What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

[kchughtai]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

20:62)
Moses said to them, ‘Woe to you; forge not a lie against Allah, lest He destroy you by some punishment; and surely, he who forges a lie shall perish.’

69:45-47)
And if he had forged and attributed any sayings to Us, We would surely have seized him by the right hand And then surely We would have severed his life-artery,

and there are other verses in Quran as well as in the previous scriptures that false prophets perishes and do not prosper.

Our adversaries keep saying about 30 false prophets but they are only concerned about this jammat. what happened to others? in recent history, Rashid Khalifa, Gohar Shahi etc.

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

@kchughtai

20:62) Moses said to them, ‘Woe to you; forge not a lie against Allah, lest He destroy you by some punishment; and surely, he who forges a lie shall perish.’

69:45-47) And if he had forged and attributed any sayings to Us, We would surely have seized him by the right hand And then surely We would have severed his life-artery,

and there are other verses in Quran as well as in the previous scriptures that false prophets perishes and do not prosper.

Our adversaries keep saying about 30 false prophets but they are only concerned about this jammat. what happened to others? in recent history, Rashid Khalifa, Gohar Shahi etc.

So?

whats the purpose of this post? Mirza sahib was nabi/zilli/baroozi? but it is not proven by this or by the discussion of tafseer of khatam un nabieen ayat.

Why not cut the discussion short and discuss the qualities of prophets and did mirza sahib qualified for these or not.

[Mr.Popat]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

^ so the treatment of Allah with Hz Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(as) shows he a.s was true in his claims.

before we even discuss the qualities of prophet and if mirza sahab qualified for it or not, you must first determine if the door of prophethood is still open. Once accepted, only then InshAllah discussing qualities of prophets will be beneficial to you.

[WhateverFloatsUrBoat]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

that's really the issue now isn't it? Nobody ever speaks to ahmadi's directly neither do they know what Ahmadi's actually believe but just hate because other hate. Ahmadi's called other sects Ghair Ahmadi, Ahmadi's do not think anybody is to be judged as a muslim or non muslim as only Allah tallah knows what is in each person heart, and he is only one to judge

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

@Mr.Popat

^ so the treatment of Allah with Hz Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(as) shows he a.s was true in his claims.

before we even discuss the qualities of prophet and if mirza sahab qualified for it or not, you must first determine if the door of prophethood is still open. Once accepted, only then InshAllah discussing qualities of prophets will be beneficial to you.

Suppose it is open :)

Lets now discus qualities of prophethood.

I have some idea why ahmedis are so scared to explain actual writings of mirza sahib or his personality.

@WhateverFloatsUrBoat

that's really the issue now isn't it? Nobody ever speaks to ahmadi's directly neither do they know what Ahmadi's actually believe but just hate because other hate. Ahmadi's called other sects Ghair Ahmadi, Ahmadi's do not think anybody is to be judged as a muslim or non muslim as only Allah tallah knows what is in each person heart, and he is only one to judge

You have not read the complete thread, otherwise you may amend your opinion. Mirza basheer was also ahmedi in my opinion. Ahmedis here tried to use all sort of somersaults or twisting of facts but could not explain the fatawa of mirza basheer.

[Mr.Popat]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

@bao_bihari

Suppose it is open :)

Lets now discus qualities of prophethood.

I have some idea why ahmedis are so scared to explain actual writings of mirza sahib or his personality.

You have not read the complete thread, otherwise you may amend your opinion. Mirza basheer was also ahmedi in my opinion. Ahmedis here tried to use all sort of somersaults or twisting of facts but could not explain the fatawa of mirza basheer.

C'mon now bao bihari. I thought you were a decent person. You cannot say explanation was not given by ahmadis, because it was. You can however say the explanation was not acceptable by you. But saying explanation wasnt given at all doesnt seem right.

Quran says to not be friends with jews/christians.. quran says to kill them wheresoever you find them. Hadith says a person who abandons prayer commits kufr. Hadith says anyone who kills a fellow muslim commits kufr.

