Kishtian Chulteen Hain Ta Hoon Kushtian
I have seen this claim before "xx millions" converted to Ahmediat, never seen any proof of that.
Re: Re: Ahmedi's and Guru Nanak
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by salman_2you: *
Munni, I am pretty sure that you are aware of the fact that Ahmedi's are still and will be called as non-muslims regarless of their numbers in either millions or billions. Its not my law but Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Comparing them to sunnis will be out of question as per the above statement until unless the law changes and Pakistan accepts them as Muslims (which I don't see it happening in coming era). The dream will always be a dream (Insha-Allah).
[/QUOTE]
I never heard of anyone giving a licence to Pakistan or to Sunnis in determing who is or isnt a Muslim.
Besides, I dont think you or anyone else defining them as non Muslims will make any difference, because your oppinion or that of your communities is simply irrelelevent.
I like the fact that the Ahmedis make an effort to bridge the gap between muslms and non muslims. Any sect which promotes religous tolerance should be respected. Certain people on this site should learn a lesson from them.
As a cool, calm and collected Kaffir, I must say Ahmadis are perhaps the most progressive, educated, well to do Muslims I know.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by armughal: *
and guess what?!?!
i rule u out of the circle os Islam too.... :)
[/QUOTE]
well alhamdolillah that I wouldn't be answerable to mushrikeens and sectarians but would have to report to Allah Alone.
Re: Re: Re: Ahmedi's and Guru Nanak
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PaKpatriot1: *
I never heard of anyone giving a licence to Pakistan or to Sunnis in determing who is or isnt a Muslim.
Besides, I dont think you or anyone else defining them as non Muslims will make any difference, because your oppinion or that of your communities is simply irrelelevent.
[/QUOTE]
Mr. PP1
The name of the license is called as "Ijma'a" which unfortunately ignorant like you don't understand. Government of Pakistan adapted as a law, what majority of muslim scholars decided in the past including all sects of sunnis and shias. Defining them as a non muslim is just and appropriate. As many of my muslim friends stated above that "Khatam e Nabuwat" is the utter belief of every muslim, as stated by Prophet (PBUH) himself too, many times. The relevancy that you are whining about has been provided to many (like you) in the past. It is irrelevant of what you think is right or wrong cause neither you have authority or religious education to prove anything. As for me, Salman and many of our friends we still believe without any shadow of doubt that Qadiyanis and Ahmedis ARE and WILL REMAIN be Non-muslims.
Pilot
Since we are on the topic of Ahmadis, I had one question. Hopefully someone can answer it here.
I have heard a lot of Ahmadis dissecting the meaning of the word "khatam" (in the ayat) to mean "seal" and not the "final" (as in last). And hence, they present a case that more "prophets" can come (including Mirza Ghulam Ahmad). I am curious to know, if that is the case, what is their opinion on Musalima "Kazaab", with whom muslim armies fought under the khilafat of Hazrat Abu Bakr (Razi Allah Tallah). Obviously, the first khalifa and the muslims of that time believed that there can be no prophet after Prophet Muhammad (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam) and hence Musalima can only be a liar. So, they crushed his fitna, and a great number of muslims were martyred in the fights to crush Musalima and his followers.
Do the present day Ahmadis believe that the first khalifa was wrong in his belief and there could have been more prophets coming after Prophet Muhammad (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam)? What are their thoughts on Musalima, then? Might he been a prophet too just like Mirza Ghulam?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
As a cool, calm and collected Kaffir, I must say Ahmadis are perhaps the most progressive, educated, well to do Muslims I know.
[/QUOTE]
and as a person whose extended family's Ahmadi members comprise perhaps 99% of the world's Ahmadi population, I must sadly refute your claims.
Samby I didn't know ahmadjee and NYA are in your family? Wow..GS is like a one big happy...
Now how come you don't know the 1% of all ahmadis? Or is it that you only know the 99% of the 1% of underachieving ahmadis. If it is the latter, what does that say about you?
hey I'm only using the one generalization/exaggeration limit per post that everyone is allowed. or so I gathered from your post?
dude, the question is about Ahmadis and what they think of Guru Nanek. So it would be appreciated if you would not think of it as an opportunity to poke fun at Muslims in general.
