Jinnah Considered Ahmadis Muslims

By YLH

As our anchors and TV channels commit national and logical suicide by referring to Ahmadi Mosques  as “marakaz” and “Ibadgahs”,  we must remind ourselves of the views of Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah who relied heavily on the Jamaat Ahmadiyya and its brilliant son Ch. Zafrulla Khan (whose younger brother was killed yesterday).   Jinnah not only considered Ahmadis Muslims, but relied on them to provide the manpower and skilled intellectual force in his efforts on behalf of the Muslims of India.  As a secular liberal Jinnah could not imagine how someone who considered himself Muslim could be called something else.

He said:

“I have been asked a disturbing question, as to who among the Muslims can be a member of the Muslim Conference. It has been asked with particular reference to the Qadianis. My reply is that, as far as the constitution of the All-India Muslim League is concerned, it stipulates that any Muslim, without distinction of creed or sect, can become a member, provided he accepts the views, policy and programme of the Muslim League, signs the form of membership and pays the subscription. I appeal to the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir not to raise sectarian questions, but instead to unite on one platform under one banner. In this lies the welfare of the Muslims. In this way, not only can Muslims make political and social progress effectively, but so can other communities, and so also can the state of Kashmir as a whole.”

“Mr. M. A. Sabir tried as hard as he could to persuade the Quaid-i-Azam to declare Qadianis as being out of the fold of Islam. But the Quaid-i-Azam stuck resolutely to his principle and kept on replying: `What right have I to declare a person non-Muslim, when he claims to be a Muslim’.

(23rd May, 1944,  Srinagar)

 THE PARLIAMENT MUST REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT NOW!  THE PARLIAMENT MUST STOP MAKING US THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE WORLD FOR THE SAKE OF FEW CROOKS, CRANKS AND MADMEN WHO HAVE NEVER LIFTED A FINGER FOR PAKISTAN’S PROGRESS.  THE PARLIAMENT MUST STOP PERSECUTING PAKISTAN’S LOYAL SONS AND DAUGHTERS.

194 Comments

Filed under Pakistan

194 responses to “Jinnah Considered Ahmadis Muslims

  1. poke

    YLH, why are u trying so hard to find inconsequential reasons when it is crystal clear that this arabic slave mentality / ideology is the reason.
    So what if ahamdis are non muslims ? Even if Jinnah does’nt agree. Ahamdis still believe in most of islamic trick except one & … if this can be perpatuated on them imagine the plights of hindus & muslims.

    Where is the goodness of islam? where are all those muslims/ pakistanis who demand exceptional human rights in the free world?where are all those pakistanis/muslims who claim discrimnation & persecution?

  2. yasserlatifhamdani

    Because Ahmadis want to be recognized as Muslims.

    I don’t consider myself a Muslim.

  3. Ayesha

    Thank you YLH for this. May we have more people like you.

  4. To quote YLH, “THE PARLIAMENT MUST REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT. THE PARLIAMENT MUST REPEAT THE SECOND AMENDMENT NOW! THE PARLIAMENT MUST STOP MAKING US THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE WORLD FOR THE SAKE OF FEW CROOKS, CRANKS AND MADMEN WHO HAVE NEVER LIFTED A FINGER FOR PAKISTAN’S PROGRESS. THE PARLIAMENT MUST STOP PERSECUTING PAKISTAN’S LOYAL SONS AND DAUGHTERS.”

    very aptly said.

  5. dude40000

    Understood. So, if Jinnah had not made this statement then yesterday’s dead were fair game.

  6. Ahmadis do not “want” to be recognised as muslims at all. They already “are” born Muslims. They present and practise true Islamic faith. A faith whose Prophet made prophecy about the messiah and a faith that promised arrival of the messiah by the end of 14 year of hijra, and Ahmadis with all their soul have blind faith in what their beloved Prophet Muhammad said and folowed in his footsteps regardless of atrocities comitted against them whether on small scale or grand one.
    History is full of accomplishments when refering to Ahmadiyya Muslims only Pakistani Mullah’s and that too chiefly belonging to Southern Punjab are short sighted and therefore keep the general masses in ignorance by weaving web of hate against Ahmadis. Why so scared of an Ahmadi? Because you know they present true picture of Islam.
    According to Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H): “He who declares his fellow muslim as a non-muslim is himself a non muslim.”

  7. a muslim

    Quaid-i-Azam M.A. Jinnah reply to a question regarding Ahmadis in Kashmir:
    A brief report of this press conference is given in the Urdu book Tahrik Hurriyyat Kashmir, by Rashid Taseer, published by Muhafiz Publications, Srinagar, in volume 2 which covers the period 1936–1945 on pages 290–291. It refers to Mr. Jinnah’s reply on the Ahmadiyya issues as follows:

    “Reporters asked him a question about Ahmadis, that they were not being permitted to join the Muslim Conference because they were considered to be non-Muslims. What was his view on this? Mr. Jinnah said: ‘Who am I to declare as non-Muslim a man who calls himself a Muslim?’ It was after this that almost all the Ahmadis of Kashmir joined the Muslim Conference.”

  8. a muslim

    Maulana Muhammad Ali Urges Special Prayers Every Friday [for Muhammad Ali Jinnah]:
    The Light, 8th May 1946, front page

    For the last three weeks Maulana Muhammad Ali, Head of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, has been offering special prayers at the Friday congregational prayer for the success of Mr. Jinnah’s talks with the Cabinet Mission.

    Exhorting the congregation last Friday, May 3, to humbly beseech the Almighty to protect the Muslims of India at this critical juncture in the history of Islam in this country, the Maulana made it plain that Pakistan is a life and death issue, not only for the existence of Muslims but at the same time for the survival of Islam itself as a faith and culture. Of all the world of Islam, said the Maulana, the Indian Muslims were the only people who yet believed in the possibilities of Islam as a religion to play a role in the re-shaping of the world. In every other Muslim land, including Egypt, the cultural centre of Islam, and Turkey and Afghanistan, the politically independent States of Islam, the very idea of tabligh or the propagation of faith was extinct.

    ‘Pakistan or Perish’ was no mere political slogan, observed the Maulana. It was a real and grave danger. If the Muslims failed to survive as a free people, they perish and along with them perishes the idea of Islam as a vital force of life.

  9. a muslim

    Quaid Azam M.A. Jinnah spoke at Shah Jehan Mosque -Woking Muslim Mission on occassion of Eid prayer.
    Islamic Review April 1932.

  10. Well said Yasser! I totally share your views and stand by the Ahmadi community as well. They ARE Muslims.

  11. Tanzeel

    But we’re no more living in Jinnah’s Pakistan. Its Bhutto’s Pakistan.

  12. Jinnah would forever be the founder of Pakistan. Burn that in your head Tanzeel.

  13. a muslim

    Contribution of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement member in resolving conflict between Q-i-A M.A.Jinnah and Sir Dr. Muhammad Iqbal:

    In October 1928, Maulana Fazal Karim Durrani returned to Lahore and joined the editorial staff of the Muslim Outlook. Then he started a monthly by the name of Muslim India. In 1928, he wrote a throught-provoking book, The Future of Islam in India. In 1930, he founded Tablighi Literature Society and published a weekly called The Truth. During the same period Quaid-i ‘Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah came to Lahore. A meeting was arranged to resolve the differences between him and Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal. Maulana Durrani played a pivotal role in removing the misunderstandings which had existed between the two since 1928. (Creation of Pakistan by Justice Shamim Hussain Qadri, published by the Army Book Club,1983, p.90.)

    After this, in 1937, Maulana Durrani published a booklet of 16 pages entitled Muslim National Ideal. The well-known writer and research scholar, K.K.Aziz in his book, A History of the Idea of Pakistan, (1987) has devoted six pages to Maulana Durrani’s contribution in expounding the idea of Pakistan. He has even remarked that Maulana Durrani’s book, The Future of Islam in India, influenced the thinking of the Quaid-i Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal. The latter, in his Allahabad Address of 1930, expounded the same ideas which were expressed by Maulana Durrani in his book in 1929. (pp.160-167)

    While commending the ideas of Maulana Durrani, the author, K.K. Aziz, paid tribute to him in the following words:

    “The Muslim League and the Muslim Conference . . . neither supported Durrani Sahib’s views nor did they adopt them, one possible reason for which was that he belonged to the Ahmadiyya Jama‘at (Lahore). In today’s Pakistan, these views would be considered as the views of a non-Muslim because, constitutionally, the members of the Ahmadiyya Movement have been thrown out of the fold of Islam … But, he (Mr.Durrani) most successfully directed the attention of the people towards the need of saving Muslims from the domination of the Hindus … This was a great service to the Muslims of India. It must be said with deep regret that his service has not been acknowledged at all.”

  14. a muslim

    Message of Felicitations on the Auspicious Occasion of Establishment of Pakistan:
    by Hazrat Maulana Muhammad Ali, Head of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement
    The Light, 15th August 1947

    ——————————————————————————–
    I offer my felicitations, first of all, to Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, for whose trust in God, untiring efforts, unwavering resolution, far-sightedness, unbending power of resistance and breadth of vision, God Almighty has blessed the Muslims with a magnificent boon and has vouchsafed them rulership over a part of India. May God grant this soldier of Islam a long lease of life and sustain him in health and energy, and may He enable him and us all to be grateful servants of His, our heads always bowing before His will!

    I offer my felicitations to the whole of the Muslim nation, especially the masses of the Muslims whose sacrifices have won Pakistan, the greatest of these sacrifices being the united front which they displayed in the struggle. It is my humble prayer that God may sustain their hearts in unity, free from all kinds of mutual jealousies and ill-will. May God grant all Muslims the sense to realise that in this unity and solidarity lies the secret of their strength, especially to those of them who are yet outside this Islamic solidarity.

    I offer felicitations to those unknown Muslims whose nightly supplications before God to save the bark of Islam at this critical hour have been the cause of bringing us His blessings and mercy, and who keep the torch of this Heavenly light, which is the soul of Pakistan, aflame.

    In this hour, my fervent prayers also go out towards those saintly personages who sowed the seeds of tabligh in this land of ours, the fruit of which we are enjoying today in the shape of Pakistan. In grateful memory let us recall that but for their efforts to propagate the light of Islam in India, far from achieving any sovereign status for Islam in this country today, millions of our people now constituting the Muslim nation would have themselves been wallowing in polytheism, idol-worship and darkness. May He bless their souls with His unbounded mercy and exalt their ranks in their heavenly abode! May He enable us of this age to follow in their footsteps and try in our own humble way to disseminate the light of the last message of God, the Holy Quran, not only in this subcontinent but over the length and breadth of the whole world; and, while departing from this world, may we leave behind to the coming generations the same heritage that these saintly souls left to us, so that just as we today are reaping the harvest of their sacrifices and labours in the form of Pakistan, our coming generations may be blessed with the reward of our efforts and sacrifices in the shape of converting the whole of India, nay, the whole of the world, into a Pakistan in which man may be reunited to man, in which fellow-feeling may bind man to man, irrespective of caste or creed, a Pakistan free from injustice, tyranny and oppression, in which the whole of mankind may dwell as a single family.

