Destiny of a false prophet?

Society Religion & Philosophy
101

>Why are we always referred to as the ummat of Muhammad (pbuh) if there is supposed to come another prophet after Muhammad (pbuh)?

  • Who told you there can not be a prophet from within the Ummat of an old prophet?

--==: Ummati Prophet in Koran:

The concept of a Prophet & Messenger coming from within the Ummah of another one, without bringing a new law, is not new. Such prophets had come in the Ummah of prophet Moses as well, so has been stated in the Koran. "Surely, we sent down the Torah wherein was guidance and light. By it did the Prophets, who were obedient to us, judge for the Jews, as did the godly people and those learned in the Law, because they were required to preserve the Book of Allah, and because they were guardians over it." (5:45)

You next question will naturally be, that where does it state such prophethood within the Ummah of prophet Mohammad.

It says in the Koran: "Whoso obeyeth Allah and the messenger, they are with those unto whom Allah hath shown favour, of the prophets and the saints and the martyrs and the righteous. The best of company are they! That is bounty from Allah, and Allah sufficeth as Knower." (Koran, 4:69,70) Thus out of the four gifts promissed by Allah to the Ummat of prophet Mohammad, one is prophethood.

God has promissed the Ummah of prophet Mohammad that he will not leave them alone in times of hardship, but will continue to send Messengers who can guide them: "It is not (the purpose) of Allah to leave you in your present state till He shall separate the wicked from the good. And it is not (the purpose of) Allah to let you know the Unseen. But Allah chooseth of His messengers whom He will, (to receive knowledge thereof). So believe in Allah and His messengers. If ye believe and ward off (evil), yours will be a vast reward." (Koran, 3:179)

God has also told prophet Mohammad to make the same promise to his Ummah as above: "And announce unto the believers the good tidings that they will have great bounty from Allah." (Koran, 33:47) What will this great bounty be, has been explained in the verse I quoted above, in the words, "Whoso obeyeth Allah and the messenger, they are with those unto whom Allah hath shown favour, of the prophets and the saints and the martyrs and the righteous. The best of company are they! That is bounty from Allah, and Allah sufficeth as Knower." (Koran, 4:69,70)

If you still think Islam does not allow a prophet within the Ummat, then perhaps you will listen to your own scholar, Molana Qasim Nanotvi, the founder of the Deoband movement.

"Ba'd Zamana-e-Nabawi (Sal'am) bhi koi nabi paida ho to phir bhee Khatamiyyat-e-Mohammadi main kuch farq na aye ga." (TehzeerunNas, Page 28)

102

Originally posted by Paaga| |nsaan: *

- When I talked about the bans I referred to the penal code of Pakistan. If Ahmedis have no point, how do you justify the ban?

Because simple people like me, who haven't studied Islam that much, who mostly know the basic things, basic history, someone who hasn't studied the Arabic language that much, could get caught up in those theories without enough knowledge of his own. Points can be made out of anything. Words can be twisted, aya's can be interpreted in so many ways, and if someone doesn't have that much knowledge of these things, it's easy to persuade that person with nice words.
I'm not saying it's oké to kill, I'm not one to judge that. But I do understand why the penal code excists.

Thats absurd, I quoted your own scholars and Imams from Islam, then if I am Kafir, you all are the same for the same reasons.

Dear brother, nobody called you a Kafir because of that language, but because of believe in Mirza sahib's claim to prophecy.

You tell them that you follow Jesus as well. You tell them them that the original teachings of Jesus are followed by you and what they believe in is not what Jesus said!!! That is exactly we Ahmedis say to you about prophet Mohammad. There is no difference. How will you like it if they ban you in the US for calling Hazrat Esa a prophet?

But I'm not calling myself Chistian now, am I? Why would US ban me for my own religion, which is Islam, not Christianity.

Unlike Ludhianvi,the liar, yells you, we do not beliebe that Mirza Saheb is the last prophet to mankind.

I don't think I've said that you believe Mirza the Arch-Liar Sahib is the last prophet. But that's not the point. Last or not, there is just not supposed to be another prophet after Muhammad (pbuh).

Look at the thread I have started about the sayings of the Koran on the prophet within the Ummah. You will notice that according to the Koran, Allah will continue to choose Messengers from among humans forever.

That's your way of looking at it. By throwing aya's in someones face who is not very familiar withthe meanings of Arabic language, you can easily proove your point.
That's why we have the Ahadith. NOt only to show us how to pay zakaat, or pray or all those other basic important things, but also they tell us that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is indeed the last prophet. And don't tell me now that you're supposed to only rely on Quran, because you also pray the same way I do, and where do you get the information to do proper salaat, also from Ahadith so don't say we shouldn't rely on them.

103

>someone who hasn't studied the Arabic language that much, could get caught up in those theories without enough knowledge of his own.