Just how you give me the explanation of the above statements, though to jews/christians it might not be acceptable. It's the same with you too. It's not our fault if you dont want to understand, but the explanation has been given.

As far as discussing the qualities of prophethood, i'm not going to 'assume' that you accepted that the door of prophethood is open. I want you to to have firm faith in it. I dont want to tell you a whole story of laila majnu and in the end you ask me who was laila.

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

@Mr.Popat

C’mon now bao bihari. I thought you were a decent person. You cannot say explanation was not given by ahmadis, because it was. You can however say the explanation was not acceptable by you. But saying explanation wasnt given at all doesnt seem right.

Quran says to not be friends with jews/christians.. quran says to kill them wheresoever you find them. Hadith says a person who abandons prayer commits kufr. Hadith says anyone who kills a fellow muslim commits kufr.

Just how you give me the explanation of the above statements, though to jews/christians it might not be acceptable. It’s the same with you too. It’s not our fault if you dont want to understand, but the explanation has been given.

As far as discussing the qualities of prophethood, i’m not going to ‘assume’ that you accepted that the door of prophethood is open. I want you to to have firm faith in it. I dont want to tell you a whole story of laila majnu and in the end you ask me who was laila.

I said ahmedis are scared, how you assumed i meant that explanation was not given. Any way i have read azala auhaam (i think that was the name) where mirza sahib tried to justify some of the writings. So yes “explanation” is there but how logical is this let us see that here.

I am not sure why ahmedis avoid discussing mirza sahib so much, it is the easiest way to find haq(if one is looking for it). Some one claimed something but does not qualify the basic ingrediants needed to be given some weightage so why discuss the concepts.(concepts have been discussed by scholars and are there but by looking at this thread how ahmedis avoided a simple explanation of mirza basheer statements/ahmed beliefs i dont think that it will have any result but will just result in waste of time). So all we can do is direct people to reference to look for themselves.

Look at any good tafseer and you will find very good explanation for these ayats, if you still want an explanation then please open a thread.
Quran Tafsir Ibn Kathir - Home
https://islamicbookslibrary.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/aasan-tarjuma-quran-3-volumes-by-shaykh-mufti-taqi-usmani/

[Mr.Popat]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

^ lol ye to bari jaldi peecha churaane ka tareeqa hai bhai.

Here’s a video for those who are inviting ahmadis to Islam and for those who think Muslim ummah is all united.

[psyah]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

@Mr.Popat

are you saying sunnis understanding of finality of prophethood is correct because the above false claimants of prophets were killed ?

There are three ways of looking at it.

1) these claimants were not ordered by Muhammad PBUH to be killed. Not a single one. Infact, one of the above claimants ( I think Aswad al-Ansi ) claimed to be a prophet in Muhammad PBUH lifetime, and instead of Holy Prophet PBUH showing anger, I believe I read somewhere that Holy Prophet PBUH personally went to Him and asked if He has claimed to be a prophet, upon his affirmation, Muhammad PBUH asked Him to provide him with evidence proving that Gabriel comes to him just as he comes to Him pbuh. Look at His approach. Despite being a true prophet of Allah, he pbuh did not blindly say, he cant be prophet, since i'm the last prophet, but rather going up to him and asking him for evidence. He later did toba and took back his claim. Muselmah was killed not because of his claim of prophethood, but rather refusing to pay zakaat and creating army against Muslims and therefore openly announcing war against Holy Prophet PBUH. Kindly look into history books.

2) This is the true way of Allah. Allah says in Quran that if even Muhammad PBUH had lied on my name, I would have destroyed his mission (paraphrasing it). Islam has a living Allah, and he is always right in what He says. How then can one think that a true prophet of Allah will be getting same kind of treatment from Allah as the false claimant of prophethood? It's not possible. Therefore, Allah deals with people of such false claims. It is not in our hands to deal with whose right and whose not. They were killed, and hence Allah's word stand corrected.