    In the end, it is my humble prayer to God Almighty that now that He has blessed us with rulership, He may also fill our hearts with the passion to serve fellow-men and enable us to walk in the footsteps of those who, while wielding regal sceptre, lived the lives of darweshes, those who looked upon themselves, not as rulers, but as servants of the people. O Almighty Allah! Make this Islamic state an ideal State which may serve other nations of the world as an object lesson in equity and justice, in mutual goodwill and toleration, in honesty and integrity and above all in a passion for the service of fellowmen. O God, grant that the heads of the officials of this State may ever remain bowed before Thy commandments and their hearts filled with compassion for Thy creatures!

  15. //Jinnah would forever be the founder of Pakistan. Burn that in your head Tanzeel.//

    Let’s see…

  16. a muslim

    One more reference:
    Quaid-i-Azam was strongly opposed to any such verdicts against those who declared themselves to be Muslims, and he adhered to the Lahore Ahmadiyya view that all those who recite the Kalimah Tayyibah are Muslims:

    “He said that it was totally wrong to place restrictions against Ahmadis joining the All India Muslim League. He farther advised the Kashmir Muslim Conference not to create sectarian conflicts, and to gather all those who recite the Kalimah under one flag” (Reported in Inqalaab, 3 June 1944).
    Note also that in the days when the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement managed the Woking Mosque and Mission, many famous Muslim leaders prayed there behind the Ahmadi Imams of the mosque. Among such leaders were Tunku Abdur Rahman of Malaysia, the late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, and the late President Ayub Khan of Pakistan.

  17. Dil Sooz

    (Same message was posted on ATP site)
    Sahibzada Farooq Ali Khan Sahib (Ex Speaker National Assembly in 1974) Speak up:
    Dear Sahibzada Sahib, Allah has granted you long life to give you an opportunity to tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth, before it is too late (In my view it is already late). You were Speaker of house when Ahmadis of Qadiani and Lahori Branches were declared non- muslims. You confided privately to many that it was all sham and it was just a political decision to appease Mullah. Since there are no public record of proceedings leading up to this declaration (one wonders why) it falls on you to set the record right. This is historic moment, please grab it.
    For the rest of readers: Please note Pakistan is only Islamic country which has declared one part of Ummah who recite kalima and believe in day of judgment as “Kafir”.
    Lahore Ahmadiyya Jammat has always believed in finality of Prophethood of Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) more then any other school of thought, as they believe, just as Quran says NO new prophet be it it New or Old will come after him. Instead of getting more respect they are made Kafirs -Astafghfir Ullah!. You can check their beliefs and works in propogation of Islam on their sites: http://www.muslim.org and http://www.aaiil.org
    Painful truth is that religious parties like Jammat Islami who were against creation of Pakistan (I can debate anyone who denies this fact) are now so called “beholders” of country. After Pakistan was created they kept up the strife which led to anti ahmadiyya riots and 1st martial law in 1950’s in ensuing court proceedings death sentence was given to late Maulana Maududi for his incitment of violence.
    Among secular parties ANP/NAP was against creation of Pakistan and their senior ministers even now say so on public TV. Their leader Wali Khan even wrote in his book that Pakistan was Qadiani “conspiracy”. At least he was not a hypocrite. Wali Khan refused to vote on anti ahmadiyya amendment in 1974.
    Now a quick quiz for every one–Who drafted Pakistan declaration of Independence which is affixed even now on Minar Pakistan Lahore?–Answer “Sir Zafarullah Khan” -whose nephew Lt. Gen (R) Nasir Ahmed was killed in this recent massacre.
    Point to ponder: May be Wali Khan was right about founders of Pakistan. And then who else signed this declaration of Independence document (knowing that Maulana Maududi and like minded maulvis were against it)-list of signatories included father of former Indian Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral.

  18. Gurmit

    Forgive my ignorance but what is the basic difference between main stream muslims and ahdamis? As far as I know, ahmadis do NOT consider Prophet Muhammad as last prophet of Islam? and they also consider Mirza Ghulam as Prophet after Muhammad?

    As Muslims isn’t it part of your faith to believe in Muhammad as Last Prophet which Ahmadis DONT and hence declaration as non-muslims?

    Please someone explain this.

  19. kashifiat

    Sabit ho gya ! Jhoooooooot ki koi inteha nahien

  20. yasserlatifhamdani

    Kashifiat waqai tumharay jaisey jamaation ko jhoot bolnay kay alawa kuch nahin aata.

  21. yasserlatifhamdani

    “Now a quick quiz for every one–Who drafted Pakistan declaration of Independence which is affixed even now on Minar Pakistan Lahore?–Answer “Sir Zafarullah Khan” -whose nephew Lt. Gen (R) Nasir Ahmed was killed in this recent massacre.”

    Apparently when the bastards moved into the mosques, they asked for Nasir… and shot him dead.

    His crime: He was related to Zafrulla and had served in the Pakistan Army.

  22. a muslim

    @Gurmit:

    To anser your question:
    Lahori-Ahmadis (Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement) are the only Muslims who collectively believe in the FINALITY of prophethood IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD–FINALITY of prophethood. they believe that prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the LAST prophet. No if, thens, or buts. They hold belief that even prophet Jesus will NOT come back to this earth.

    Their critic muslims hold belief that prophet Jesus will come back to this earth. Thus practically NEGATING the finality of prophethood on prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

    Qadiani-Ahmadis hold belief prophet Jesus is dead but new-prophets can come after prophet Muhammad (pbuh). So they also practically negate finality of prophethood.

    Funny part is that BOTH Qadianis and general Muslims are practically DENIERS OF FINALITY of prophethood on prophet Muahmmad (pbuh). but since general muslims are much more so they branded qadianis as kaffir. Where as in reality they both qualify tobe declared kaffir.
    I GUESS MIGHT IS RIGHT, in minds of Pakistani Muslims.

  23. Hani

    @ Gurmit

    It’s b/c those who take a prophet as Ahmadis do after our Rasool are not Muslim. The confusion is that there is a Lahori Ahmadi movement which doesn’t ascribe to this fundamental disbelief, but the main Ahmadi movement does do it and as such they take themselves out of Islam. It’s pretty straightforward, it’s just that people are exploiting this tragedy for whatever personal political agenda they have.

    The fact that the Pakistani state regulates and doesn’t allow heterodox Ahmadi beliefs from being masqueraded or prosleytized as anything other than that is not unique to Pakistan. Russia has regulated Jehovah’s witnesses, Germany banned Scientology as not a legitimate religion. Pakistan has done far less by simply calling a spade a spade.

    This again is of course different than a state, a Muslim state, having the responsibility of protecting all of its denizens from violence regardless of their faith or identity.

  24. yasserlatifhamdani

    Zafrulla was what kind of Ahmadi … Qadiani or Lahori? He was Qadiani.

    That Zafrulla was not part of the League but its pivotal part should tell something to people about who was considered a Muslim or not.

  25. Hani

    @Yasser

    Having played a role even a pivotal in the creation of Pakistan is not the rubric by one which is judged a Muslim rather it’s the rubric by one may be judged a Pakistani. Muslims can be patriotic Indians and non-Muslims can be patriotic Pakistanis.

    No one is delegitimizing the Ahmadi appellation of being a Pakistani or even a patriotic Pakistani. For what role Zafrulla or Qadianis played in Pakistan’s creation, they should be given credit it for it.

    However, basic, fundamental, and imperative truths of what constitutes a Muslim shouldn’t be sacrificed in a misdirected attempt at resolving the actual problem that Pakistanis shouldn’t be butchering each other in this manner or any manner regardless of what difference (real or imagined) may exist.

  26. a muslim

    Zafrullah Khan services for Palestinians, in UN.

    Please don’t forget Palestine case built by zafrullak Khan for Palestinians in UN. No muslim or non-Muslim has served Palestine as well as Zafrulla did over half a century ago.

  27. a muslim

    I think justice will only be served in Pakistan if all DENIERS of finality of prophethood with Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in practical sense, are constitutionally declared Kaffir. When this happens then Kaffirs will become majority in pakistan and then they will work for peace and justice.
    in pakistan deniers of finality of prophethood includes:
    Sunnis, shia, Wahabi, deobandi, ismaili, qadianis…… EXCEPT Lahori-Ahmadis.

  28. Hani

    @a muslim

    Many Muslims and non-Muslims have advocated on behalf the Palestinians. Gandhi and other non-Muslims did just as much as well as I would presume Muslims besides Zafrullah did the world over at that time. Again, this doesn’t detract from the character of Zafrullah. He should get credit for what good works he did.

    I know you’re being partly facetious with your post about declaring everyone kaffir, but that’s exactly the problem that arose with the Qadiani movement. With their beliefs there’s no gray area in which most all other Muslim groups like Hanfis or Jafari Shias fall into when it comes to something like what constitutes Yawm-ul-Qiyamat or the nature and character of Mahdi/Messiah/Prophethood etc. Since it has to do with the future, we can simply give an Allahu Alim and move on with our lives living them as best as we can.

    Qadianis on the other hand have already stated a claim to having a messiah/prophet in the form of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. For Ahmadis, the Muslims knowing rejection of Mirza as a false prophet and imposter means that before we (the Pakistani state) declared them unbelievers they had already declared us to be non-believers b/c our rejection of Mirza is akin to rejecting Muhammad (saw) and claiming to be a Muslim. There’s no two ways around it, it’s either one or the other.

    Furthermore, Ahmadi’s even though they claim to be wanting to be simply called “Ahmadi Muslims” it really goes much further than that. The real implications of Ahmadi beliefs are that they are the real and true inheritors of Islam which in turn relegates the rest of us non-Ahmadis as being no different than the Jews that rejected Rasool in his time. Again, there is compromising on this precept much like how different Muslim schools of thought in the Sunni and Shia traditions can compromise. Even more importantly, this is the falsehood that they wish to spread and propagate and this is what the state has responsibility to clarify and regulate.

  29. Khullat

    @ Gurmit (May 29, 2010 at 11:47 pm)

    “…Forgive my ignorance but what is the basic difference between main stream muslims and ahmadis?…”

    Well, to begin with, the mainstream Muslims, in Pakistan, are Government-certified. In 1974, the Ahmadis were denied this celestial certificate.

    On the plane of doctrine, and in a single sentence, it would be: Ahmadis believe that the Holy Prophet’s prophecy regarding the promised advent of the foretold Messiah and the awaited Mahdi has been fulfilled in the person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. The mainstream Muslims believe that this prophecy still awaits fulfillment.

    @ Hani (May 30, 2010 at 2:27 am)

    “…Pakistan has done far less by simply calling a spade a spade…”

    And who may I ask defines and verifies the spade?

  30. Ranjit

    {{Dear Ranjit, Please Take India Shining narrative to http://www.chowk.com. Respect the dead here!}}

  31. Hani

    @Khullat

    The government can and does regulate and determine a whole set of categories as well as legislating laws pertaining to religion. Not just in Pakistan, but as I cited earlier Germany’s example of categorizing Scientology as a non-religion or Russia not allowing Jehovah’s Witnesses or Sweden mandating the Lutheran Church (not Methodists, not Baptists, not some general abstract Christianity) as the State Church of their nation with all its rules and standards.

