Allegations Against Ahmediyya

Society Religion & Philosophy
121

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

most welcome....however do drop by if you have any allegations and need reply! :)

122

your interpretation is completely wrong, though.

:)

Lafz ba Lafz- Poetry game
123

can u give reference of this hadees u mentioned? i tried searching but did not find any imam NOVI???

124

Do you want reference for Hadith?

Which is:

[QUOTE]
Muslim, Part 2, chapter 'Fazail Hasaan bin Sabit
[/QUOTE]

or Do you want to know who is Imam Novi?

Also whilst I am at it? What is about the Hadith or Imam Novi which is bothering you so I can compile my answer according to that? Or do you have any disagreement with presentation of Hadith in subject context?

I feel like..
125

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

just wondering if its authentic hadith or weak???

126

Well it is from Sahi Muslim....I am just wondering even if it the source was not authentic then would you have discarded the hadith? I keep it simple; as long as the Hadith does not contradict Quran and perhaps a Sahih Hadith its fine.

I will try to find more information on Hadith, Narrtor and route if I can.

127

When Ahmadis repeat the Kalima they implicitly include their false prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad when they say ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’.

Extracts from Kalimat-ul-Fasal by Hadhrat Sahibzada Mirza Bashir Ahmad.

(Mirza Bashir Ahmad was one of the sons of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. The book Kalimat-ul-Fasal was published during the Khalifat of Mirza Mahmood Ahmad, his elder brother, with his approval. Ahmadis believe that Mirza Mahmood Ahmad was the promised reformer of Islam and that his coming was prophesied by their prophet)

“The fool does not realise that ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ was put in the Kalima because he is the crowning head of the prophets and the Khatam-un-nabiyyin. By mentioning his name all other prophets are implicitly included. There is no need to mention the name of everyone separately. Admittedly, the coming of the Promised Messiah has created one difference, and that is that before his coming the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ included (besides the Holy Prophet) only the prophets before the Holy Prophet Muhammad, but after the coming of the Promised Messiah one more prophet was added to the significance of these words. … In other words, the same Kalima is still to be used for admission into Islam, the difference merely being that the coming of the Promised Messiah has added one more messenger to the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’.”

The original can be found here :
www.alislam.org/urdu/pdf/Kalma-tul-Fasal.pdf
However it is in Urdu. The book has only recently appeared on their website.

This proves that it is not the case that Ahmadis have the same Kalima as Sunnis etc. If they believe the above why don't ahmadis stop trying to mis-lead muslims and change their Kalimah to "There is no god but Allah and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is his messenger"? That way when they say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in the before mentioned blasphemy they can claim that they are including all prior prophets and they don't have to corrupt the original version.

Other juicy extracts from this book have been copy and pasted below:

“In this chapter some Quranic verses will be mentioned which show that Allah has made it obligatory to declare faith in all messengers and has called as kafir those who do not consider it necessary to believe in all prophets.” (p. 107)

“Thus, according to this verse, every such person who believes in Moses but not in Jesus, or believes in Jesus but not in Muhammad (peace be upon him), or believes in Muhammad but not in the Promised Messiah, is not only a kafir but a staunch kafir and is excluded from the fold of Islam.” (p. 110)

“It is a basic point that as the Promised Messiah is a messenger and prophet of God, he therefore has all the rights that other prophets have, and to deny him is the same as to deny any other prophet of Allah.” (p. 119)

“This objection shows the lack of knowledge of the objector. We find that the Promised Messiah has permitted us to have only that relationship with non-Ahmadis which the Holy Prophet Muhammad permitted with Christians.” (p. 169)

“In this chapter some Quranic verses will be mentioned which show that Allah has made it obligatory to declare faith in all messengers and has called as kafir those who do not consider it necessary to believe in all prophets.”

“… If you say we are permitted to marry their (other Muslims’) daughters, I say we are also permitted to marry daughters of Christians. If you ask, why do we say salam to non-Ahmadis, the answer is that it is proved from Hadith that sometimes the Holy Prophet Muhammad even said salam to Jews in response to them. … Therefore, in every way the Promised Messiah has separated us from other Muslims, and there is no relation which Islam requires exclusively between Muslims which has not been prohibited to us (with other Muslims).” (p. 169–170)

“The objection arises here as to why the marriage of a woman who is an Ahmadi is not dissolved if her husband is a non-Ahmadi, or why is the inheritance of a deceased Ahmadi allowed to his non-Ahmadi son when a kafir is not allowed to inherit from a Muslim.” (p. 170)

“As matters of inheritance and dissolution of marriage fall under the law of the government, this is why the Promised Messiah wrote nothing about these. If he had possessed governmental power, he would have issued the same orders in these matters as well.” (p. 170)

128

Thank you for joining the forum and enlighting us with your very first post in religious thread.