If someone claims to be a prophet. One of two is correct : either he is saying the truth or he's completely lying. In case of a true claim >> Allah promises in Quran that in the end Him and His prophet will be victorious In case of false claim >> Allah will destroy him as well as his mission. His mission will not grow and his followers will leave him.

Let me explain further if I may.

If someone claims to be a prophet. One of the following is true : either Allah knows about his claim, OR he does not know about it at all. If we say Allah did not know about it, we are openly denying his attribute of 'all knowing'. This leaves us with last option of Him having knowledge of his claim. Then there are 2 possibilities : either Allah will keep his promise and destroy him and his mission and that will be the end of him OR Allah helps him in every step of the way, his mission starts to progress, his followers starts to increase, and Allah is His helper as well as the jamaat that He establishes.

Now, how is it that a 'fake prophet' is getting the same treatment by Allah ( Allah helping him at every step, his followers keeps growing in number, gets more opposition etc ) vs. the 'true prophet' whose treatment by Allah is exactly the same. Allah nauzubillah do not lie. Allah will destroy a fake claimant and will help the true claimant.

One cannot help but to think and ponder upon it and is forced to believe that Allah NEVER let a false claimant be victorious just like a true prophet. Allah does not like anyone saying lies on His name, and therefore deals with them HIMSELF. But WHY is it that Allah's mercy has always been with who you call to be a 'false claimant' ? Why is Allah doing such a thing ?

3: One other way of looking at it is that they claimed an independent prophethood against the Holy Prophet PBUH's prophethood, which is automatically a lie and shouldnt be taken seriously, as now the only prophethood that one can achieve is through mere Holy prophet pbuh's footsteps. Every other door of prophethood has now come to an end. No christian, hindu,jew or vice versa will ever see the face of prophet in their ummah. This fountain of prophethood can only be achieved through complete obedience of our Master Holy Prophet PBUH.

I hope this answers your question.

Peace Mr.Popat

Interesting!!! Let's break down your response in just the first paragraph.

**
1) these claimants were not ordered by Muhammad PBUH to be killed. Not a single one. Infact, one of the above claimants ( I think Aswad al-Ansi ) claimed to be a prophet in Muhammad PBUH lifetime, and instead of Holy Prophet PBUH showing anger, I believe I read somewhere that Holy Prophet PBUH personally went to Him and asked if He has claimed to be a prophet, upon his affirmation, Muhammad PBUH asked Him to provide him with evidence proving that Gabriel comes to him just as he comes to Him pbuh. Look at His approach. Despite being a true prophet of Allah, he pbuh did not blindly say, he cant be prophet, since i'm the last prophet, but rather going up to him and asking him for evidence. He later did toba and took back his claim. Muselmah was killed not because of his claim of prophethood, but rather refusing to pay zakaat and creating army against Muslims and therefore openly announcing war against Holy Prophet PBUH. Kindly look into history books.

Firstly there are specific statements by RasoolAllah (SAW) saying "There is no prophet after me**"And I asked if the early claimants were not liars and finality was not the issue for you to explain why they were killed - you said in response Sayyiduna Muhammad (SAW) did not order them to be killed. So by saying this are you saying

a) RasoolAllah (SAW) didn't take them to be liars?
b) The Sahabah (RA) who did order them to be killed were at fault because RasoolAllah (SAW) did not order it so? c) And if they were only killed for not paying zakat then is that not even more reason to kill the false claimant?
d) And if they were true claimants and the Sahabah (RA) should have been careful for new prophets coming - surely if the claimant was true then his not paying zakat is justified as his new prophecy would abrogate previous rulings and hence they should not have been killed at all - because they could have been true prophets ...

When RasoolAllah (SAW) confronted the other claimants - did he (SAW) do so on the grounds that they could have been true? Or to intellectually refute and destroy their influence? He (SAW) also never entertained them for being prophets yet you say otherwise.