    Furthermore, what Bhutto did in the 70’s wasn’t simply some autocratic dictum of a “Shia” against “Ahmadis” it reflected the almost unanimous national feeling of the country. If it had been put to a national referendum, do you think the decision would have been any different?

    In any case, the role of the state is to indeed protect minorities from violence (which Pakistan failed to do here) but putting blinders on to real differences and the kind of fitna the Qadiani movement would represent if allowed to continue masquerading as Islam (2.0 in this case) is also just as incorrect and a potential source for even more discord in the future. What happened in Lahore should be condemned whether it happens to Qadiani, Muslim, Hindu, or Jew, and most Pakistanis I believe (regardless of their personal beliefs) would condemn it as such.

    The point is if you are a Qadiani say you’re a Qadiani. If you are Qadiani say that you believe in Rasool (pbuh) but that you believe in another prophet after him whose role as messiah entails whatever xyz in your belief system (such as abrogating Jihad as Mirza did), but don’t sell yourself as orthodox Muslim belief. For instance, Bahias believe in Rasool and also Allah (swt) but also believe in Bahiullah as a prophet afterwards, but they don’t have the temerity to sell themselves as Muslims and which is why we don’t have laws clarifying their role in Pakistan.

  32. AZW

    Hani:

    Germany’s example with the Church of Scientology is incorrect. Germany is a secular nation that constitutionally guarantees that no citizen will be discriminated based on their faith of religious convictions.

    Germany recognizes major religious communities as “statutory corporations”. This incorporation give these communities certain privileges; give religious instruction in state schools (as enshrined in the German constitution) and having membership fees collected (for a fee) by the German revenue department as the so called the Church Tax.

    Where the Church of Scientology (COS) comes in is where there have been doubts about their cult like practices, brainwashing their members, totalitarian behavior and financial impropriety by their status of statutory corporation. This is where interior ministry has asked for their status as a recognized religion to be revoked. There is already severe reaction and court challenges to this move.

    First, German public is rightly worried that state recognizing religions even in the name of education and taxes violates the personal choice that any person have when it comes to their faith.

    Second, Germany’s move to unrecognize a religion may run into constitutional challenge especially as they have reportedly failed to find clear evidence supporting the charges against the COS.

    Apart from these statutory corporation aspect, Germany cannot discriminate COS members based on their faith. Their faiths are never questioned by the state, or form basis of anything they have to do in the public and private lives. There is no comparison between Ahmadis and COS in Germany.

    Second, Russia’s record in case of minorities or religious freedom is one of the better examples of what not to do.

    Third, you may want to call them non Muslims, or strayed Muslims, or the less righteous ones. Or they may want to call you a staunch non-Muslim. Be at it as much as you want. This is none of my business. And this should be none of state’s business too. Once a state starts deciding who is a believer or a non believer, the state discriminates the non-believer. Good for you to be born into the lucky club where the state is on your side. I would rather that future generations do not have to play the lucky sperm roulette where they are discriminated based on the sect into which they are born. A citizen with exactly equal rights and privileges irrespective of his faith, sect or personal beliefs will most probably not face the daily discrimination or threat to their lives and property that bahais, sunnis, shias, catholics, protestants, and ahmadis face in various countries across this globe.

  33. yasserlatifhamdani

    I don’t want to get into a stupid debate about partition but I’d like to ask Ranjit if it were that simple …why was the anti-Ahmadiyya agitation originally planned by the one Islamic Party (Majlis e Ahrar) which was the most pro-Congress ?

    Agha Shorish Kashmiri- the leading light of Islamist Tehreek e Khatme Nabuwat – was a follower, admirer and biographer of Maulana Azad.

    Mufti Mahmood is another such example.

    It is not as simple as Ranjit makes it. I request Indian friends to stop trying to make everything about partition and start with point scoring all the time. Then when I trace back Islamist agitation to Gandhi, all of you start whining.

    It is requested that this kind of behavior is stopped by Indians and moderators please consider removing post by Ranjit on India shining and certainly Arun/Sadna Gupta because for some reason that shameless person continues to post even though she has been told not to post here.

    After all … On the same day 80 people in India were also killed in bomb attack. So have some shame and dignity.

    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  34. yasserlatifhamdani

    Sir Zafrulla’s contribution not just to the Pakistan movement and Kashmir (the resolutions which base our case on were gotten passed by his adroitness when uncharitable Islamo-fascists admit as much) but to Arab causes world wide …especially Palestine …are admitted by most of the Islamic world.

    For some to compare Zafrulla’s contribution to Palestinian causes to some favorable noise by anyone else is the working of a prejudiced mind.
    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  35. yasserlatifhamdani

    I request UK-based Jamaat Ahmadiyya – and all Ahmadi Muslims- to pool into the archives in Islamabad (London walla) and find the correspondence between Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood and Quaid e Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah …which will show even more convincingly just how close Jinnah’s ties were to the Ahmadi Muslims.

    Another important correspondence would be between Dard (the London Ahmadiyya Mosque Imam and friend of Jinnah who convinced Jinnah to come back to India) and Jinnah…

    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  36. yasserlatifhamdani

    Maroof,

    It is NOT valid. The Islamist groups that are at the root of Anti-Ahmadiyya violence were PRO-Congress and Pro-Gandhi during partition. This is a Historical fact that cannot be denied.

    Why don’t you tell me what Majlis e Ahrar and Aga Shorish Kashmiri’s view on partition was? Majlis e Ahrar started the anti-Ahmadi movement. Read the Munir Report. It seems to me Aga Shorish Kashmiri is claimed by all and sundry in India when he forges an interview with Maulana Azad showing him in favorable light… well if that is the case, you cannot turn around and deny Aga Shorish Kashmiri’s “contributions” against Ahmadis in Pakistan can you now.

    In any event I don’t want to discuss partition here. That Ahmadis supported Pakistan Movement and the author of the Lahore Resolution was written by an Ahmadi … and that those murderers who killed and maimed Ahmadis asked for Ch. Zafrulla’s brother by name… speaks louder than a million pages of propaganda.

    PS: In the future before claiming to be Pakistani, try and change your IP Address from Delhi to Karachi. Just a word of advice.

  37. a muslim

    Dear Hani:
    STRONG Foundations of Palestine issue in UN were laid by zafrullah khan. What ever contributions people did after him for Palestine are based on his. We need to give his due credit.

    Lets be clear:
    “I know you’re being partly facetious with your post about declaring everyone kaffir,

    {EDITED FOR THEOLOGICAL POINTS}

    Can you please tell me based on what criteria of Holy Quran and sunnah of prophet Muhammad pbuh, government of Pakistan declared kalmia-reciters as Kaffir. If there is any such than why that bases of Holy Quran and sunnah has been kept as confidential and state top secret for over 36 years???? Reason is there is NO SUCH basis of Holy Quran and sunnah. It was all political. This is the reason govt of zulfiqar ali Bhutto and rest of mulla-mafia politicians kept it a secret. For Muslims, non-Muslims i.e. germany etc are NOT the criterion. For muslims criteria is Holy Quran and sunnah, at least in the matters of religion.

    {Editor: No one has to answer any theoleogical questions. This is not what this website is about. I am deleting other comments about sectarian literature as well. Hope this will be enough of an indication to avoid dragging religious point scoring in this debate. AZW, Editor}

  38. yasserlatifhamdani

    Hani writes:

    “No one is delegitimizing the Ahmadi appellation of being a Pakistani or even a patriotic Pakistani. For what role Zafrulla or Qadianis played in Pakistan’s creation, they should be given credit it for it. ”

    Some credit…. by criminalizing their mode of worship… by wiping off kalima tayyaba from their graves… by abusing them day in day out.

    Ahmadis are MUSLIMS because they say so. That is the standard Jinnah set. That is the standard all Pakistanis ought to follow.

  39. a muslim

    For information of Hani:

    Differences of Belief:

    {Deleted for theological points. Next time, comments will be summarily deleted} (Editor)

  40. yasserlatifhamdani

    a Muslim…

    The person who claimed absolute sovereignty for the parliament… that A H Peerzada… now claims that parliament is not sovereign…

    Sharifuddin and Hafeez are the two biggest curses for this country.

  41. Ranjit

    YLH,

    If you read my post properly, I was actually comparing the post-partition policies adopted by the Indian government vs the post-partition policies adopted by the Pakistani government. Those policies provide the foundation on which the two societies have evolved.

    After independence, Congress clamped down on the communal discourse. There was a fear of Punjab style communal riots spreading to UP and rest of India after 1947. Refugees were pouring in, communal passions were very high and people were losing their minds. At that time, the new Congress government decided to firmly clamp down on communalism and adopt a secular policy. It was tough to do at that time, but it has paid rich dividends in building modern India.

    After independence, Pakistan went the opposite direction. The government deliberately made India/hindus the collective enemy, imagining that it would help in nation building. The syllabus in schools, the media and the social discourse was all about hating India. That hatred laid the rotten foundations on which the communal parties that you refer to, were able to plant their seeds. The rotten situation in Pakistan is the direct result of adopting that policy.

    Yes, the Jamaat-e-Islami and Majlis-e-Ahrar might have supported Gandhi, but who gave them the space and environment to grow in Pakistan?

    EDITED FOR OFFENSIVE INSINUATIONS (READ MY POST BELOW)

  42. a muslim

    For information of Pakistanis who declare Lahori-Ahmadis as Kaffir

    Woking Muslim Mission’s Role in the Creation of Pakistan:
    by Khwaja Salahuddin Ahmad (son of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din)
    Ch. Rehmat Ali got his spark of inspiration in the Drawing Room of the Mission House, Woking
    The Light, 16th January 1966 / Reprinted in The Light & Islamic Review: Vol.74, No. 4, July-August 1997, pages 5-8

  43. a muslim

    Lahore Ahmadis to Vote for League — Maulana Muhammad Ali Issues Instructions:
    The Light, 8th February 1946, p. 4

    ——————————————————————————–
    In the course of his Friday Khutba on February 1, Maulana Muhammad Ali, Head of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, has called upon the members of this Movement that throughout India in the forthcoming elections to the Provincial legislatures, they must vote for the Muslim League candidate. Muslim League, he emphasised, has at the present time become a symbol of Islamic unity and solidarity. All members of the Lahore Ahmadiyya community must therefore stand by the League in this momentous struggle which involves the very survival of Islam in this country. Anyone failing to abide by this verdict of the community will be guilty of a betrayal of the community.

  44. a muslim

    ‘The Light’s’ Message on the ‘Independence of Pakistan’ — The Meaning of Pakistan:
    The Light, 15th August 1947

  45. yasserlatifhamdani

    Dear Ranjit,

    I don’t disagree that Pakistan went in a certain direction… my point is more basic… your post seemed to trace back things to the creation of Pakistan.

