised Messiah. (Kishti Nuh, p. 15)
All these writings make it clear that according to the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, after the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, it is only the door of reflective prophethood which is open to a true and devoted follower of the Holy Prophet. Being a reflection of the Holy Prophet, he deemed himself as included in the identity of the Holy Prophet and claimed no separate and distinct position for himself. It must be remembered that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, did not in any way claim to be law-bearing prophet or has claimed to be a prophet in his own right. He has categorically stated:
Keep well in mind that the door of law-bearing prophethood is firmly closed after the Holy Prophet and that there is no book after the Holy Quran which can bring new commandments or can abrogate any commandment of the Holy Quran or can suspend obedience to it. The Holy Quran is binding till the Day of judgment. (Al-Wasiyyat, P. 12)
Again, he has said:
God is the enemy of him who regards the Holy Quran as abrogated and acts contrary to the law of Islam and seeks to bring into operation his own law. (Chashmah Maarifat, P. 324)
He has affirmed:
I am a prophet, but my prophethood is not law-bearing which would abrogate the Book of Allah and put into effect a new book. I consider such a claim as amounting to disbelief in Islam.(Badar, 5 March 1908)
He has declared:
I have repeatedly affirmed that the truth and reality is that our lord and master, the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is the Khatamul Anbya and after his there is no prophethood in its own right nor any new law. Anyone who claims differently is, without a doubt, faithless and rejected.(Chashmah,Maarifat, P. 324)
In view of all these declarations, no God-fearing, just person dare assert that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, claimed to be a law-bearing prophet or a prophet in his own right.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Assalam,
this is in reply to Jeen Lava
You are still misunderstanding what I have clearly written. I'm not sure if you are doing it on pupose, or that you really cannot comprehend what i write.
The Holy Prophet Muhammad Mustafa (saw) son of Abdullah and Aminah prophecied that after him, i.e. Muhammad (saw), there would appear 30 liars who would claim prophethood for themselves, but would not be prophets.
If you read the hadith carefully, the Holy Prophet (saw) said that the time will not come for the fullfillment of the Hour until there would come to pass after the Holy Prophet (saw) 30 liars, who would claim to be prophets.
Yet the Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) claimed to be a subordinat Prophet to the Holy Prophet (saw), which is why he claimed to be the Muhammadi Messiah, meaning that without the guidance and teachings of the Holy Prophet (saw) he, i.e. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, is nothing, for it was by way of Ghulam Ahmad (as)'s perfect obediance to the Holy prophet (saw) that he attained the status of Prophethood.
As the Holy Prophet (saw) said: "The Divines among my Ummah, will be like the prophets of Bani Israel."
And just as the Quran declares in Ch. 4 verse 70 or 69:
"And whoso obeys Allah and this Messenger (saw) shall be among those on whom Allah bestows His blessengs-namely the Prophets..."
it is clear that the followers of Muhammad (saw) can raise up to the stature of Prophethood and can indeed recieve Divine Revelation from Allah. But again this is not because of their own independence, but is a blessing from Allah upon those who loose themselves in complete submission and love in the Holy Prophet Muhammad Mustafaa (saw), And this is what (4:70) declares. No new prophet can come, that is true, but true Muslims who are reflections of Muhammad (saw) by adhering to the Quranic Law and following the example of the Greatest Prophet, i.e. Muhammad (saw), can indeed be raised to the status of Prophets.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) recieved Prophethood by way of reflection of the qualities of Muhammad(saw) and though he was not at the same status of Muhammad (saw), for no one was, is and ever will be equalled to the Holy Prophet (saw), he was likened to his second coming and re-advent, because of his absolute slavery to the Seal of the Prophets (saw).
in response to sherafghan, I must say that he has misunderstood the War that had to be declared by Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddique (ra). Freedom of religion is one of the beautiful teachings of Islam, along with tolerance of other faiths, and understanding between religious ideologies. Never did the Holy Prophet (saw) or his Sahaba (rahm) wage wars to convert peolple to Islam, or to return them to the Islamic faith if they abandoned Islam. There is no such Ayat in the whole of the Quran which says that the punishment for Apostacy alone is death. JazakAllah.
Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan
Sir jee, haven’t you looked at following ayat?
Those who believe, then disbelieve, then again believe, then disbelieve and thereafter go on increasing in disbelief, Allah will never forgive them, nor guide them to any way of deliverance. (4.138)
If the punishment of apostacy in Islam is death, then why is Allah saying “nor guide them to any way of deliverance” after they are already dead?
So, this ayat catagorically rejects the baseless allegation that apostacy in Islam is punishable by death.
Other ayats in support of my argument are as follows:
The Holy Quran says:
O ye who believe, whoso from among you turns back from his religion let him remember that in place of such a person, Allah will soon bring a people whom He will love and who will love Him, who will be kind and considerate towards the believers and firm and unyielding towards the disbelievers. They will strive hard in the cause of Allah and will not at all take to heart the reproaches of fault finders. That is Allah’s grace; He bestows it upon whosoever He pleases. Allah is the Lord of vast bounty, All-Knowing. (5.55)
Whoso disbelieves in Allah after he has believed, excepting the case of one who is forced to make a declaration of disbelief while his heart rests securely in faith, but one who opens his mind wide to disbelief; on him is Allah’s wrath and he shall have a grievous punishment. (16.107)
In the above verses, Allah is the one who will punish them, and it is not upto any state or a people to go and kill that person, just because of apostacy.
The Holy Quran states:
They will not stop fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can. The works of those from among you who turn back from their faith and die in a state of disbelief shall be vain in this world and the next. These are the inmates of the fire, therin shall they abide. (2. 218)
This means that whoever, out of fear of the sword (or the pain of punishment), decides to abjure Islam has a fundamental right to do so but no one else has the right to declare him to be an apostate. The right to declare himself to bean apostate lies only with him. Nowhere in the Holy Quran has this right been granted to others. That is to say, one is free to renounce one’s own religion but has no right to impose renunciation of religion on others. According to Islamic teachings, an apostate, therefore, cannot be manufactured by religious scholars or the clergy or any non-tolerant individual or government.
The Holy Quran also states: ‘Surely, those who have turned away after guidance has been made manifest to them have been deceived by Satan who has beguiled them with false hopes.’ (47.26)
Also Holy Quran states;
Whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers. How shall Allah guide a people who have disbelieved after having believed and who had borne witness that the Messenger is true and to him clear proofs had come? Allah guides not the wrongdoers. Of such the punishment is that on them shall be the curse of Allah and of angels and of men, all together, the reunder shall they abide. **Their punishment shall not be lightened nor shall they be granted respite; except in the case of those who repent thereafter and amend… **(3.86–92)
In the above verse, please read the last line carefully. Now if the punishment of apostacy is death, ofcourse, that person will never get a chance to repent after he has disbelieved. Then, why is Allah forgiving people who have repented.
So, all of the above references from Holy Quran catagorically rejects the punishment by death of apostacy.