The thing I'm trying to get to is not what you have explained tainted with falsehoods ... I'm looking at the mindset of the Salaf regarding new claimants - they were strict about not letting any NEW prophet come ... yet they believed in the return of Isa (AS) our interpretation of finality is compatible with how they "THE SALAF" understood it ... which is different to yours.

We have a legacy and tradition that is broken by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad ... All prophets came from a family line as well ... is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad even from that line? No ... he is not. Also it is categorical that the Salaf understood the return of Isa (AS) to be literally him - (AS) the son of Maryam (AS) as is the belief of Christians since before Islam.

[Mr.Popat]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

@psyah

Peace Mr.PopatFirstly there are specific statements by RasoolAllah (SAW) saying "There is no prophet after me"And I asked if the early claimants were not liars and finality was not the issue for you to explain why they were killed - you said in response Sayyiduna Muhammad (SAW) did not order them to be killed. So by saying this are you saying

a) RasoolAllah (SAW) didn't take them to be liars? b) The Sahabah (RA) who did order them to be killed were at fault because RasoolAllah (SAW) did not order it so? c) And if they were only killed for not paying zakat then is that not even more reason to kill the false claimant? d) And if they were true claimants and the Sahabah (RA) should have been careful for new prophets coming - surely if the claimant was true then his not paying zakat is justified as his new prophecy would abrogate previous rulings and hence they should not have been killed at all - because they could have been true prophets ...

Peace,
Sir, now you're just arguing merely for argument sake.

"there is no prophet after me and no new shariyah will be born" ** If there's no prophet after Him the way you're taking it then Jesus a.s cannot be prophet according to you. If you say such a thing then really, you are conflicting with Quran,hadith, and your scholars. Please keep in mind what 'after' or 'baad'a' means in Arabic. If you look in Quran, it is used as to mean 'except' as well. For example, there is a verse which states that who will they worship after/except Allah. The word there is used 'baad'a' not to be after, since there is no after Allah. It means except. We interpret Quran and ahadith in such a way that it makes sense and that interpretation do not contradict with other interpretation of verses.

a) rasulAllah took them all as liars.
b) I am telling you this again. Muhammad PBUH DID NOT order anyone to kill them because they claimed prophethood. Muhammad PBUH personally went to one of the claimant and asked him for proofs. Sahabah killed them or how ever they were dealt with is not sahabah killing them, but rather thats the sunnah and promise of Allah that was fulfilled.

They COULD NOT have been true prophets. What is so hard to understand ?? There's a hadith which states that Muhammad PBUH addressed Hazrat Ali (as) when he was going for some battle and said that You are to me as Haron(as) was to Moses(as), except that there is no prophet except me. Prophet Muhammad PBUH had to say this to distinguish the difference between Haron (as) and Ali(ra) for people to know that Haron and Moses(as) were both present at the same time, and they both were prophets. But there is no prophet except me( Muhammad PBUH ). You are just taking the debate in a wrong direction.

They raised army against Muslims. They were killed. For other reason but NOT because they claimed prophethood. Muhammad PBUH did not order to kill them. If Muhammad PBUH did not order , does it mean he pbuh took them to be true ? (Nauzubillah). C'mon psyah! I thought you could do better.

Read this again.

If someone claims to be a prophet>> one of 2 is true >> Allah knows about it or doesn't know about it. >> If we say Allah was not aware of it, then we r denying his attribute of 'all knowing' >> if we say Allah knew about His claim .. then one of 2 is true >> Whether Allah will destroy Him and his mission will not prosper OR Allah will help Him and the jamaat that he establish, the early followers of Him, and Allah will be by their side all the time.

Now that is the formula. I let you be the judge.