    The newly formed ML government had a Hindu law minister and an Ahmadi Muslim foreign minister. The syllabi you refer to are of later origin.

    The crime ML government did commit was the Objectives Resolution of 1949. Otherwise their policy remained on the whole quite inclusive and moderate. They were confused no doubt and had no leader after Jinnah… but had they followed Jinnah’s prescription of secular state…. we would have better off. But you cannot accuse ML government from 1947-1953 to be a government of Hindu-haters. They were not. They were not India-haters either… despite Kashmir injustice. Check for example the Nehru-Liaqat pact.

    The “security state” apparatus began to manifest itself starting with 1953 riots… which brought down the original Muslim Leaue government. 1958 was the culmination of the security state project. Indeed the whole anti-Ahmadiyya agitation has to do with establishment’s conspiracy against Nazimuddin’s government.

    It was in 1965 that India became an enemy country.

    Now may I request that you stop repeating your points which are frankly offensive to someone like me who has always opposed blanket anti-Indian and anti-Hindu sentiment in Pakistan.

  46. yasserlatifhamdani

    …. by the logic used here by the Indians… one might as well trace the massacre of innocents at the hands of Maoist terrorists to Nehru’s socialism.
    Yeah… stupid right? Well that is how stupid your assertions are as explained above.

    So may I suggest that Indians who want to take this ridiculous line stop posting here.

  47. Ranjit

    YLH,

    I understand your feelings and my intention of posting here is not to hurt you. But, the reality is that in spite of all that has happened, Pakistanis cannot bring themselves to say that all Jihad must be stopped. Period!! Just end each and every jihadi activitiy, and clamp down on each and every jihadi organization including LeT, JeM etc. End all hate speech against anyone in the world.

    Why is it so difficult for Pakistanis to give this up? Why this lust for Kashmir or hurting India, that still motivates vast numbers of Pakistanis to the point that they ignore the hugely negative side effects on Pakistan itself? The perversions that you see in Pakistani society like the sectrian violence, is purely due to the jihadi culture, my friend. And no one talks about getting rid of it without any exceptions.

    And by the way, the Maoists are a by product of the left leaning rhetoric in India’s discourse. Even today the government talks about dialogue with them and does not use the army against them. In a sense, they are India’s Taliban. Its a big mistake. India needs to ruthlessly finish them off.

  48. yasserlatifhamdani

    I agree with your sentiment but I think you’ve got many of the facts wrong.

    But let us india and Pakistan crush these people.
    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  49. Hani

    @ AZW

    I appreciate your nuanced exploration of the COS/Germany example and it’s specifics, but my point was really that states DO dictate religion and even the ‘secular’ states often define the parameters of what constitutes that exact belief system. The case still stands that the German Federal State attempted to outright ban of Scientology (not the much lesser charge of simply defining Ahmadi’s as non-Muslims with no right to Muslim symbols) even after it had once granted it a religion status. Similarly, the Church of England is part and parcel of its nation, and you’re not going to see it drop the Athanasian creed for Unitarianism anytime soon. This is a state ‘defining’ what it’s religion will be and in general what constitutes its belief system.

    Similarly, Pakistan as the Islamic Republic by which it identifies itself has a prerogative to give that Islam at least some basic parameters that are immutable and easily recognizable. The idea of the seal of Prophethood that no Prophet will come after our Rasool is exactly that by definition and consensus. Otherwise, what’s their to stop the next Ghulam Mirza Ahmad from coming on to the scene and claiming prophethood and stating he is carrying on the legacy of Islam as Islam carried it out for Judaism and Christianity. Should the state subsidize and recognize the next one and the one after that. Is that what we are? simply who we say we are? The attackers and whoever supported them proclaim themselves them to be righteous men on sirat-ul-mustaqeem, do you believe them simply b/c they believe they are or do you scrutinize not only their actions but their specific beliefs system as well? The irony here is that no one on this board I imagine will disagree when I say that these attackers (and their sympathizers) whose beliefs validate this kind of murder make it so that they are committing a transgression against Islam. Yet, the specific and open beliefs of Qadianis seem to be immaterial to what defines Islam. My point is if we are to judge these murders by not just their actions but also by their beliefs (as many here have done) by the rubric of Islam then it is only fair that everyone else is judged by that same rubric however basic it may be (thou shalt not murder etc.)

    Lastly, Islam is not a sperm roulette nor is Ahmadi a genetic marker. A person chooses what beliefs they carry around or even more significantly openly proclaim and the consequences of those beliefs whether they are met with praise or prejudice is often understandable and to be expected. Islam and Ahmadiyya are both a set of unique beliefs b/c despite their similarities they unfortunately have a number of irreconcilable cardinal beliefs and the implications of those beliefs are ones that you can’t simply just paper over like you can regarding fiqh and history between Sunnis and Shias with an Allahu Alim.

  50. yasserlatifhamdani

    Hani,

    Do you think Ahmadis have civil rights?
    Do you think their “unique” mode of worship should be criminalized?

    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  51. Hani

    @a muslim

    I’m presuming your Lahori Ahmediyya follower. Personally, I don’t really have an issue with your beliefs with respect to Islamic eschatology. I’m not well versed in them and I think all eschatology is pretty fuzzy by it’s very nature. Besides having a basic belief in Yawm-ul-Qiyamat, how, when, over what period of time, whose Dajjal, whose Mahdi, is there a Mahdi, is Prophet Isa (pbuh) going to be present or in what capacity are all points that I don’t really know nor do I deeply concern myself with them, Allahu Alim so yea that’s my answer.

  52. yasserlatifhamdani

    Hani…

    Your anglican church example is idiotic.

    Can you point out where UK has declared that Catholics and Non-Anglicans are not Christians and cannot be considered Christians… and if they call themselves Christians, they would be imprisoned.

    Unless you can show us where this has happened, what you’ve written is hogwash.

    Stop justifying your bigotry by making inane points. You remind me of that asshole Supreme Court judge who compared Islam to Coca Cola.

  53. Hani

    Of course they should have basic civil rights to safety and prosperity and I think the kinds of everyday abuse we hurl at each other should be beneath Pakistan and Pakistanis. But the civil rights that should be guaranteed to them are the same that are deserving to all of Pakistan’s citizens be they Hindu, Christian, or Parsi.

    My feeling is much of the discord that arises is on the Qadiani insistence on being accepted on face-value as Muslim and then utilizing that as a jumping off point for proselytizing their specific belief system based on the person and teachings of Ghulam Mirza Ahmad as a prophet. This is the falsehood that is found to be most egregious and what brings so much heat upon them.

    Take for example Nizari Ismailies/Aga Khanis, even though their belief system at times are often far more heterdox than even Ahmadiyya, Nizaris generally are not in the business of spreading their worship of the Aga Khan to non-Ismaili Muslims as a form of orthodox Islam, or more exactly they are not in the business of redefining orthodoxy to the uninitiated Muslim masses as is the mission of Qadianis. For this reason, they leave everyone else alone when it comes to Islam and in turn they generally get left alone despite being as active as they are in the political/economic/community scene.

  54. yasserlatifhamdani

    All these are pathetic excuses by a crook. You are a crook Hani. Just leave.
    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  55. Hani

    @ YLH

    what did I say about abusive language…

    Anyhow you misunderstood my point, so I’ll make it simple. I was not speaking for all of Christianity nor does the Church of England speak for all of Christianity. I said England has an established state religion/church (here’s a hint it’s not christianity with a big C), it’s the Church of England or more simply Anglicanism. The Church of England as was originally defined by the English state has established creeds and beliefs that make it what it is and just as importantly what it is not. I gave the example that the Archbishop of Canterbury cannot be a Unitarian b/c Trinitarianism is one of the said foundational creeds of Anglicanism. If you don’t follow that creed then you cannot be considered an Anglican simple as that. Similarly, Islam has simple basic creeds like the finality of Prophethood or Tawhid that if you don’t follow you are not a Muslim. These aren’t matters of fiqh between various madhabs or sects or whether you pray with your hands across or your hands to sides. That much should be apparent.

  56. yasserlatifhamdani

    Again a ridiculous and crooked argument.

    Now you are reducing Islam to small sub-section of Christianity i.e. Anglican Church. Earlier AZW took the air out of your Germany argument. Had you instead quoted the example of Nazi Germany’s use of yellow star perhaps you would have been more intellectually honest.

    What depths will crooks and bigots not fall to!

    I am just calling a spade a spade… I haven’t started the abusive language yet… I am not an Ahmadi and am not going to start bleating “love for all hatred for none”… in my armory – as a born and bred Lahori- are abuses that you would remember till your dying day.

  57. a muslim

    For brother Hani:
    Dear hani:
    “Similarly, Pakistan as the Islamic Republic by which it identifies itself has a prerogative to give that Islam at least some basic parameters that are immutable and easily recognizable. The idea of the seal of Prophethood that no Prophet will come after our Rasool is exactly that by definition and consensus. Otherwise, what’s their to stop the next Ghulam Mirza Ahmad from coming on to the scene and claiming prophethood and stating he is carrying on the legacy of Islam as Islam carried it out for Judaism and Christianity.”

    Not that I believe in any prophethood after prophet Muhammad pbuh. Not even Jesus AS.
    My question to you:
    How you can stop NEXT “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad” from coming on to the scene and claiming….????
    What if the next “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad” comes in India, or USA, or any muslim country other than Pakistan, Saudi-Arabia, and Iran. How you can stop his influence and carrying legacy of islam??? Please do NOT forget it is time of big POWERFUL WEAPON==è
    INTERNET, PRIVATE SATELLITES!!!!!
    How will you declare next “mirza ghulam ahmad” as kaffir, who is NOT in Pakistan???
    How will you KILL next “mirza ghulam ahmad and his followers” who are NOT in Pakistan???

    Remember: It is time of ideas. People are becoming more EDUCATED with every passing moment!!!

    BTW: Do you think by cursing Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, you will be able to finish his influence???
    I can list his mission objectives and how they are being accepted by MILLIONS OF MUSLIMS around the world including Pakistan. I can not list them here as it will make this post “religious”. And this is secular forum. One example in Pakistan we hear every day from people like Allama Javad Ahmad Ghamdi on TV. Have you realized Ghamdi sahib says EXACTLY SAME what Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian said over 120 years ago!!!

    No one can beat a rational idea. If idea is in sync with rationality, it will always prevail.
    I see every day Muslim Ulema on TV and print in Europe, North America and even in Pakistan saying what MGA of Qadian said long ago: It is time for JIHAD WITH PEN and NOT militant in defense and propagation of Islam!!!! Will you NOT call all these Muslim scholars as followers of MGA of Qadian????

    “specific belief system based on the person and teachings of Ghulam Mirza Ahmad as a prophet.”

    By avoiding to make this post a religious one, I will only say: YOU ARE WRONG.
    I read MGA, and NO where he said what you are saying!!!