All I have to say is that if you had paid more attention to the thread from begining then you would have realised that I made a post on this particular issue of Ahmadies having incorrect Kalima on very first page.

You may view the bunch of videos on this topic and you can view them by clicking the following link: http://www.paklinks.com/gs/6524692-post2.html

Now the question arises why am I not replying to some particular points you raised from a book of Promissed Messiah0 (A.S) son’s book? This is becuase the generalised view is that we dont follow the same Kalima as other Muslims do. I say its a lie and blunt lie and whosoever says is lying.

Even if I try to give you full explanation of things in writing you may perhaps bring extracts from another book. This circle of blame game will continue. Your allegation is that we have different Kalima. You say we mean something else when we recite Kalima. I say this is wrong and incorrect perception. End of the story.

Now few comments for your post:

Be respectful towards a religious figure. This is the forum policy. :slight_smile: (I love this forum to be honest.)

What would be your point quoting this extract? Also can you provide the page number for this in your next post?

How does this prooves that? Please explain your point in more details.

I like the way you said juicy extracts. Lets see how juicy are they?

I havent cross refereced this with the book but is it not believe of 1.2 billion Muslims that rejecting even one prophet will make you Kafir?

According to you the coming Messiah or Jesus (A.S) will be a Prophet. We say Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (A.S) is also a Prophet. The same prophet whom Hadhrat Muhammad (SAW) fortold. Hence rejecting a Prophet of God is also a Kafir.

Again my above two replies should be sufficient for this quoted statement.

I am sure you have read the book and knowledge of Islam. Christians rejected the prophethood of Holy Prophets SAW as you rejected the prophethood of Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (A.S). I am sure we can add more into this topic but wont be necessary.

So what are you trying to proove by quoting this?

If you read the few lines ahead after the quoting extract you will see the answer as well in the same book.

Indeed read few lines ahead to read the answer.

You cannot create a state within a state with Islamic Laws with Non-Islamic Goverment. This is called Gaddaari. Goverment Law always supercedes Religious Laws.

129

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

JAZAKALLAH tansen.

130

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

lol

I never included the name of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in the Kalima.

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

rooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooofl

I love this forum, too.

These bunch of jokers really entertain me

131

insanity is setting in. :)

132

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

Aramis sahiba you never say jazakallah to me :( ...I am sure I do reply your posts!!!

133

d-tox..ed

Read clearly what the son of your holy prophet believed was the meaning of the Kalima. Also please acknowledge the fact that Mirza Mahmood Ahmad who "took over" from his father(your holy prophet) and claimed to be the promised reformer of Islam re-affirmed:

“The fool does not realise that ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ was put in the Kalima because he is the crowning head of the prophets and the Khatam-un-nabiyyin. By mentioning his name all other prophets are implicitly included. There is no need to mention the name of everyone separately. Admittedly, the coming of the Promised Messiah has created one difference, and that is that before his coming the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ included (besides the Holy Prophet) only the prophets before the Holy Prophet Muhammad, but after the coming of the Promised Messiah one more prophet was added to the significance of these words. … In other words, the same Kalima is still to be used for admission into Islam, the difference merely being that the coming of the Promised Messiah has added one more messenger to the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’.”

Unless my knowledge and comprehension of the English language is exceptionally poor, the writer of the above passage is stating that the when Ahmadis repeat the Kalima they believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is implicitly included when they say ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’. Does this not confirm the accusation that when Ahmadis say the Kalima they may use the same words as all other Muslims but they believe it to mean something quite different?

Please also note that this book is published on your official website!!
www.alislam.org/urdu/pdf/Kalma-tul-Fasal.pdf

Timepass - September 2013
134

Indeed I would not disagree with you that your knowledge and understanding and limitation on the deduction analysis and analysis of writing is very poor. You fail to understand what the writer is trying to say when he says “By mentioning his name all other prophets are implicitly included.” Where does he state explicitly Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (A.S) only? What I understand from the statement is that he may be trying to say that when you recite Kalima and say Muhammad ur rasoolullah you also affirm that you also believe in all the Prophets who were before Holy Prophet SAW and after.

The faith was not originated by this writer or this book is not the basis of Jamaat Ahmadiyya. Hence in last I would say that I have made my points and told you that we recite the same Kalima as any Muslim does. I dont have anything further to add to this subject.

You are most welcome to believe whatever you want to but you will be considered ignorant. How can you come and tell me that for example that I am eating apple when I am actualy eating orange? Ignorance!

P.S - I asked you to give me the page number of the extract but you never gave that. How do you expect the readers to read when you dont provide the full reference? Too late now!

135

Quote:

"What I understand from the statement is that he may be trying to say that when you recite Kalima and say Muhammad ur rasoolullah you also affirm that you also believe in all the Prophets who were before Holy Prophet SAW and after."