**Faisal **Bhai,
The issue of apostasy & its punishment is very interesting as far as the Islamic history is concerned and it is best debated in the context of Musailma. The wars fought by Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra) are commonly known as “Wars of Apostasy” which gives the impression that wars were about the claim of prophet hood by these people. But was apostasy & its punishment the sole reason Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra) & other Sahabas fought those wars? Or was the reason different but ‘false claims to prophet hood’ one of the common traits of these people? For that you have to read history a little more in depth, certainly not the ones they teach as the course books in Pakistan. :-)
All history is biased, regardless of who writes it, especially the opinion on justification, morality and reasons of going to war, as people’s lives are at stake. Is the War on terror, a war against violent religious extremism or is it against Islam? Is the war with Iraq about WMD, security and a cruel dictator or about Oil and Israel etc? The opinion varies and is usually dictated by one’s own perception and biasness towards the issue. Not only the victors write the history but most often than not it’s rewritten in the following years as needed & the dominant view among the historians of the victorious becomes the commonly known history, regardless of the fact that it might not have any truth to it.
The whole saga with Musailma is particularly important as it gives many different clues which weakens if not totally reject the reasoning commonly known, for the strong stand of Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra). Here are a few things to consider:
#1. Contrary to common belief, Musilma’s claim to prophet hood didn’t come after AnHazoor (saw) death. Instead in the life of the Holy Prophet (saw) he made several attempts to be recognized by him as a fellow prophet & was hopeful that afterwards the position of the ‘head of the state’ of the newly founded Muslim State will be given to him. He wrote letters to the Holy Prophet (saw) addressing himself as a prophet & also addressing AnHazoor (saw) as a prophet. So, the question arises, if it’s necessary to go after a false claimant and punish him, and if that was the reason why Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra) went after Musailma then why AnHazoor (saw) didn’t? And if AnHazoor (saw) didn’t go to war, how can his perfect follower, who wouldn’t even budge an iota away from his Sunnah would go to war?
#2. The claim of Musialma changed after the demise of AnHazoor (saw). He shifted from claiming to be a fellow prophet to a better prophet and also claimed that Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra), who was already elected as Khalifa (Head of the Muslim State) at that time, should follow him. He refused to pay dues, such as Zaka’at and also changed the law of the land by making drinking lawful along with Zana etc. Not recognizing the head of state, in this case doing bait of a (rightfully guided) Khalifa is considered ‘rebellion’ and throughout Islamic history it has caused the followers of both parties pull out arms against each other. Refusal to pay the state dues, make amendments to the law of the land is another unprecedented crime. Not to mention massing army & making alliances with other favored groups against the ‘head of the state’ and create a law & order situation is considered ‘treason’ and even the great democracies of today consider it a crime punishable by death. And Musailma did all the above!
#3. The history also shows that there were other claimants of ‘prophet hood’ at that time that were mostly brought to justice but there were some that were left alone. One has to investigate why they were forgiven? One of the wives of Musailma (if I remember correctly her name was Sajjah) also claimed to be a prophetess. Though when she couldn’t get along with Musailma (who in the opinion of most historians was only using her) moved to her homeland Iraq, which at that time was not part of the Islamic state. There is no evidence that Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra) or other went after her to punish her or her believers, for her false claim to prophet hood.
Most Muslims who appose the idea of ‘waging a war against the apostates’ argue through Qur’an stating the fact that it preaches no compulsion in religion and gives freedom of belief to others. IMO, the close study of the case of Musailma gives a far better argument, as Qur’an is open to interpretation, and mostly the pro-death-penalty for false prophets give Hazrat Abu Bakar (ra) incident as their sole argument, with the case of Musailma as the center piece.
Anyway, there are several other distinction of Hazrat Ahmad (as) claim to prophet hood from the likes of Bahaullah, Joseph Smith (Mormons) etc. He claimed to be the ‘promised one’ by AnHazoor (saw), the same Messiah & Mahdi for-told by the Holy founder of Islam and not someone God has send out of the blue moon. He also doesn’t claim to have prophet hood outside the confines of the ‘Khatam-un-nabeyeeN’, instead gives his full subordination to AnHazoor (saw) & Quran!
i dont have anything to convience you but the fact is today it is not difficult to find an “ahmadi” at every nook and corner of the world, the term you were unfamiliar few years ago and your vocabulary was limited to “qadianis” and “mirzais”.