    “Take for example Nizari Ismailies/Aga Khanis, even though their belief system at times are often far more heterdox than even Ahmadiyya, Nizaris generally are not in the business of spreading their worship of the Aga Khan to non-Ismaili Muslims as a form of orthodox Islam, or more exactly they are not in the business of redefining orthodoxy to the uninitiated Muslim masses as is the mission of Qadianis”

    If you have issue with Qadianis practices of preaching to Muslims, then you should have done what Indonesia did to them—-Pakistan should have BANNED them. Ban their offices, newspapers etc Why Pakistan declared reciters of Kalima-Shahada as Kaffir???
    This way Pakistanis started on path to REVERSE what prophet Muhammad pbuh came to do!!! Prophet Muhammad pbuh came to convert Kaffirs to Muslims and Pakistanis started converting Muslims to Kaffirs.!!
    Pakistani politicians and Mullah-mafia did what they did in 1974 for POLITICAL REASONS!

  58. enkhan

    YLH, So you brought one quotation where Jinnah was playing politics and now say he believed them to be muslims? I totally condemn the attack on Pakistanis, regardless of religion they are Pakistanis, but your gross efforts of mixing religion with an evolving constitution is quite incorrect, infact it is the major difference between a religion and a constitution, the base ideas of religions don’t change/evolve and what’s the big deal if you can’t agree to fundamental rules, then you’re not part of community. Why do they have to be a crybaby to be called Muslims when there’s a disagreements in basis??

  59. yasserlatifhamdani

    Huh? You are the ones who have mixed religion with the constitution.

    Is Islam a copyright? Well try and get Nation of Islam in the US banned on that rule.

    What you are saying, ENKhan, is nothing but nonsense.

  60. Hani

    I’ve stated my points as best as I can as well as answering your questions and addressing your at least (overtly non-hostile) accusations. You have done little of either as far as I have seen, but maybe this is all that you are capable of contributing to this topic at the present time.

    Initially, I was going to give you the friendly advice of sparing me the melodrama, since it’s even more unbecoming over the internet. Plus, it’s my first experience with Pak Tea House and who knows if I’ll ever return so why get you worked up when I may not even read it.

    But now I’m thinking I’ll probably drop in and out again so if it comes with the YLH package and is probably inevitable at some point now or later then please just go ahead and demonstrate your Lahori armory now (kudos on the metaphor, but be careful next time somebody wittier than I may retort with some kind of unpleasant “dud” jokes).

    Anyhow, this way I figure we can just get your fireworks show out of the way and maybe move on to something substantive later.

  61. yasserlatifhamdani

    Hani mian,

    You are running away because you tried to limit Islam to the anglican church and when I pointed that out you’ve started whining. AZW already deflated your balloon on the German example… you’ve refused to answer basic questions about the anglican church example… this is what I call a cop out by a crook.

    The YLH Package is the integral part of the PTH experience.

  62. enkhan

    YLH, you don’t understand religion.. and as you know religions are far more older than copyrights laws actually existed. Now I suggest you to please stop being a cry-baby and stop trying to twist and fit your ideas in religion.

  63. yasserlatifhamdani

    enkhan,

    Well my point is that Islam is NOT a copyright. You have no claim to Islam anymore than an Ahmadi.

  64. Hani

    @a muslim

    EDITED FOR THEOLOGICAL POINTS. I’ll just leave it at that b/c I don’t wish to go into the individual fiqh merits of each position nor would the blog admins probably appreciate it.

    EDITED FOR THEOLOGICAL POINTS.

  65. yasserlatifhamdani

    Enkhan,

    I have deleted your post because it is irrelevant. A Muslim League is in any event a party to represent Muslim minority and interests. Ofcourse it would be limited to Muslims… including Ahmadis.

    It doesn’t have any bearing on beliefs such as Jinnah’s ideals that state and religion should be separate.

    Jinnah resigned from the League presidency after the creation of Pakistan for precisely this reason.

  66. Hani

    Shabbakhair YLH

  67. a muslim

    Hani bahi jan:
    before you leave, please tell how you will stop next “mirza ghulam ahmad” and his followers in India from influencing Pakistani-Muslims???
    Especially in presence of internet.
    Thanks

  68. enkhan

    @YLH

    this is the third time my post got deleted.. that proves my point, its no place to debate..

  69. yasserlatifhamdani

    Yes. I deleted your posts on all three occasions personally.

  70. yasserlatifhamdani

    Make that four.

  71. Yasser, sure, I understand.

  72. yasserlatifhamdani

    People who can’t allow other people to call themselves Muslims, Christians or Hindus as per their religious beliefs are mortally estopped from claiming freedom of speech as a defence against my deletion of their comments.

  73. yasserlatifhamdani

    Karaya,

    Just so that we are clear…There is no link between Nehru’s socialism and Maoists who killed innocent people in my view. The link you drew between Nehruvian socialism and Maoism was a was a tenuous one.

    I cited it as an example of the absurdity of some of the arguments emanating from across the border.

  74. Bin Ismail

    @ Hani (May 30, 2010 at 5:33 am), (May 30, 2010 at 11:04 am)

    1. “…..The government can and does regulate and determine a whole set of categories as well as legislating laws pertaining to religion. Not just in Pakistan…..”

    You’re right – not just in Pakistan. Also in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Israel, former Soviet Union and other similar progressive and secular states. In retrospect, I suppose you would be all admiration for the Spanish Inquisition and further back in time, for the manner in which King Yazeed legislated laws that culminated in the assassination of Imam Hussain.

    2. “….. what Bhutto did in the 70′s wasn’t simply some autocratic dictum of a “Shia” against “Ahmadis” it reflected the almost unanimous national feeling of the country. If it had been put to a national referendum, do you think the decision would have been any different?…..”

    What Yazeed did in 680 AD, also reflected the unanimous verdict issued by his Council of advisors as well as the national opinion of the nation that had sworn unconditional allegiance to him.

    3. “….. In any case, the role of the state is to indeed protect minorities from violence…..”

    When the state does legislation against a certain religious community, the message it sends to the masses is that “you are free to treat them as the accursed”. Religious legislation against a certain community is actually an overt approval of their victimization.

    4. “….. For instance, Bahias believe in Rasool and also Allah (swt) but also believe in Bahiullah as a prophet afterwards, but they don’t have the temerity to sell themselves as Muslims and which is why we don’t have laws clarifying their role in Pakistan…..”

    The Bahais believe that Bahaullah was a law-bringing messenger, independent of the Holy Prophet. They believe that the Aqdas has abrogated the Quran. They believe what they believe.

    The Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a reformer, subservient to the Holy Prophet. They believe that the Quran is the final and last book of God. They, too, believe what they believe.

    In the words of Quaid-e Azam, “that has nothing to do with the business of the state”.

    5. “….. The idea of the seal of Prophethood that no Prophet will come after our Rasool is exactly that by definition and consensus…..”

    Pray enlighten me on how this “definition and consensus” will reconcile with the awaited advent of Prophet Esa (Jesus) when he eventually descends from his present heavenly abode. Will he be demoted from his status of prophethood prior to his descent to ensure that the “definition and consensus” you advocate is honoured?

    6. “….. Should the state subsidize and recognize the next one and the one after that …..”

    The state should subsidize health care and education for its citizens and recognize the fact that it exists not to govern the belief-system of its citizens, but to provide good governance to them.

  75. a muslim

    Kafir Factory

    Urdu column by Muhammad Hanif (author of ‘A case of Exploding Magos’)
    BBC Urdu-Online
    May 25, 2010.

    A good analysis of Pakistan’s religious atmosphere. I wish I could translate it into English.
    It says, “anyone who calls himself a Muslim [in Pakistan], there are two people to call him Kafir”.

    This article has one factual error: It gives impression as if Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement is some offshoot of Qadiani Jamaat.

    I’m wondering if author picked my phrase ‘Kafir-Factory’ aka Pakistan as a title of his write-up from my articles over the years on different blogs/ forums. Anyways, I’m glad if he did.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/2010/05/100529_hanif_colmn.shtml

    .

  76. Khullat

    Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian says:

    “Shukr lillah mil gaya hum ko wo laal-e bey-badal
    Kya huwa gar qaum ka dil sang-e khaara ho gaya”

    Translation:

    ‘Thank God that I have found that priceless gem – God.
    So what, if the hearts of my own people have turned stone-hard towards me.’

  77. a muslim

    Dear Hani:
    When you write:
    “…..The government can and does regulate and determine a whole set of categories as well as legislating laws pertaining to religion. Not just in Pakistan…..”

    I guess you SUPPORT SWISS government for banning minarets in mosques.
    I guess you SUPPORT BELGIUM government for banning veil/niqab/burqa.
    I guess you SUPPORT FRENCH government for banning Hijab

    AND I GUESS YOU WILL SUPPORT DANISH GOVERNEMENT FOR BANNING HOLY QURAN OR AT LEAST SOME OF ITS VERSES AND CHAPTERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  78. Khullat

    Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian says:

    “Baad az khuda ba ishq-e Muhammad mukhammaram
    Gar kufr een bawad bakhuda sakht kaafiram”

    Translation:

    ‘Next to God, it is the love of Muhammad that inebriates me.
    If this is kufr, then by God I am a firm kafir.’

  79. AZW

    Hani:

    The case still stands that the German Federal State attempted to outright ban of Scientology (not the much lesser charge of simply defining Ahmadi’s as non-Muslims with no right to Muslim symbols) even after it had once granted it a religion status. Similarly, the Church of England is part and parcel of its nation, and you’re not going to see it drop the Athanasian creed for Unitarianism anytime soon. This is a state ‘defining’ what it’s religion will be and in general what constitutes its belief system.

    Case stands for what. That German recognition of religion is to provide education for Catholics, Jews and Muslims with more emphasis placed on their religious sensitivities. There is absolutely no where when the state is deciding who is a Christian, Muslim or a Jew. The state is just saying: “Look, my job is to make sure you can follow whatever faith you want. And if you want religiously sensitive educational environment, I will even make sure I will provide it to you”.

    Germany is actually going one step forward; by not just guaranteeing religious freedom, but giving freedom to pick and choose the educational environment for its citizens.

    For this act, Germany needs to recognize religions because only by doing that it can provide for the extra benefits specific to that religion that the state is promising. In no way, Germany is deciding who is a Christian, Jew or a Muslim. This is taking secularism one step forward, not backward. It is shameful for someone to use this recognition of religions as something akin to state sponsored discrimination where every single Pakistani has to declare that he considers Mirza Ghulam Ahmad an imposter and his followers kaafirs.

    Your confusion with Germany and England probably arises from the lack of understanding of the term secularism. Secularism does not suppress religions; it allows them to live and thrive in its communities. Secularism simply does not allow one religion to overwhelm the others. It separates the religion from the state completely for this exact reason, but at the same time the secularism makes sure that no one can be stopped an iota from practicing their religions. England carries from its past the symbolic titles that are still kept in the name of tradition. It is a constitutional monarchy because of 1,000 years old tradition. Yet Queen or a King have zero legislating or overriding powers against the legislative assembly or democratic decisions. Britons can scrap the monarchy if legislation gets overwhelming approval for doing so.

    But the constitutional law is what reigns supreme in these countries. State does not decide who is a righteous one or an infidel. State makes sure that a self proclaimed righteous one does not have any more advantage over the less righteous one. Nowhere on these countries citizenship documents, passports, public offices anyone’s faith is ever questioned.