[Mr.Popat]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

@psyah

Firstly there are specific statements by RasoolAllah (SAW) saying "There is no prophet after me"And I asked if the early claimants were not liars and finality was not the issue for you to explain why they were killed - **you said in response Sayyiduna Muhammad (SAW) did not order them to be killed. So by saying this are you saying

a) RasoolAllah (SAW) didn't take them to be liars? **

I'm just totally speechless. Please read again what you're saying. Nauzubillah Muhammad PBUH had to order to kill them for Him to take them as liars? Is that the only way to take someone as liars?!? Nauzubillah

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

@Mr.Popat

I’m just totally speechless. Please read again what you’re saying. Nauzubillah Muhammad PBUH had to order to kill them for Him to take them as liars? Is that the only way to take someone as liars?!? Nauzubillah

Do you believe that our beloved Prophet Muhammad ever ordered for killing of any one?

[Mr.Popat]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

@bao_bihari

Do you believe that our beloved Prophet Muhammad ever ordered for killing of any one?

Even before this, do you believe the punishment of a false claimant of prophethood should be death in accordance to Quran and ahadith ?

[psyah]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

I'm just totally speechless. Please read again what you're saying. Nauzubillah Muhammad PBUH had to order to kill them for Him to take them as liars? Is that the only way to take someone as liars?!? Nauzubillah

Peace Mr.Popat

This is more sophistry from you ... I asked a question - I did not make a statement ... I said ... that in your response to me about "how the claimants" were taken to be ... instead of answering the question - you said "none of the claimants were ordered to be killed by RasoolAllah (SAW)" ... that is when I asked "so you think that in order for someone to be deemed a liar then his death should be ordered" to which you are now accusing me of saying a liar has to be ordered to be killed" - no such thing ... Again I am saying that the statement you made about "RasoolAllah (SAW) not ordering the killing of any one claimant" is a red-herring statement ... The truth is ... despite not ordering the killing of certain individuals it does not mean that they were not viewed as "false prophets" ... Put it this way ...

All of the claimants at the time of the our liege prophet Muhammad (SAW) NOT a SINGLE new claimant was ever believed to be TRUE ... for this reason there is proof in the mindset of the Salaf that there is no chance for a NEW prophet to come. Rather each time they came instead of looking for signs of prophethood the companions (RA) used to check if those claimants showed signs of being the Dajjal.

[psyah]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

My comments in red below:

@Mr.Popat

Peace,
Sir, now you’re just arguing merely for argument sake.

“there is no prophet after me and no new shariyah will be born” ** If there’s no prophet after Him the way you’re taking it then Jesus a.s cannot be prophet according to you. False - Isa (AS) is not a new prophet … Mirza Ghulam Ahmad on the hand is a new claimant. If you say such a thing then really, you are conflicting with Quran,hadith, and your scholars. **No … my scholars is who I get my stuff from … **Please keep in mind what ‘after’ or ‘baad’a’ means in Arabic. If you look in Quran, it is used as to mean ‘except’ as well. For example, there is a verse which states that who will they worship after/except Allah. I would use the words “other than”, except infers isolation which is incorrect … and this is a red-herring for this context. The word there is used ‘baad’a’ not to be after, since there is no after Allah. It means except. We interpret Quran and ahadith in such a way that it makes sense and that interpretation do not contradict with other interpretation of verses. But let’s see how that translates in all three cases.

**1) There is no prophet after me
2) There is no prophet except me
3) There is no prophet other than me
**
**None of these allow another prophet after RasoolAllah (SAW) and 2) and 3) also suggest that there is no prophet before him (SAW) either

Sorry that trick of yours didn’t work …**

a) rasulAllah took them all as liars.
b) I am telling you this again. Muhammad PBUH DID NOT order anyone to kill them because they claimed prophethood. Red-herring … the killing was meant they had to be stopped from misleading the Ummah just as speaking to them was meant to achieve the same. Muhammad PBUH personally went to one of the claimant and asked him for proofs. Red-herring - again. Sahabah killed them or how ever they were dealt with is not sahabah killing them, but rather thats the sunnah and promise of Allah that was fulfilled. True - but also a red-herring, we were talking about the mindset of how new claimants were taken.