  • How does this justifiy that you ban the activities of one sect, and hang them if they write the name of the Prophet on their belongings? All the sects of Islam try to persuade each other and consider each other false, why does the penal code not ban all the sects from preaching, praying or being Muslims?

*> Points can be made out of anything. Words can be twisted *

  • Like Ludhianvi Saheb lied in all those instances I addressed to in my earlier posts. Why are then the Deobandis also not banned??

I have already told you what the Ahle Sunnat scholars think of Deobandis:

"In these times, just one group of Wahabiyya Deobandiyya has caused more harm to Islam, then all false sects joined together. Although this sect has left Islam, this sect is posing itself Sunni and Hanafi, and innocent Sunni Hanafi brothers get decieved by them, and by considering them of the same school of thought as themselves, get trapped in their deception techniques."

The above Fatwa accuses you of the same thing as you accuse the Ahmedis of. Then if there's a new law to ban the activities of Deobandis, will you also agree to it??

>But I'm not calling myself Chistian now, am I? Why would US ban me for my own religion, which is Islam, not Christianity.

  • No you do not call yourself a Christian, but ask your parents or your Molvi Saab, they will all tell you that it is an Islamic belief that all prophets Including prophet Jesus were Muslims. Why should the US not ban you for stealing their prophet??

>That's your way of looking at it. By throwing aya's in someones face who is not very familiar withthe meanings of Arabic language, you can easily proove your point.

  • If you are not familiar with the Arabic language, then why do you see one mistranslated verse and consider it enough to believe there can be no further prophets? If the Molvis have the right to teach their verse to all the people of Pakistan who do not know the Arabic language, then why shouldn't the Ahmedis be giventhe right to teach their verses to the same people too?

And no, there is no such hadith that states there will be no prophet any more. There's a discussion going on about three of them in another thread.

104

Originally posted by Paaga| |nsaan:

How does this justifiy that you ban the activities of one sect, and hang them if they write the name of the Prophet on their belongings? All the sects of Islam try to persuade each other and consider each other false, why does the penal code not ban all the sects from preaching, praying or being Muslims?

It's sad they all fight this way. But I guess they didn't get banned because they all believe in Muhammad (pbuh) to be the last prophet. That's the big difference I think. Maybe they should also ban the Ulema's that only preach hatred, the accident of few days ago, of Shia's being killed by Sunni's, is sadly one of the concequences of such preaches. They all want to be right so much, they forget they are all followers of Muhammad (pbuh) the last prophet of Allah, despite their own little differences. But there is a gap between all these Islamic sects and Ahmadies, created by the unbelieve of Ahmadies that Mohammed (pbuh) is indeed the last prophet of Allah.

The above Fatwa accuses you of the same thing as you accuse the Ahmedis of. Then if there's a new law to ban the activities of Deobandis, will you also agree to it??

If they would only spread hatred and tell people to kill those who don't agree with them, then yes, I would agree to it. In the first place I'm a muslim, follower of Muhammad (pbuh) not blindly follower of one group.
These groups are all created by just humans and humans can make mistakes.
Not all Deobandis, or Sunni's or Barelvi's whatever run after all Maulana's. Why isn't my family murdered yet by our Sunni friends here (some of them happen to be super religious) or by our Barelvi friends, or the other groups, why haven't any of them forbidden us to enter their homes or the other way around? We're all living here in peace and have a great time when we are together.

No you do not call yourself a Christian, but ask your parents or your Molvi Saab, they will all tell you that it is an Islamic belief that all prophets Including prophet Jesus were Muslims. Why should the US not ban you for stealing their prophet??

I don't think people are that much offended by Ahmadies 'stealing' their prophets, including Muhammed (pbuh), I think they are more offended to the fact that you call yourself muslims while obviously you have a different believe compared to all the sects together; that Muhammad (pbuh) wasn't the finallity of prophethood.

Speaking for myself, I personally wouldn't mind if you would 'steal' Moesa (pbuh) or Iesa (pbuh) or Muhammad (pbuh), and then bring in another 'new prophet' , but the fact that you then call yourselves muslims too while obviously you're not. You have this new religion. As far as I know, all the different Islamic groups are equal in believing this, that Muhammad (pbuh) is the last prophet of Allah. So they are all muslims despite their differences. But Ahmadies can't fall in the same category because they don't believe in one of the important things in Islam, the finallety of prophethood. So I would have no problem with your belief, if you would change it's name, naturally I still wouldn't approve, but that's just my opinion, but I wouldn't have such an issue with it either, since it's not implying to be my religion then if it has a different name.

If you are not familiar with the Arabic language, then why do you see one mistranslated verse and consider it enough to believe there can be no further prophets?

Because it's supported by Ahadith. In your thread also somebody pointed out few Ahadith that support the finallety of prophethood.
If Ahadith are a good enough guide to show us how to do salaat and pay zakaat and stuff, then why aren't they as good a guide in teaching us the finallety of prophethood?