about 100 years ago a single man in a remote village, where there was no means of transportation and communication, raised his voice under divine command that he was appointed as a reformr of the time. some accepted him, many rejected his claim (like all the prophets of the past). Persecution, fatwas, and deadly laws were tailored, his followers were tortured mentally and physically… dispite of all these facts the community florished and today it is established in over 170 countries.
if i may ask you, where are those people today who have written long fatwas and deadly laws against ahmadiz? did anyone succeed in their nobel missions?
listen for the last time, GOD has planted this seed and angles guard this tree and no one has the power to erradicate this jammat, it is and will florish and INDEED the days are near when ISLAM will be identified with this pious jammat.
if you want to do something than forget about ahmadiyyat, go save islam, its dying, the book you call Quran is covered with dust, go save muslims of today who have not only lost respect but also the real essence of islam,
you still need numbers?
may allah bless you
RE: CHOLA.. read this discussion
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zalim: *
about 100 years ago a single man in a remote village, where there was no means of transportation and communication, raised his voice under divine command that he was appointed as a reformr of the time. some accepted him, many rejected his claim (like all the prophets of the past). Persecution, fatwas, and deadly laws were tailored, his followers were tortured mentally and physically... dispite of all these facts the community florished and today it is established in over 170 countries.
[/QUOTE]
i do not believe in bashing religions, so my apologies if people are offended.
I wanted to ask Ahmedis, what is the exact position of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed in your faith?
If he is held in special veneration, why hasn't the vast, overwhelming majority of Muslims never heard of him/call him a heretic?
What I am trying to get over here is that Shias/Sunnis although divergant in their beliefs still revere Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) and Hazrat Ali (AS), although in varying degrees. Niether hold Ahmed in any positive light at all.
Furtheron, no Muslim reveres Guru Nanak either. The Guru of the Sikhs is not mentioned in the Quran (unlike Hazart Isa etc.), so why would Ahmedis care for Guru Nanak? Could it be that M.G. Ahmed and Guru Nanak are both Punjabs and Ahmed sought to convert Sikhs by coopting their holy man?
Any responses appreciated..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *
i do not believe in bashing religions, so my apologies if people are offended.
I wanted to ask Ahmedis, what is the exact position of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed in your faith?
If he is held in special veneration, why hasn't the vast, overwhelming majority of Muslims never heard of him/call him a heretic?
What I am trying to get over here is that Shias/Sunnis although divergant in their beliefs still revere Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) and Hazrat Ali (AS), although in varying degrees. Niether hold Ahmed in any positive light at all.
Furtheron, no Muslim reveres Guru Nanak either. The Guru of the Sikhs is not mentioned in the Quran (unlike Hazart Isa etc.), so why would Ahmedis care for Guru Nanak? Could it be that M.G. Ahmed and Guru Nanak are both Punjabs and Ahmed sought to convert Sikhs by coopting their holy man?
Any responses appreciated..
[/QUOTE]
I think they have a web site the Ahmedis that answer a lot of your questions.. Forgot what its called though. I have Ahmedis In the Family, and they respect and revere the Prophet Muhamad as much as any Sunni. They differ only on the interpretation of the seal of the prophets...
They say that other prophets may come, but no "law bearing prophets," none will bring any new relgion, but will all be Muslims and preach according to the teaching of the Prophet Muhamad.
I dont think this makes them non Muslims, because they dont violate the classic definitions of what a Muslims is. When a Muslim convert takes the Shahada, he testifies that god is one and that Muhammad is his prophet, but that doesnt say he is the last prophet, but only a prophet of god. The emphasis is on the Oneness of god, and Muhamads Prophet hood in and of itself. So, the Sunni/ Shia accusation doesnt hold water. As of Mirza Sahib, he was respected all the way up to his announcement that he to was the prophet mehdi and a nabi. After that, many of his former proponents became his enemy and the Sunnis have basically shunned the entire group since then... Ofcourse there has been a lot of propaganda, and as far as Pakistan is concerned, you can never learn anything about Ahmedis' beliefs from a non biased source. Not to mention the fact that most Sunnis are to forgone in their own conclusion to care to learn anything besides what the Molvis have taught them....
salam
why discuss these difficult topics .....why dont we read some qadiyanee books to see what was the mental level and character of the mirza....
all this coming soon....as soon as i find those mirza books...
salam