    As a matter of fact, a significant population in West is uneasy about the lengths to which the states are going to provide for the religious schooling of different faiths. The public is rightly asking why the state is bending over backwards to provide for these services. All catholic, Muslim and Jewish kids should have access to same public schools, and their religious sensibilities can be catered to by extra classes or extra home education. But even the detractors of the “extra mile” programs will be horrified to see that you are using these extra steps to justify the discrimination perpetrated by the Pakistanis against the Ahmadis.

    And finally the sperm roulette club argument. I find your argument selfish and parochial. Majority population on this planet is following the wrong faith, period. It does not matter what constitutes a right or wrong faith. You are born to the faith that is in dominance in Pakistan and in your self-righteous zeal, you are proclaiming that everyone should recognize that your faith is correct or suffer the rightly prescribed medicine; be declared infidels and non Muslims. And ditto for the state to do that.

    The problem is your thinking has been repeated by everyone throughout the history where majority in their supreme belief of their righteousness initiated systemic discrimination against the others. My simple question to you is “what if you were born a Qadiani?”. How much probability you put in people who switch their religion of birth, whether they are born Qadiani Muslims or Sunni Hanfi Muslims? What if you are disallowed from practicing your faith in open or face a possible 3 year rigorous punishment jail term.

    And while we are at it, let me quote you a real example that I have quoted elsewhere on this board. This question is rather simple: ‘What if you were born into a minority faith?”

    I had this discussion with a moulvi as he tried to tell me that he was on the right path and I was on the wrong path. I posed him this question; what if you were born to the faith that I am born to. His reply was as follows: “This is God’s will that he made you born in the wrong religion. But it is never too late for anyone to come to the right path”. And what if I don’t come to the right path? “Then I am doomed in this life as well as the afterlife” was his reply. Now that’s too bad for me right?

    You see, this moulvi was an Evangelical Christian priest. His only problem was that he could proselytize, but he could not force me to follow his religion, or let me be branded a non-Christian by the state. This is the blessing that the country I live in (Canada) gives me. It allows me to practice my faith to the same degree that it gives to that Christian priest. It is neither giving me an upper hand, or him an upper hand. I am not discriminated because of my religion. No one has ever asked me my religion when I apply for a driver’s license, passport, job interview (government or private), or at any public space (hospital, airport, courts). The law makes sure that religion does not form the basis of any discrimination. The state makes sure no one is stopped from practicing their religions.

    A state just doesn’t decide the righteousness of its citizens, period.

  80. Quaid wouldn’t have wanted that we accept his every opinion ‘blindly’ , I’m sure. You should also read Iqbal’s views on Qadiyanis🙂

    We should be more concerned about making Pakistan the way Allah wants it to be , rather than stressing on ‘Quaid ka Pakistan’ !

  81. YLH

    I have read Iqbal’s views on Qadiyanis. Did you know he was a Qadiyani himself till 1933?

    Had Quaid-e-Azam could see by time travel what people like you have done to Pakistan by selectively quoting Iqbal, he would have packed his bags and gone back to England around 1940.

  82. Then I won’t mind ‘Quaid’ leaving Pakistan if he’d be more concerned about ‘his’ views rather than the demands of Allah SWT !

    Furthermore, you need to bring proof for the ‘huge’ claim that Iqbal was an Ahmedi himself till 1933. Huh ! Have you read his book on Ahmedism ?

    And the topic of kufr of Qadiyani should have been dealt by discussing the Islamic sources (Quran and Hadith) rather than using emotional tactics and quote ‘Jinnah’ whose statement is of no ‘Shara’ee’ (legal) importance.

    You should imagine how happy Prophet Muhammad SAW would be on your approach ! You don’t need to invent a time-machine to bring jinnah back!

  83. YLH

    Iqbal’s eldest son Aftab …who remained a practising Ahmadi … testified to this effect. I don’t need any more proof.

    “Then I won’t mind ‘Quaid’ leaving Pakistan if he’d be more concerned about ‘his’ views rather than the demands of Allah SWT !”

    To phir Pakistan tera chacha banata?

  84. YLH

    erratum .. second last post…. “if Quaid-e-Azam”

  85. a muslim

    @ Muhammad Awais Tahir:

    Dear brother:
    Your question:Furthermore, you need to bring proof for the ‘huge’ claim that Iqbal was an Ahmedi himself till 1933. Huh ! Have you read his book on Ahmedism ?

    Dear if you go to head quarter of ‘Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement’ (more formally called: Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha’at-e-Islam Lahore) website and type in ‘Search window’: dr muhammad iqbal
    You will get proof results:
    144 for dr muhammad iqbal. (0.13 seconds)

  86. Yeah, the irony. What Iqbal himself isn’t valid. What his son said (supposedly he did) is more accurate.

    Come on, don’t let your inner filth gush out in the public. When Allah had decreed the making of Pakistan, had Quaid ‘flown-away’ (the way you said), doesn’t leave Allah with ‘no options’. Quaid was just a tool of Allah SWT. It was Allah who made us cross so many seemingly impossible steps to come up as a new Muslim nation on the globe. Now, we aren’t concerned about how we are breaking our promise that we did with Allah SWT ; ‘ that we’ll make it a laboratory where we’ll practice Islam’. How Quaid ‘would have felt’ is such a big issue. But how Allah SWT is seeing us now, is no issue. Even the purely religious topic is being discussed on the basis of views of someone who never claimed to be a ‘scholar’.

  87. First line : *What Iqbal himself *said

  88. Much before 1933 ‘ramooz e baykhudi’ was published in 1918 in which he says :

    ‘ la nabiyya b’adi ahsaan e khudaa ast
    parda namoos e deen e mustafa ast ‘

    Even his lectures (reconstruction of religious though in islam) were published in 1930 in which he takes strong exception to any idea that goes against khatm e nabuwwat.

  89. Pingback: From the BlogBucket: “Ahmadis Attacked” « CrossPak

  90. Hani

    Firstly, I thought it was in poor form to delete my response to ‘a muslim’ b/c I wasn’t really raising theological points or arguing over fiqhi matters, I was simply stating my perspective to where I stand to his/her perspective and actually being conciliatory. My advice which you can take (or will probably just leave which is just as well) don’t make Islam a no-go area when it comes to these discussions, since matters of faith/values are central in this topic.

    @AZW (a muslim i answered one of your questions as well)

    (sigh) Look I know where you are coming from, but at some points we may simply disagree and at others we may simply be talking past one another.

    However, my critique of your perspective that your naive if you think nation-states (in the West especially) do no dictate who is “righteous and who is an infidel.” Your naivete is that you only perceive of this occurring in some superficial sense that it has be said by a man reading out of a pulpit wearing a religiously inspired pointy hat (or a beard and turban I suppose). It seems unimaginable to you that the West may no longer be lead by a priest or a “defender of the faith” or utilize papal bulls but that it is no less dogmatic now wearing tailor-made suits than it was ever before when it comes to its values and beliefs. “Secular” values (or secular humanism as an ideology) and “Faith” values are two sides of the same coin despite however much one gets more sugarcoated in the West as being superior.

    ‘a muslim’ cited the examples of Switzerland, France, Netherlands (all ‘secular democracies’) and asked if I agree with their positions. My response to him/her is that it is immaterial how I “feel” about it b/c I’m neither their citizen nor do they care what I “feel” about it, b/c it is their country and they are allowed (as they have just done) to dictate the values that their country stands for.

    Sarkozy, the president of France, and his interior ministry when he banned hijab in schools or banned niqab in France, he said he was simply advocating and reflecting upon “French” values to discriminate/criminalize between exactly that “righteous and infidel” “right and wrong” “criminal and non-criminal.” For those affected, does it really make it warmer and gooier inside that he didn’t use “Catholic” as his values qualifier? Similarly, Pakistan is not a secular country, it’s a Muslim country and as such it’s utilizes Islam as it’s value systems as it should if it wishes to survive b/c the alternative is some kind ethno-national agenda with who knows what criteria lead by Punjabis? Sindhis? b/c we all know how well it turned out when we wanted Pakistan to be defined by its language.

    I can cite more examples. There are Muslim Canadian MPs right? (which you inevitably see as Canadian “openness”). As you are probably aware polygamy/bigamy is criminalized in Canada, but adultery and zina is perfectly legal (despite the illogic of it all). If one of those Muslim MPs stated he supports legalizing polygamy b/c it reflects his minority values and since adultery is legal anyways so whats the difference. In your naive world of openness and everything being equal and acceptable that makes perfect. But you should know as well as I that this Muslim MP would get excoriated from the top of Canada’s political establishment to the bottom and probably get kicked out of his party to boot. He’ll get publicly chastised by the media and public man as holding “non-Canadian” values. That’s just the reality of it.

    I won’t answer the question about what if I had been born into a minority faith b/c it doesn’t change my perspective. Minorities (faiths and otherwise) shouldn’t be molested or abused, but as I have said numerous times either you ascribe to a beliefs/values system or you dont. There’s a Islamic values system and there’s a closely overlapping ethno-cultural Pakistani values system. Ahmadis only fall under one despite however much one may wish to be otherwise, and putting blinders on is never the solution.

  91. Hani

    @ Bin Ismail

    I’m not saying the government is infallible. I’m simply stating that whether you agree with them or not (and if you are Ahmadiyya obviously you will not), governments do set parameters with respect to social values and beliefs. Sometimes they dictate it, other time it gets dictated to them (through referendums etc.). As an example, if you look at the state of California in the U.S. much of the political establishment is for legalizing gay marriage (governor, legislature etc.), but every single time it has come to a popular vote it has been voted down.

    I’ll repeat if you really think the judgement on the Qadianis would have been one iota different if it had been brought up to a popular referendum in Pakistan then go advocate for it, I’ll even support you namely b/c I don’t think it would have changed a single thing. Bhutto passed the amendment not b/c he had some kind of grudge against individual Ahmadis, it’s b/c that’s what the populace was calling for in the face of what Ahmadiyya publicly held to be true.

  92. Qadianis and Orthodox Muslims by Allama Iqbal ! ( published in “The Statesman” on 14th May 1935)

    http://irshad.org/info_m/writings/iqbalpdc.php

    The fitna of Qadianism was still emerging at that time. Perhaps, Jinnah didn’t have full knowledge of the situation, the way Iqbal had !

  93. AZW

    Hani:

    ‘a muslim’ cited the examples of Switzerland, France, Netherlands (all ‘secular democracies’) and asked if I agree with their positions. My response to him/her is that it is immaterial how I “feel” about it b/c I’m neither their citizen nor do they care what I “feel” about it, b/c it is their country and they are allowed (as they have just done) to dictate the values that their country stands for.

    Ah so here we are beginning to see the backtrack now when it comes to western democracies. Because in your first comment, you triumphantly mentioned Germany as an example of a country that legislates various religions within its communities. And when it was explained why Germany is going an extra mile to cater to the religious sensitivities of its population (without mind you discriminating one religion against the other, or officially excommunicating some religion on theological grounds), your example fell flat on its face. And now it is immaterial for you how you feel about these countries. Brilliant.