And no, there is no such hadith that states there will be no prophet any more.

What about the Ahadith someone mentioned in your own thread?

105

[quote]
I don't think people are that much offended by Ahmadies 'stealing' their prophets, including Muhammed (pbuh), I think they are more offended to the fact that you call yourself muslims while obviously you have a different believe compared to all the sects together; that Muhammad (pbuh) wasn't the finallity of prophethood.

Speaking for myself, I personally wouldn't mind if you would 'steal' Moesa (pbuh) or Iesa (pbuh) or Muhammad (pbuh), and then bring in another 'new prophet' , but the fact that you then call yourselves muslims too while obviously you're not. You have this new religion. As far as I know, all the different Islamic groups are equal in believing this, that Muhammad (pbuh) is the last prophet of Allah. So they are all muslims despite their differences. But Ahmadies can't fall in the same category because they don't believe in one of the important things in Islam, the finallety of prophethood. So I would have no problem with your belief, if you would change it's name, naturally I still wouldn't approve, but that's just my opinion, but I wouldn't have such an issue with it either, since it's not implying to be my religion then if it has a different name.

If you are not familiar with the Arabic language, then why do you see one mistranslated verse and consider it enough to believe there can be no further prophets?

[/quote]

Well What makes u think we have new religion? Who gave u the authority to call us Non Muslim? Who told you that we do not believe in finality of prophet (saw)?

Lastly if you are soo good in ARABIC terms and meaning. Show me the meaning of KHATAMUNABIYYEN that says. OLD prophet can come and NEW one cant.............. In any lughet of arabic show me this meaning.
Show me where its written in Holy Quran that Jesus (hazret Isa (as)) will come down to earth in later days with his physical body.

Proove me all this i accept in what ever u beleive in.

106

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by insha_ji: *

Well What makes u think we have new religion? Who gave u the authority to call us Non Muslim? Who told you that we do not believe in finality of prophet (saw)?

Lastly if you are soo good in ARABIC terms and meaning. Show me the meaning of KHATAMUNABIYYEN that says. OLD prophet can come and NEW one cant.............. In any lughet of arabic show me this meaning.
Show me where its written in Holy Quran that Jesus (hazret Isa (as)) will come down to earth in later days with his physical body.

Proove me all this i accept in what ever u beleive in.
[/QUOTE]

I never said i'm 'soo good' in ARABIC terms and meaning. I only know how to read Quran. I've only recently began to learn Arabic gramar and terms to better understand Quran for myself. I never said I'm an expert. But the information so far I've had from my parents, from books and also some opinoins here on the board only support my belief for me.

And please don't drag me in a new discussion about the meaning of KHATAMUNABIYYEN and all that stuff about law-bearing and non-law-bearing prophets.

107

[QUOTE]
And please don't drag me in a new discussion about the meaning of KHATAMUNABIYYEN and all that stuff about law-bearing and non-law-bearing prophets.
[/QUOTE]

im not gonna drag u in to that discussion. All im saying provide me the meaning of Khatamunbaiyyen that says. OLD prophet can come and NEW one cant. plus u still have to answer my other questions...

Well What makes u think we have new religion? Who gave u the authority to call us Non Muslim? Who told you that we do not believe in finality of prophet (saw)?

................ beside you can do better then what u just replied.................

108

There's not much left to quarrel over, but:

>But I guess they didn't get banned because they all believe in Muhammad (pbuh) to be the last prophet.
>I think they are more offended to the fact that you call yourself muslims while obviously you have a different believe compared to all the sects together; that Muhammad (pbuh) wasn't the finallity of prophethood.
>But Ahmadies can't fall in the same category because they don't believe in one of the important things in Islam, the finallety of prophethood.

  • Where does it state that those who do not believe in the Finality of Prophethood become Kafir? It has been clearly stated in the Koran: "Say not to anyone who offers you a salutation: "Thou art none of a believer!" (Koran 4:94) If you transgress the teachings of the Koran, it is you who are Kafir and not the Ahmedis.

    The Koran uses the term, 'Seal of Prophets', and all Ahmedis declare to believe in prophet Mohammad as the Seal of Prophets, at the time when they enter the community, and every year again and again throughout their lives. How can you say that we do not believe in Prophet Mohammad as Khatamun Nabiyyin?

I have quoted for you, the saying of the founder of the Deoband movement, and you saw that he possesses the same views on the term 'Seal of Prophets' as we Ahmedis do. So if we are Kafir then Molana Qasim Nanotvi and all the Deobandis who are his followers including you are also Kafir.

>If they would only spread hatred and tell people to kill those who don't agree with them, then yes, I would agree to (the ban).

  • Molana Ludhainvi, whom you so want to defend, and whom you believe can never tell a lie, he himself has given a Fatwa of the killing of the Ahmedis. If you have read his books against ahmedis, one of them is called Qadianio aur Doosray Kafiro Ke Darmyaan Fark. On page 8 & 9 of the book, you will see what I am talking about. Many of his followers do that in Pakistan often. Ahmedis have never ever made such a Fatwa against anyone. Then who should be banned, the Ahmedis or Ludhianvi?