They COULD NOT have been true prophets. What is so hard to understand ?? There’s a hadith which states that Muhammad PBUH addressed Hazrat Ali (as) when he was going for some battle and said that You are to me as Haron(as) was to Moses(as), except that there is no prophet except me. Prophet Muhammad PBUH had to say this to distinguish the difference between Haron (as) and Ali(ra) for people to know that Haron and Moses(as) were both present at the same time, and they both were prophets. But there is no prophet except me( Muhammad PBUH ). You are just taking the debate in a wrong direction. Now you are bending the translation further than you have already done so - First you argued that ba’da means except when used for Allah (SWT) … so this is a secondary translation not a primary one and then you apply it wrongly here and then give another meaning to it that it contains somehow the meaning “at the same time” … there is no need to use the secondary meaning here - use the primary meaning … “there is no prophet after me” … simple.

They raised army against Muslims. They were killed. That is just wrong … let’s see you prove that. For other reason but NOT because they claimed prophethood. Muhammad PBUH did not order to kill them. If Muhammad PBUH did not order , does it mean he pbuh took them to be true ? (Nauzubillah). C’mon psyah! I thought you could do better.

Read this again.

If someone claims to be a prophet>> one of 2 is true >> Allah knows about it or doesn’t know about it. >> If we say Allah was not aware of it, then we r denying his attribute of ‘all knowing’ >> if we say Allah knew about His claim .. then one of 2 is true >> Whether Allah will destroy Him and his mission will not prosper OR Allah will help Him and the jamaat that he establish, the early followers of Him, and Allah will be by their side all the time.

Now that is the formula. I let you be the judge.

Actually Allah (SWT) will also allow Dajjal to be successful in exactly the way that you describe above … I pray that you do not fall in to his grip when Dajjal arrives … lesser Dajjals can be escaped from easier.

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

Even before this, do you believe the punishment of a false claimant of prophethood should be death in accordance to Quran and ahadith ?

i will tell you what i believe,but * pehlay aap *:)

[chacha_Ghalib]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

You guys still going?

What obsession!!

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi’s call mainstream muslims?

@chacha_Ghalib

You guys still going?

What obsession!!

Choudhry saab

twahday munday chamr hi gae nay thread nau, na haq manday nay na facts paish kernay aan, main tay halay waila aan , saada tame pass ho janada aay.

tussi vi aa jao qalbaziya khan wastay

[kchughtai]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

[QUOTE]

So?

whats the purpose of this post? Mirza sahib was nabi/zilli/baroozi? but it is not proven by this or by the discussion of tafseer of khatam un nabieen ayat.

Why not cut the discussion short and discuss the qualities of prophets and did mirza sahib qualified for these or not.

[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

Actually Allah (SWT) will also allow Dajjal to be successful in exactly the way that you describe above ... I pray that you do not fall in to his grip when Dajjal arrives ... lesser Dajjals can be escaped from easier.

[/QUOTE]

Wow, in response to the truth mentioned in the quoted Quranic verses, you are looking here and there.
Psyah Sahib,
As you consider dajjal to be a person, please let me know what would be the end of that person? "will be killed eventually". right? and that is in sync with Quran.

Those who attribute falsehood to Allah and keep doing that, don't take a step back. they always meet a violent death. their works, plans are cut short and they are unsuccessful. There is a clear distinction between a truthful one and the one who is an impostor wrt how Allah deals with them in this world. If that was not the case then the point raised in verses 69:45-47) cannot be extended as a sign of the truthfulness of the holy prophet (pbuh).

Bao jee, pehlay samajh liya karo kay ki gal ho rahi aye.

[bao_bihari]

Re: What do Ahmedi's call mainstream muslims?

Bao jee, pehlay samajh liya karo kay ki gal ho rahi aye.

gul ho rai see whether ahmedis consider us non muslim or not , mirza basheer statement was presented but tussi log tried to show a politicaly correct version of ahmediyat rather then what was actual fact.

Now when cornered as usual the direction of thread was changed to confuse the reader.

Khayr ye kahani tau purani hay :)

PS: and the first quote in you post is mine not brother psyah's, if you have any thing with that post , *bhai say rabta karain

*