    Here is another nugget from your last comments: It seems unimaginable to you that the West may no longer be lead by a priest or a “defender of the faith” or utilize papal bulls but that it is no less dogmatic now wearing tailor-made suits than it was ever before when it comes to its values and beliefs. “Secular” values (or secular humanism as an ideology) and “Faith” values are two sides of the same coin despite however much one gets more sugarcoated in the West as being superior.

    Of course no priests run governments in the West. The government treats every citizen as equal. It guarantees them the exact same rights, privileges, and protection. It never asks them a single time what religion they belong to. That is why there is no sectarian or inter-religious warfare that takes place in North America. Let me check when was the last time a Muslim killed another Muslim in the name of religion in Canada or US. I am still searching. This is a direct result of neutralizing any religion’s influence upon others. Every member of every faith or sect is subjected to the same rule of law. And if you wish to call this a secular humanism ideology, most population on earth will take this ideology any day of the month.

    Now compare this every human being-equal-in-the-eyes-of-the-state-and-the-law ideology to the one practiced in Pakistan or Iran. Would a Sunni ever want to immigrate to Iran considering that the majority sect differentiates against them by using state legislature? Would a Shia ever consider moving to Saudi Arabia, as the majority sect is so self righteous that it discriminates against the minority? Yes, if you want to compare the secular humanism ideology to the state sanctioned religious ideology, except for the majority dominant sect living in Pakistan, Iran or Saudi Arabia, who else is happy? None.

    Ah, and now you try to move earth and the skies to find the farthest of examples to back up your ideology thought process. And what’s the best example here: Sarkozy banning niqab in France? Or Canadian MP getting kicked out for what? If these are the best examples you can find to back up who knows what you are trying to say, I must say that secularism in the west is doing quite well. France is debating the niqaab ban, and both sides are pitching their arguments for and against the ban. Here at PTH we have run a three part series back in February where we have discussed the nuances of niqab, its security implications, the force to wear factor, as well as why France may be wrong in outlawing the full featureless face covering dress. But here is the important point: niqaab is not proposed to be banned because it is an Islamic symbol. Islamic minarets now grace major European and North American cities, and the last time I checked there is an Islamic center scheduled to open a block away from the World Trade Center in New York.

    However I suspect like you picked the German example, this example may also be picked up handily to justify at any cost the state led discrimination that Pakistan is indulging in the name of religion.

    Then again you say that I won’t answer the question about what if I had been born into a minority faith b/c it doesn’t change my perspective. Minorities (faiths and otherwise) shouldn’t be molested or abused, but as I have said numerous times either you ascribe to a beliefs/values system or you dont. There’s a Islamic values system and there’s a closely overlapping ethno-cultural Pakistani values system. Ahmadis only fall under one despite however much one may wish to be otherwise, and putting blinders on is never the solution

    You may not have realized but you have answered my question with your wayward response here. Yes, we all ascribe to a belief system. And when you go behind the back of the Islamist government to treat others differently, you open the door to abuse right there. It is wishful thinking on your or other Islamists part who are helplessly seeing the religious genie rampaging through Pakistan. Discrimination comes from hatred; institutional discrimination in Pakistan has bred hatred through a full generation and a half. And now that unabated hatred has spilled over, and is killing indiscriminately on the Pakistani streets.

    There is only one positive aspect of the chaos and mass killings in Pakistan that I can think of. In regular English the term is called rubber meeting the road. The institutionalized religion is playing havoc with the very fabric of nation. And these acts are beginning to tell the Pakistani population something very basic: that when state becomes a party for one sect, it starts tearing the very society apart on the sectarian and religious lines. The fallacy of religious governance is showing in the only way it is capable of: a chaotic society where minorities and even the majority is being killed on the streets in the name of that very religion.

  94. AZW

    I have also noticed a rather stark contrast in the way the righteous ones as well as the murtids (unbelievers, followers of the false prohet) have posted their comments on PTH so far.

    The righteous ones are smug, think they have it figured out, and then outright quick to state that their word is final. Everyone else is a liar. They look down upon the infidels without ever answering the infidels’ patient comments and explanations. Short, aimless comments are being thrown like “No sir, you are a non Muslim”, or “you are a liar without any boundaries” etc. etc.

    The Ahmadi commentators have been extremely patient, taking their time to explain the nuances of their faith and why they think the majority righteous ones are missing the point.

    It is a stark contrast between how two parties are explaining their point of view.

    I am just amazed at the patience of the Ahmadi commentators, their kindness in the face of really torrid attacks on them, and their adherence to a civil code of communication. Bravo for that. This is the first time I have seen Ahmadi community explaining their point of view with so many voices. Your kindness and patience is duly noted and appreciated.

    For the smug Islamist right wing brigade trying to argue without arguments, the less being said the better it is.

  95. kashifiat

    //I have read Iqbal’s views on Qadiyanis. Did you know he was a Qadiyani himself till 1933? //

    Hahahaha another remarkable latifa

  96. yasserlatifhamdani

    I don’t like Iqbal nor I consider him a founding father. But Iqbal was a Qadiani till 1931 or 1933.

    I strongly encourage people to read Iqbal’s correspondence with Bashiruddin Mahmood especially in the All India Kashmir Committee.

  97. OMLK

    @ Hani

    U said:

    “@a muslim

    I’m presuming your Lahori Ahmediyya follower. Personally, I don’t really have an issue with your beliefs…”

    But you certainly do not seem to be bothered by the fact that the Lahore Ahmadiyya members are also by law considered Non-Muslims in Pakistan, despite having an absolute (as opposed to relative like the non-Ahmadi Muslims) belief in the finality of Muhammad (SAWS) prophethood.
    Of course this just shows that the issue was always political and not really theological as far as the 1974 amendment is concerned.

  98. I agree with AZW about the remarkable patience and forebearance demonstrated by members of the minority sect who were assaulted in Lahore (it is not clear who gets offended by the use of the terms ‘Qadiani’ or ‘Ahmedi’). In post after post, they have set aside the dreadful implications of the massacre, and replied as best as they can everything said about them.

    They have really set an example of grace under pressure.

  99. YLH

    For some reason it says “repeat” … it should read “repeal”.

    How strange.

  100. OMLK

    @AZW

    I think your observation may be explained by the philosophical approach to religion that the Ahamdis have; well atleast I can speak for the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM).

    You see according to the Ahmadi point of view the main obejctive of Islam is not to gain political power and forge huge kingdoms to enforce Islam globally. The main objective is the spititual uplift of humanity by following in the footsteps of Muhamamd (SAWS) which begins on a personal level for each individual. Ahmadis believe that the real strength of Islam is intellectual, and it is to be preached as such: a rational, tolerant philosophy that by the intellectual beauty of its teachings will appeal directly to the heart. Hence this is then how Ahmadis tend to argue; with patience and rational logic.

    Then there is the other camp (not all anti-ahamdi are necesary included here but certainly the most vocal ahamdi critics are), who believe that Islam must be enforced by grabbing political powers (eg. Jamat e Islami) and it is a duty of Muslims to wage Jihad to establish a global Islamic Kingdom in the pursuit of this objective. Thus by default then such voices speak as politicians and warriors do; full of emotion and empty rhetoric and devoid of rationality.

  101. Iqbal’s own writings are enough proof that he never accepted Qadiyanism. He might have praised the works of ‘Mirza’ in the beginning, but as soon as he realized him attempting to break the seal of Prophethood, he had been against him. And that is clear from his writings much before the 1930’s. And in the 1930’s he gave blunt views on Qadiyanism, and he found no place for them in the folds of Islam!

  102. a muslim

    Dear brother Hani:
    I have not read your comments in reply to me. If you live in San Francisco bay area, may be we can get together some day.

    “‘a muslim’ cited the examples of Switzerland, France, Netherlands (all ‘secular democracies’) and asked if I agree with their positions. My response to him/her is that it is immaterial how I “feel” about it b/c I’m neither their citizen nor do they care what I “feel” about it, b/c it is their country and they are allowed (as they have just done) to dictate the values that their country stands for.”

    I thought you were speaking for MAJORITY PAKISTANIS when you support Pakistani law regarding former Muslims i.e. Kalima-Shahada reciters killed on Friday or those who will get killed one day or other by Pakistani-Muslims, unless they leave the country.

    Please remember it is Pakistani Muslims who burn property and protest when European countries applying their laws defend those who hurt feelings of Muslims. Why the same Pakistanis don’t say, “we must respect all blasphemous writers, cartoonists, movie makers, politicians, bloggers, ….because they are doing absolutely legal things according to laws of their countries”.

    Meetha meetha hupp hupp aur karwa karwa thu thu!!!!

    Dear Islam does NOT teach: Might is right.
    Islam teaches: Fairness and justice. Wish for your brother, neighbor, fellow citizen what you wish for yourself.
    Unfortunately Pakistani Muslims hold belief: Might is right.

    BTW, I’m him.

    My comment on your post addressed to AZW:
    “My If one of those Muslim MPs stated he supports legalizing polygamy b/c it reflects his minority values and since adultery is legal anyways so whats the difference. In your naive world of openness and everything being equal and acceptable that makes perfect. But you should know as well as I that this Muslim MP would get excoriated from the top of Canada’s political establishment to the bottom and probably get kicked out of his party to boot. He’ll get publicly chastised by the media and public man as holding “non-Canadian” values. That’s just the reality of it.”

    Dear probably you don’t know:
    Couple of months a MPA from Punjab Assembly Mrs. Khawar belonging to PML (Q) made statement endorsing polygamy, on the floor of the assembly. Do some research and you will find out what was done to her. How she was criticized and shut up etc. look into your own pants before criticizing others.

    Being a trained shrink in US, I would say good chunk of problems in society would resolve if polygamy is allowed. And mark my words, one day in this USA it will be allowed. There was a time when Ahmadi Mubaligh (missionary) was refused entry in US because he had copies of Holy Quran with him, and the holy book allows polygamy.

  103. yasserlatifhamdani

    Before 1934-35 there is no indication of any anti-Qadiani bias in Iqbal mian’s work.

    It was Iqbal who joined the overwhelmingly Ahmadi Kashmir Committee and then nominated Bashiruddin Mahmood for its presidency.

    These are facts and as such irrelevant because Iqbal was not the founding father of Pakistan.

  104. See the ‘seerah’ of Prophet Muhammad SAW and his rightly guided caliphs, how they attained ‘political’ power ! The claim is totally rational and unislamic ! Few people are taking ‘Jihad’ out of the equation, just to please Mr America and Mr Britian! As for the Islamic Spirit, yes we need to take revenge from our enemies (even if you are against offensive Jihad). Those who wish down and say ‘go you and your Prophet fight’ (they way Israelis did) can do so, but what Islam demands from you is that you challenge those who pose a threat to you and your system! If the goal of ‘global islamic order’ has been possible without bloodshed, Prophet Muhammad SAW would have never raised a sword.