>Because it's supported by Ahadith. In your thread also somebody pointed out few Ahadith that support the finallety of prophethood.

  • Dear Sadya, first you said that Mirza Saheb was a liar because he added to the Koran. Then when it was established that he did not do that, you said he is a liar because he does not believe in Finality of Prophethood as written in the Koran. When I opened a thread about it, and asked you people to discuss the issue with me in the light of the Koran, you have no reply, and you want me to now come to Ahadith. How do I know that if I spend hours and hours and write a new thread about Ahadith, you will come up with some other issue?

However, three of the Ahadith have been dicussed between me and perplexing in the thread 'So Who Exactly Was Mirza', on the last page. However, I will very very soon start a new thread and comment on each of the ahadith one by one. Then you will see that the Hadith not only rejects the idea that there can not be a Prophet, but infact it foretells the coming of a Prophet.

109

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Paaga| |nsaan: *

Where does it state that those who do not believe in the Finality of Prophethood become Kafir?

From what I understand of what Kafir means, isn’t that someone to whom the teachings of Islam are opened and he still rejects the Truth even after hearing it?
As far as I know, isn’t the basic believe of Islam that Allah is one and Mohammed (pbuh) is his messenger and the last prophet (lawbearing or nonlawbearing!) and don’t all muslims believe in the second coming of Iesa (pbuh) and the coming of Imam Mehdi?
So if you take Mirza sahib to be a prophet or Jesus (pbuh), you’re not a muslim anymore and he obviously wasn’t Imam Mehdi either. ( or Krishna the God of Hindus, which Mirza probably only claimed to be because he was in India where the majority is Hindu and maybe wanted to gain support from that direction too?)
Hasn’t Muhammad (pbuh) said that after him there won’t be any prophets but there will be caliephs to lead us? Why would he say that there would come only caliephs to lead us?

It has been clearly stated in the Koran: "Say not to anyone who offers you a salutation: “Thou art none of a believer!” (Koran 4:94) If you transgress the teachings of the Koran, it is you who are Kafir and not the Ahmedis.

Not all Qadiani’s are Kafir, a lot of them don’t know the exact teachings. I’ve read many times on internet as well as in magazines stories from people who were Qadiani first, but had no idea about the true nature of Mirza sahib or his claims. I’m not one to judge which Qadiani is a Kafir and which not, that is up to Allah. ( I also wonder about the death penalty on someone who becomes Mirzai, if you kill such person for becoming one, then you stop that person from possibly repenting on that sin and returning to Islam)
However, in all honestly, some of the claims do seem exaggerated, you made that clear, but that does not take away the rest of the bad things he indeed has done!

The Koran uses the term, ‘Seal of Prophets’, and all Ahmedis declare to believe in prophet Mohammad as the Seal of Prophets, at the time when they enter the community, and every year again and again throughout their lives. How can you say that we do not believe in Prophet Mohammad as Khatamun Nabiyyin?

From what I’ve so far understood about Qadianism, is that Mirza mirrored himself to Mohammed (pbuh) and hasn’t he somewhere stated he was the better reincarnation or something I don’t know, of Muhammad (pbuh)? Isn’t it true that when true Qadiani’s recite the first kalima, when they say that Muhammad (pbuh) is the messenger of Allah, they think of Mirza? I’ve read that several times. Enlighten me on that one, will you?

And btw, Musailma (spelling?) also did believe in Muhammad (pbuh) as a prophet and did recite the kalima too!

Khatamun Nabiyyin is the Seal of the Prophets isn’t it? When a document is sealed, it’s sealed because nothing left to add. And Muhammad (pbuh) said that there would be no more prophets after him but caliephs to lead us. For me, that and the other authentic Ahadith are enough to believe that. And if there are Ahadith accepted who tellyou how to pay zakaat for example, then why aren’t the ones accepted where Muhammad (pbuh) stated to be the last of the prophets, they are both authentic.

If you have read his books against ahmedis, one of them is called Qadianio aur Doosray Kafiro Ke Darmyaan Fark.

I haven’t read other books by Maulana Ludhianvi sahib. Now you’ve recommended it, I’ll see if I can get it.

Many of his followers do that in Pakistan often. Ahmedis have never ever made such a Fatwa against anyone. Then who should be banned, the Ahmedis or Ludhianvi?

Apparently, nowadays it seems to be a fashion to make fatwa’s. The Qadiani’s might not have made fatwa’s, but I’ve read several curses and bad languages that the founder of Qadiani’s has used.

Take a look on this site: Ethics and Morality
(if you can’t get it, go to the main page first by leaving out the words abuse) I was so shocked to see some pages of one of Mirza’s books, which were filled with words like la’nat, he was counting the number of times he wrote that (what for??) la’nat 1, la’nat 2, etc. etc. What was that for??