So you can implicitly include any person you wish who you think may be a Prophet and that in no way alters the meaning of the Kalima?
What if a Bahai repeated the kalima and repeated the abusrdity of the Ahmadis that Bahaiullah acknowledged the prophet Muhammad pbuh as a prophet and must therefore also implicitly be included we say Muhammad ur rasoolullah?
Do you think that Bahai and your average Muslim repeating the Kalima mean the same thing? I think not!!

136

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

In addition to the above I would like to give a bit of context of when Mirza Bashir Ahmad made this claim. He was answering the allegation:

If Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet just as the Holy Prophet Muhammad was a prophet, then why don't his followers incorporate his name into the Kalima?

His reply was that there was no need because when Ahmadis repeat the Kalima they believe it also includes Mirza Ghulam Ahmad even though the words they recite are the exact same as those that other muslims recite.
In short do Ahmadis not believe that the Kalima means something different to what other muslims believe even though the words are the same? If that's not a change in meaning then please tell us what is!!!

137

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

hahahaha...do u even read what i said in my post above?

End of discussion on this topic from my side. Because you are not even reading my reply. Go and watch the videos and reply me from videos and the arguments I mentioned. Moderators are very keen on viewing this closly hence I would suggest keep on the topic precisly and make a reply. They dont like discussions going round circles and I dont want my thread closing because of you.

138

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

Ashhado Allaailaaha illalla o wahdahoo laashareekala hoo wa ashadoo anna Muhammadan Abdohu warasoosoolo…

Now see the following video: Experts taken explictly from your favourite Dr Israr sb and guess what it is specially made for you Tansen.

139

Re: Allegations Against Ahmediyya

One question from Ahmedis:

Can a non-ahmedi participate in namaz-e-jinaza of a deceased ahmedi person?

Just to clarify a confusion.

140

I have reproduced an extract from the book Truth About The Split by Mirza Mahmood Ahmad, son of the holy prophet of Ahmadis and also prophesied by his father and “Prophet” Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Before d-tox..ed starts claiming that Ahmadiyya is not defined by a single book it is worthy of pointing out that all Ahmadi Khalifas have re-affirmed the beliefs of Mirza Mahmood Ahmad. Secondly his son claims in the extract below that his father Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also held these same views and produces proof of this , or at least so he claims.

"Regarding the main subject of my article, I wrote that as we believed the Promised Messiahas to be one of the Prophets of God, we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims. It is true we did not consider them to be kafir billah, (deniers of God), but how could we doubt that, they were kafir-bil-ma’mur (deniers of a God’s Messenger)? Those who say that they regarded Mirza Sahib as a righteous person and so did not deserve to be called kuffar, ought to consider whether a righteous person ever spoke an untruth. If Mirza Sahibas, was indeed a righteous person, what possible objection could there be to their subscribing to his claim.
After this, the article proceeded to quote passages from the writings of the Promised Messiahas to show that he regarded his deniers as kuffar. Some of the passages, quoted in the article, are reproduced here in brief: To the apostate Abdul Hakim of Patiala, he wrote: “At any rate, when the great God has revealed to me that every body whom my Call has reached and who has failed to
accept my claim, is not a Muslim, and is liable to account before God, how can I at the instance of one individual, whose heart is steeped in a thousand darknesses, ignore the command of God. It is easier to cut off such a one from my Community. Accordingly from this date I hereby exclude you from the Community of my followers.” **Following this, I proceeded to explain the purport of the above passage in the following words. "The above words apply not merely to those who take an active part in denouncing the Promised Messiahas; but every person who fails to accept him is not a Muslim. **Further on, I explained, in the words of the Promised Messiahas himself, the meaning he attached to the expression “reaching of Call.” …
After this, I went on to prove from the writings of the Promised Messiahas that those who did not explicitly style the Promised Messiahas as a kafir but nor did they accept his claim, were to be classed with those who styled him as a kafir; so also were those who only waited for fuller information and put off entering into his Bai‘at. Then in my own words. I summarised the purport of the quotations as follows:“Thus, according to these quotations, not only are those deemed to be kuffar, who openly style the Promised Messiahas as kafir, and those who although
they do not style him thus, decline still to accept his claim, but even those who, in their hearts, believe the Promised Messiahas to be true, and do not even deny him with their tongues, but hesitate to enter into his Bai‘at, have here been adjudged to be kuffar." After this, some more quotations were given in support of the main contention, and the weakness implicit in the overture for friendship was exposed, and the Promised Messiah’s as fatwa (pronouncement) which forbade Ahmadis to pray behind non-Ahmadi Imams was quoted. And lastly, it was argued from a verse of the Holy Quran that such people as had failed to recognise the Promised Messiahas as a Rasul even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues, were yet veritable kuffar.”

This book can be read here at the official Ahmadi website:
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Truth-about-the-Split.pdf

There are also numerous other passages in this book which I will high light when time permits.

MOHABAT HO CHUKI PURI........
MOHABAT HO CHUKI PURI........