Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?
My friend Mr. Popat Earlier in your post you had attacked my level of maturity and claimed higher level of intelligence for yourself.
You can attack me to your heart’s content – it worries me in the least.
You cannot throw doubt on the maturity and intelligence of the viewers here. You cannot hoodwink them.
Granted that ‘our’ scholars despite calling Shias kafir still call them Muslims – Note: They don’t consider them out of Pale of Islam
Likewise Shia scholars despite calling Sunni kafir still call them Muslims – Note: They don’t consider them out of Pale of Islam
You have made a claim on same lines that you take non-Ahmadis as kafir on the grounds that they have rejected a prophet but still call them Muslims and consider them within the Pale of Islam.
Now look at the statements and Position of **Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad **(He is son of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani and your second leader) :-
The belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah as.
“The article was elaborately entitled A Muslim is one who believes in all the messengers of God'. The title itself is sufficient to show that the article was not meant to prove merely that those who did not accept the Promised Messiah were deniers of the Promised Messiah’. Its object rather was to demonstrate that those who did not believe in the Promised Messiah were not Muslims.”** A’inah-i Sadaqat (pp. 135-136)**
“Regarding the main subject of my article, I wrote that as we believed the Promised Messiah to be one of the prophets of God, we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims.”** A’inah-i Sadaqat (pp. 137-138)**
“not only are those deemed to be Kafirs who openly style the Promised Messiah 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 Messiah 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 Kafirs.”** A’inah-i Sadaqat (pp. 139 -140) **
“And lastly, it was argued from a verse of the Holy Quran that such people as had failed to recognise the Promised Messiah as a Rasul even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues, were yet veritable Kafirs.” A’inah-i Sadaqat (p. 140) veritable Kafirs” are “pakkay kafir” in the original Urdu book
All here can clearly see that position of Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad is definite, categorical, clear cut and uncompromising. He strongly considered all those who did not accept claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad are:
so-called Muslims
are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam
not Muslims
we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims
deemed to be Kafirs
have here been adjudged to be Kafirs
veritable Kafirs” are “pakkay kafir” in the original Urdu book
Your position is diametrically opposite to that of Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad!
Your statement “We call you Muslim” - even though you agree that we commit kufr by rejecting Mirza Ghulam Ahmad QAdiani
You have taken unattainable position – You cannot put your feet in two boats. Either you are right or Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad got it wrong.
You cannot throw doubt on the maturity and intelligence of the viewers here. You cannot hoodwink them.