  • Dear Sadya, first you said that Mirza Saheb was a liar because he added to the Koran.

Dear brother Pagal Insaan, I never said that that was the ONLY reason he was a liar. What puzzled me, was if he really had made such additions, how anyone could run after him, while that would have been a more obvious sin, even simple people like me, who don’t know Arabic grammar and haven’t studied many aspects of Islam yet, could see through.

Then when it was established that he did not do that, you said he is a liar because he does not believe in Finality of Prophethood as written in the Koran.

You haven’t established that he never made additions, you established that the two points from that booklet were wrong. (which I admit was shocking, because I like to believe in facts versus facts). There are many sins Mirza sahib has commited, I never said that addition in Surah’s was the ONLY one. As I read on about this guy, I stumble on many more strange facts, as you clear some of them up, there come many more!

When I opened a thread about it, and asked you people to discuss the issue with me in the light of the Koran, you have no reply,

There are replies, but you have long ago rejected that. You know already the other meaning, the aya you translate and explain are according to your own view. You have already rejected the true view, so what can one reply? you think the view Mirza’s teachings gave you are better than of Muhammad (pbuh)!

and you want me to now come to Ahadith. How do I know that if I spend hours and hours and write a new thread about Ahadith, you will come up with some other issue?

Lame excuse because you know that there are authentic Ahadith which tell us that there would be absolutely no prophet law bearing or non-lawbearing after Muhammad (pbuh). You will reject those and give your reasonings for that and that’s it.

110

Sadya none of what u have wrote make any sense wrather they are all marely alligations. Which are put forth on every prophet of his time. All is acusation. Your understanding is wrong about Ahmadiyyat. You are influenced by our opponents thats all. You dont even know a thing aobut Ahmadiyyet. The claims u make the sites u give the books u reffer to all are just as if you go to a christain website and trying to find islam there. YOU cant find ahmadiyyet like that. Ahmadiyet will stay the same as pure no matter what people blame or say. You are not the judge. You cant see though our hearts mind and soul BUT u claim to do so. I wonder how. When we say kalima we think of Mirza sahib Inna lillahe wainna elehe rajeoon. I donno what people think when they accuse others. I gues u didnt read my post earlier..

I wil repeat again.. its so true on people as such who have thinking like yours...

Ilama shabibi writes the 11th century mujadid.

If Holy Prophet (saw) is sent back again to the world and see the condition of muslims he would suffer from there hands As he sufferd from the hands of Qureish of Macca. Holy Prophet (saw) will say by GOD this is not the islam that i follow that these muslims follow. SO TRUE on people as such thinking of yours.

111

Sadya,

You're insisting on a lot of things which I've already shown you to be against the Koran.

--== On Declaration of *Kufr* ==--

>From what I understand of what Kafir means, isn't that someone to whom the teachings of Islam are opened and he still rejects the Truth even after hearing it?

1- Ahmedis believe in all the teachings of Islam, however they associate a different meaning to some of them to what is given by you. This is known as Taweel, about which Imam Razi has clearly stated: ** ﻞﻳﻭﺎﺘﻟﺍ ﻞﻫﺍ ﺮﻔﮑﺗ ﺎﻟ ﻭ . i.e. *The people of *Taweel are not *Kafir*. (Tafseerul Kabeer Volume 1 Page 172). This is a decisive and undeniable ruling. If you do not believe in it, you can not be a Deobandi.

2- Who has given YOU the right to decide which meaning is true? On the contrary, God has clearly stated, "Thus fair-seeming unto every community We have made their work. Then unto their Lord is their return; And HE will inform them of what they used to do." (Koran, 6:108) As far as I know, you are not God. So you have a right to opinion, but no right to make declarations of Kufr. I will not argue with you about this any more until you have some proof from the Koran to support the right you have claimed.

>Not all Qadiani's are Kafir, a lot of them don't know the exact teachings.

  • You said this in reply to the clear statment of God: "Say not to anyone who offers you a salutation: "Thou art none of a believer!" (Koran 4:94) This does not mention or support anything you said. I believe in the Koran and not in Molvis, so I can not believe anything which is against the Koran, therefore I do not wish to continue this discussion until you prove your point from the Koran.

>I've read many times on internet as well as in magazines stories from people who were Qadiani first, but had no idea about the true nature of Mirza sahib or his claims.

  • Have you not read any independant sources on the number of Ahmedis in the world? Almost all of them, were Muslims before, because they had no idea about the stupid teachings of the Molvis. When they found out, they turned to Ahmadiyyat, the true Islam. You can not compare a few tens of people who go your way, to Hundreds of Thousands of people who go our way!

>Hasn't Muhammad (pbuh) said that after him there won't be any prophets but there will be caliephs to lead us? Why would he say that there would come only caliephs to lead us?

  • There is a detailed discussion going on about that Hadith in the thread I mentioned to you. I can not argue about it with you seperately because you do not have a knowledge of Arabic grammar required for you to argue back. So read the discussion I told you about.

--== Reflection of prophet Mohammad

>hasn't he somewhere stated he was the better reincarnation or something I don't know, of Muhammad (pbuh)?

  • From Sunni scholars I will quote Shah Walilullah:

"** ﻢﻠﺳﻭ ﻪﻴﻠﻋ ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻲﻠﺻ ﻦﻴﻠﺳﺮﻤﻟﺍ ﺪﻴﺳ ﺭﺍﻮﻧﺍ ﻪﻴﻓ ﺲﮑﻌﻨﻳ ﻥﺍ ﻪﻟ ﻖﺣ
ﻪﻣﺎﻟﺍ ﻦﻣﺍ ﺪﺣﺍﻭ ﻥﺎﮐ ﺽﺭﺎﻟﺍ ﻲﻓ ﻝﺰﻧ ﺍﺯﺍ ﻪﻧﺍ ﻪﻣﺎﻋ ﻢﻋ ﺰﻳ ﻭ
ﻪﻨﻣ ﻪﺨﺴﺘﻨﻣ ﻪﺨﺴﻧ ﻭ ﻱﺪﻤﺤﻤﻟﺍ ﻊﻣﺎﺠﻟﺍ ﻢﺳ ﺎﻠﻟ ﻉﺮﺷ ﻮﻫ ﻞﺑ ﺎﻠﮐ
ﻪﻣﺎﻟﺍ ﻦﻣ ﺪﺣﺍ ﻦﻴﺑ ﻭ ﻪﻨﻴﺑ ﻥﺎﺘﺸﻔ **

i.e. It is the right of the promissed reformer, that he has a reflection of the Noor of Sayyadul Mursileen, on whom be pace. The commoners think that when he will descend, his status will only be of an Ummati. This is not true, He will be the explanation of the Ism e Jaame' Mohammad, and a true copy of it. (Alkhairul Katheer, Page 73)

  • From the Shia scholars I will quote Imam Baqir who is quoted to say about the promissed Mehdi:

** ﻭ ﻢﻴﻫﺍﺮﺑﺍ ﻲﻟﺍ ﺮﻈﻨﻳ ﻥﺍﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﻦﻣﻭ ﺎﻟﺍ ﻕﺎﻠﺨﻟﺍ ﺮﺸﻌﻣ ﺎﻳ ﻝﻮﻘﻳ
ﻥﺍﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﻦﻣﻭ ﺎﻟﺍ . ﻞﻴﻋﺎﻤﺳﺍ ﻭ ﻢﻴﻫﺍﺮﺑﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺎﻧﺍ ﺎﻬﻓ ﻞﻴﻋﺎﻤﺳﺍ
ﻥﺍﺩﺍﺭﺍ ﻦﻣﻭ ﺎﻟﺍ .ﻊﺷﻮﻳ ﻭ ﻲﺳﻮﻣ ﺍﺯﺎﻧﺍ ﺎﻬﻓ ﻊﺷﻮﻳ ﻭ ﻲﺳﻮﻣ ﻲﻟﺍ ﺮﻈﻨﻳ
ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻲﻠﺻ ﺪﻤﺤﻣ ﺍﺯﺎﻧﺍ ﺎﻬﻓ ﻦﻴﻨﻣﻮﻤﻟﺍ ﺮﻴﻣﺍ ﻭ ﺪﻤﺤﻣ ﻲﻟﺍ ﺮﻈﻨﻳ
ﻦﻴﻨﻣﻮﻤﻟﺍ ﺮﻴﻣﺍ ﻭ ﻢﻠﺳﻭ ﻪﻴﻠﻋ **

i.e. When the promissed Mehdi will come, he will announce, 'O people, If any of you wants to see Ibraheem and Ismaeel, hear that I am Abraham and Ismael. If any of you wants to See Musa and Yousha', hear that I am Musa and Yousha'. If any of you wants to see Mohammad and Amirul Momineen (Ali), hear that I am Mohammad, on whom be peace, and Amirul Momineen. (Bahaarul Anwaar, Volume 13 Page 202)

  • These people said these things even before Mirza Saheb was born. You can not say that Mirza Saheb bribed them to say this. These are among the most renouned scholars of religion, and you have seen that they believed that the Promissed Messiah will be a reflection of Prophet Mohammad. If having such a belief makes you a Kafir, then this will mean all Shias and all Sunnis are Kafir.
112

--== The case of the changed *Kalima* ==--

>Isn't it true that when true Qadiani's recite the first kalima, when they say that Muhammad (pbuh) is the messenger of Allah, they think of Mirza?

  • There is a Hadith narrated by Osama Bin Zaid, about when he killed a man after he had recited the Kalima. He says: "The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Did he profess" There is no god but Allah," and even then you killed him? I said: Messenger of Allah, he made a profession of it out of the fear of the weapon. He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Did you tear his heart in order to find out whether it had professed or not? And he went on repeating it to me till I wished I had embraced Islam that day." (Muslim, 1:176)

If the blessed companions of prophet Mohammad were not allowed to make judgments on the feelings of the heart, who are you to make such a claim? This is utter blasphemy. Kindly refrain from making such claims.

I am an Ahmedi and I read the Kalima many many times every day, and I swear to God, whose curse is on the liars, that every single time I did that, the only name on my tongue and in my heart was prophet Mohammad, on whom be peace, and blessings of Allah. Can you or Ludhianvi Saheb swear to God that I don't? Its an easy way to decide.

However, let me show you a real change in Kalima:

In Risala AlImdad, the 8th Safar 1336 Hijri Issue, Molana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, the renouned Deobandi scholar has written the following Kalima on page 34:

ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻝﻮﺳﺭ ﻲﻠﻋ ﻑﺮﺷﺍ

This, my dear sister, is not a feeling of the heart, but words written in a book. So, how can you justify this? And this is a popular quote among all the Barelvis, who use it to justify that Deobandis are Kafir and should be killed. And they don't just say it, they do it. Molana Ludhianvi was killed by Barelvis himself. Can you let them justify his killing, or even calling Deobandis Kafir, because of the above quote?

You are Deobandi and you know this Kalima quoted above is not yours. If I post everywhere on this forum that it is and you say it in your heart, How will you feel?

>Khatamun Nabiyyin is the Seal of the Prophets isn't it? When a document is sealed, it's sealed because nothing left to add.

  • I have told you that founder of Deobandiya Movement himself belioeved in the same meaning of the Seal as we Ahmedis believe! So he is also a Kafir according to you? If you have any furrther questions on the meaning of Seal, ask them in the appropriate thread I have started for this discussion. I will not answer any questions about it on here.

>I've read several curses and bad languages that the founder of Qadiani's has used.

  • I already replied in detail you one of the allegations of bad languages, and also gave you some examples of such language used by renouned and honored scholars of Islam. You have completely ignored that.

If you want me to answer to individual allegations against Mirza Saheb in the given article (which I have already read a lot of times), then start new threads for each of those allegations one by one. If you flood me with threads I will not be able to reply properly.

p.s. La'nat is not a bad word. It is present in Islamic scriptures. Start a new thread if you want proofs.

*>The aya you translate and explain are according to your own view. *

  • I do not get money to waste my time posting Ayahs on here just for the purpose of 'misguiding' you. I believe in God as much as you do, and I also consider myself answerable to him. I made my opinion after reading those Ayahs, that is why I have come up with them. You have made your opinion BEFORE reading you Ayahs so you will reject all of them. You have already made a decision.

If you have any more questions on any of those Ayah, kindly post them in the appropriate thread.

113

Allright then, Pagal Insaan, do me one last favor then, is there an online copy of Mirza's full writings, PROPERLY translated in English? I want to see for myself what all that fuss is about. But I've read that only Mirza's first work is most often quoted and translated. Also heard that 'bad' parts are taken out. If there excists a FULL translation in English online, from an independant source, I would like to see for myself. Especially of his later work.

I've been to your other threads, so now I have two kinds of explanations side by side, I can only decide for myself until I've learnt sufficient Arabic, that will take a loooooot of time, but somehow I don't see my views changing, taken in account still enough Ahadith to support them and the fact that for more than 1000 years, scholars never interpreted that one verse about Iesa (pbuh) being naturally dead instead of alive up there, it started with Mirza as far as I know, and many of his predictions that didn't come true, the way he died, etc.
Isn't there an independant translation of his work in English, I'm sorry, I don't trust the translations of Qadiani's, if there is an endependant translation I would like to read it.

114

sadya sister, u seem intelligent enuff to know a false prophet when u hear of one (i.e. anyone who claims so after Muhammad :saw:)…

there r many such claimers, and surely u dont have time to read all of those liars’ false theories…
waste of time i tell ya…

115

That’s funny. You want to read work of founder of Ahmadiyya community yet you don’t believe in the translation done by ahmadis themselves?:konfused:

Anyway, you can find all the work in Urdu from www.alfazal.org/khazain/rk.pdf

For english translations, most of the books can be found from
www.alislam.org/books/index.html

116

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by sadya: *
Allright then, Pagal Insaan, do me one last favor then, is there an online copy of Mirza's full writings, PROPERLY translated in English? I want to see for myself what all that fuss is about. But I've read that only Mirza's first work is most often quoted and translated. Also heard that 'bad' parts are taken out. If there excists a FULL translation in English online, from an independant source, I would like to see for myself. Especially of his later work.

I've been to your other threads, so now I have two kinds of explanations side by side, I can only decide for myself until I've learnt sufficient Arabic, that will take a loooooot of time, but somehow I don't see my views changing, taken in account still enough Ahadith to support them and the fact that for more than 1000 years, scholars never interpreted that one verse about Iesa (pbuh) being naturally dead instead of alive up there, it started with Mirza as far as I know, and many of his predictions that didn't come true, the way he died, etc.
Isn't there an independant translation of his work in English, I'm sorry, I don't trust the translations of Qadiani's, if there is an endependant translation I would like to read it.
[/QUOTE]

You mentioned up there that you dont respect ahmedis or their beliefs..
Funny coming from Deobandi/Wahabi, considering how little respect you people get. I wonder.. Do you remove your Burka when you bathe? Or do you just let the water soak through?

117

You ever read what the Christians have written about the Prophet Mohamad? Call him a false prophet and a poser who drove people closer to hell rather then closer to god, much of the same accusation you pose towards the Ahmedia founder. Well I suppose you consider them (the Christians) complete idiots when they refuse to recognize your prophet… Imagine what Ahmedis think of you when you do the same…
The logic is completely ridiculous!
Its a rather bold claim to make, and a rather illiterate one at best…

Note: Please don’t try to include the same statements that a Moderator has already edited from your post. Would appreciate that. Thank you --Samarra.

118

Dear Sadya,

The only English translations of the works of Mirza Saheb are the ones done by Ahmedis. I can understand how you fear they may take the bad parts out, but them, you must also fear that if the translations are done by non-ahmedis, especially Molana Ludhainvi, he may add to them a lot of things that actually didn’t exist. There is no such thing as an independant translation.

The best scenario would’ve been that you were good at Urdu, and could read the original works or Mirza Saheb without any change or errors that come through translation, and base your opinion on them. The workds of Mirza Saheb that are available online are:

1- Roohani Khazaain - A complete compilation of all the books and articles written by Mirza Saheb throughout his life.

2- Malfoozaat - A compilation of words of Mirza Saheb said to his companions and those who come to meet him, as collected from some of them who noted them in their diaries.

3- Majmoo-a-Ishtehaarat - A compilation of all the brochures and pamphlets published and distributed by Mirza Saheb.

If you want to read a summary of all the works of Mirza Saheb and then choose which one out of the books you would want to read, go here.

If you think you do not have a lot of time to go through all this, and want to read just one book in English that summarizes the whole philosophy of Mirza Saheb’s teachings, please read Philosophy of Teachings of Islam. In this book Mirza Saheb answers some fundament questions about religion and how Islam deals with them. Even if you do not believe in his claims, I bet you will find this book very very interesting and useful.

On the way Mirza Saheb died:

You mentioned that the way Mirzas Saheb died should prove that he is a false prophet. Let me first of all, make it clear to you, that the accounts you read on the death of Mirza Saheb, especially of you read them on the website you earlier mentioned to me, are full of exagerations and lies. And you have seen by now, that they are not afraid to lie at all, but infact consider it a compulsion on them.

Now, let me present you with a question. If a prophet answers the call of nature before he dies, can you use that to conclude he is a liar? In that case, dear sadya, here’s a problem:

  `Aayeshah Radiyallahu `Anha relates that at the time of the death of Rasulullah Sallallahu `Alayhi Wasallam, she gave him support with her chest, or she said with her lap.  He asked for a container to urinate in.  He urnated therein.  Thereafter he passed away. (Ash Shimail of Tirmdhi, Hadith 369)

Will you make the same conclusions from the above hadith? Do not forget that AlShimail of Trimdhi is the most authentic of the compilations of the Seerah, and Aisha, Raziyallahu Anha, was the most authentic of the narrators.

If the christians use the above hadith to make fun of our beloved prophet Mohammad, how will you feel? Will you think they are justified in using it to conclude our prophet was a liar? If they do that, how will you feel?

119

there is a lot of discussion going on. Unfortunatly i could'nt find enough time to read all of the posts. I better ask a different question. So far people here are talking about accepting Mr. Mirza Ahmed as a Prophet or not, but what does Ahmedis say about those folks who dont believe in Mr. Mirza Ahmed. For example, i am a straight forward believer and i am quite happy with the knowledge i am gaining and i simply dont believe in this gentleman. According to your books How God will treat me?

120

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by King27: *
there is a lot of discussion going on. Unfortunatly i could'nt find enough time to read all of the posts. I better ask a different question. So far people here are talking about accepting Mr. Mirza Ahmed as a Prophet or not, but what does Ahmedis say about those folks who dont believe in Mr. Mirza Ahmed. For example, i am a straight forward believer and i am quite happy with the knowledge i am gaining and i simply dont believe in this gentleman. According to your books How God will treat me?
[/QUOTE]

Its simple yaar... just read up according to your beliefs, how will God treat the people who will not believe in the promissed Mehdi or in Jesus when he comes back.