  105. a muslim

    @M A Tahir:
    Your: “And in the 1930′s he gave blunt views on Qadiyanism, and he found no place for them in the folds of Islam!”

    brother then how come Sir Iqbal kept presideing annual gathers (jalsa) of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement. how come Sir Iqbal did NOT refute what head of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement wrote. Sir iqbal live for at least two more years after LAM head Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote.
    BTW: Did iqbal ever change his belief that he accepted after doing his pledge of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of qadian i.e. Jesus AS is dead????

  106. Iqbal opined that Mirza’s claims were useless and Muslims should ignore him to avoid washing dirty linen in public. That was the position until Iqbal experienced the shenanigans of Ahmadiyya while working with Mirza Bashir (2nd Khalifa of Qadiani faction) and his followers in the All India Kashmir Committee (1931-1933). Bashir and another Ahmadi were the head and secretary of the Committee. Iqbal received complaints that Ahmadiyya were using the Committee as a platform to carry out missionary activities in Kashmir. The best way forward, Iqbal proposed, was to formulate rules of business for the Committee. But Ahmadi members vehemently opposed Iqbal and others, making it clear in the process that their primary loyalty lay with their Khalifa (Bashir) for now and in the future. Bashir resigned eventually and Iqbal took over the chair temporarily before the Committee was dissolved, mainly, due to the Ahmadis leaving to follow Bashir. Ahmadiyya went on to form their own Tehrek-e-Kashmir and offered Iqbal the chair but he refused to be bitten twice.

    This is what really happened!

  107. a muslim

    @ MA tahir:
    “If the goal of ‘global islamic order’ has been possible without bloodshed, Prophet Muhammad SAW would have never raised a sword”

    It looks like Robert Spencer of jihadwatch dot com wrote above statement with the sole purpose of maligning and defaming Islam.

  108. Furthermore, it is useless to discuss this! We all agree that Iqbal died as a ‘Muslim’, and he worked hard in 1935 to make the British declare Qadiyanis a separate Muslim community. What he thought before that (in case he did), doesn’t really matter!

    ‘Innamal A’amalu bil khawateem’

  109. Its because you are so ‘impressed’ by the western media and you fail to realize what Jihad is, and how much Allah loves it ! They can continue to hate it, if they wish to! But, this would continue, till the end of the world, in sha Allah !

  110. a muslim

    @M A Tahir:
    “Iqbal received complaints that Ahmadiyya were using the Committee as a platform to carry out missionary activities in Kashmir.”

    No, it was not the reason.
    Reason was Sir Iqbal got informed by two Muslims clerks working in viceroy office, by showing a file that had minutes and report of Kashmir committee meeting that was supposed to be confidential. Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad the chairman of Kashmir committee sent that report to viceroy.
    FYI: Sir Iqbal nominated Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad to the chair of Kashmir committee out of respect for his father i.e. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. (who had died on May 26, 1908).

  111. Hani

    @AZW

    I’ve stated my perspective and you’ve stated yours. Khalas, I’m starting to feel there’s not much left to reconcile b/c you’re so far into drinking your own kool-aid (and possibly I into my mango lassi) that you state that France’s niqab ban has nothing to do with it being in your words “an Islamic symbol,” it is not an act of outright state discrimination (the 200 women that wore it in all of France indeed constituted a “threat” necessitating presidential speeches and prison time).

    I presume you can further defend the Swiss ban on minarets b/c conical towers can serve as Taleban watchtowers, and Western media are simply espousing “freedom of speech” in the most innocent of manners by flexing their “freedom” by targeting the sacred symbols of their most politically and economically disenfranchised class. All of this has nothing to do with their views of Islam. Netherlands forcing Muslim immigrants to watch a video of same-sex kissing and topless bathers has nothing do with Islam. Right.

    I’ll remind you again I’m not simply speaking about Muslims the individuals, I’m talking about Islam the different values system that they find conflicting with their own which they have never apologized discriminating against if it really means protecting the ‘sanctity’ of their own system. Maybe this is the subtlety that is being lost on you.

    As far as I can deduce in your unyielding defense of it where there discrimination is justifiable but ours is inexcusable, it seems that secular humanism and the West is also your par exemplar (more so than Islam). If it’s a Western value, then it seems to be your value and apparently it should be Pakistan’s value as well. Let me emphasize this so we are clear, I gave examples from the Western world not b/c I share your perspective that the West sets the moral standard which is why I haven’t cared to quibble with you about Germany (I mean REALLY? Germany? no discrimination ever? unthinkable? Sieg Heil? No?) b/c at the end of the day I don’t really care what’s best or worst for Germany, or Netherlands, or Switzerland. They decide their own destiny for themselves. My sole aim was to defend Pakistan from those who try their best to make it ‘exceptional’ in all the wrong ways. This is both their hypocrisy and yours.

    (Just for added measure :P) I for one feel that western secular humanism (rather than being the harbinger of diversity and acceptance as seen in your viewpoint) is the most homogenizing force in this world (not in the good way) and far more insidious then some bigoted tribesmen with an AK-47 can ever be. And you AZW like many others here seem to be its veritable by-product maybe that’s where your affinity and allegiance towards it comes from. To be fair, I along with you am a part of this global elite that has access to the resources and means on account of which we can hatchet things out on a forum such as this speaking English in the manner that we do.

    However, my perspective is that their are far more people in Pakistan besides just us or this forum who neither need secular humanism nor want it in the manner that you think is so desperately urgent. If they did, it would have already happened by now with the secular humanist nations (the West for short) bank-rolling it as they are trying to do the world over (akin to the role the Wahabi boogey-man plays). Furthermore, I don’t know if your sense of “history” extends only so far back as a few decades, but you speak as if Islam and politics is a new institution and every depredation we see now in Pakistan started from this novel innovation of I guess Zia (the favorite decades-long dead punching-bag) or Maududi (the other favorite decades-long dead punching-bag).

    In either case, you really think Pakistanis want the same values system of the West of secular humanism where it’s not Islam (nor even popular will for that) that matter but it is secondary to a dictation from the U.N. Human Rights Commission or maybe after the latest U.S. State department press release, or possibly the musings of a cabal of PTH contributors.

    I mean what exactly is the point of Pakistan for you? If secular humanism is what you seek and if even the term “Muslim” is non-definable, then why create Pakistan as a state for Muslims at all? why couldn’t we have kept a state with Hindus? or even lived under a Hindu majority? if secular humanism is what we seek. I don’t mean that as a challenge b/c you may very well be a “Congress” supporter, which is fine b/c at least your ideology lines up.

  112. yasserlatifhamdani

    Hani you are clueless. Bigots like you- may I remind you- sided with the Congress Party in the 1946 elections.

    We’ve discussed why partition many times.

    Isn’t it odd that the people who agree with you are exactly the people who called Jinnah ‘kafir e azam”.

    So stop making stupid statements and be off.

    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  113. Hani

    @OMLK

    I think the law shouldn’t apply to Lahori Ahmadiyya, but again I think it’s just a by-product of the proximity of the two movements that they both get tarred by the same brush.

    @a muslim

    Yes Muslims protest and burn things after Western media provocations. I don’t think what they do is right or productive in terms of addressing their problems. My feeling is more than simply the offense or really caring who drew what and where, the mobs howel and get enraged at their own impotence with respect to not some foreign country but actual significant matters in their own country.

  114. Hani

    Oh YLH…

    I wasn’t born in 1946 nor have I personally ever called any individual in my life a kaffir (Quaid Azam included), but hey why engage in conversation when you’ve already discussed “everything.” I guess we’ve moved onto the YLF fatwa hour, b/c I unlike you came here to discuss and haven’t tried to shut anyone down but clearly I can tell you want to lead by your own example for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Pakistan.

  115. @Hani

    I think we should all make allowances for each other’s raised tempers considering how much these grim incidents have impacted us (not just Ahmedis, not just Pakistanis, not just Muslims, but whoever thinks of women and children getting hurt, of the innocent at prayer being killed). The same statements that you are making today may not get you such ‘robust’ responses even a few weeks later.

    Take it easy.🙂

  116. OMLK

    @ MA Tahir

    “If the goal of ‘global islamic order’ has been possible without bloodshed, Prophet Muhammad SAW would have never raised a sword.”

    This is just the type of barbaric mind set that breeds fanaticism and promotes the use of violence for religion. As this is not a forum to have a theological debate, I will simply state the Ahamdi position which is based to the last dot on the Quran and the Sunnah, and not present religious arguments.

    “Islam seeks to attract the hearts and minds of people towards the truth, by means of reasoning, good moral example, and the natural beauty of its principles. It neither aspires to gain political power, nor allows the use of force in support of the faith.”

    I think it is a tragedy for the Muslims that violent voices such as those of MA Tahir are officially “Muslim” voices and the tolerant voices like the Ahamdis are declared non-Muslims. I can just imagine one of the many anti-Islam fanatics latching on MA Tahir’s statement to malign our beautiful, paceful religion and defame our beloved Prophet Muhamamd (SAWS) as a blood thirsty power grabber (Nauzubillah).

  117. No one blamed Prophet SAW to be blood thirst. Thats your own thinking coming out !

  118. No one blamed Prophet SAW to be blood thirsty. Thats your own thinking coming out !

    Try to be realistic in your approach. They will bulldoze you in every corner of the world. Keep you in Guantanamo. They will destory your countries on false justifications, and you’d keep on sitting doing the tasbeeh of ‘peace’. That is not what Prophet SAW did when he was attacked and thrown out of Makkah. The era of Madinah was full of battles.

    They have successfully ‘won’ your mind by limiting you to the mere islam a religion concept, and you fail to realize the importance of making Islam a System of the World, and its mechanics.

  119. Keep on doing ‘tasbeeh’ of ‘peace’ as America orders you to ! You are not following the footsteps of Rasulullah , and you are not following the teachings of Quran. You are trying to remain in the boundaries Mr America set for you and the path Mr Mirza showed to you. These have nothing to do with the Islamic spirit.

  120. AZW

    Hani:

    There are a lot of clichés and generalizations in your latest comment. I will not be able to respond to it in detail until Tuesday morning Pakistan time. And for the record, there is no secret coterie running the PTH. There are people from Pakistan, India commenting openly on the forum. We do not claim to know all, but we do read history and call a failed ideology when we see one. There is a resident Islamist brigade as well that is more enlightening to all of us than this brigade can ever imagine; they keep things in perspective on how a narrow view of the world brings on the mess that plays out on the streets of Pakistan.

    Please feel free to browse the forum for niqab debate as well as articles on the nationalist Muslim ideology that was espoused by Jinnah for Pakistan. This ideology was derisively called “chaste prostitution” by Syed Abu al Ala Moudoudi. That the religious right at the time of partition was most perceptive to the Muslim nationalism espoused by Quaid is one of the biggest ironies of all. As they correctly realized what the mostly centrist Muslim League leadership was up to, they were able to agitate right away to take Pakistan away from where Jinnah wanted it to be all along. But that takes a lot more due diligence than simply jumping on the clichés that we hear day in and out in an increasingly politically-Islam influenced Pakistan.

    More later.

  121. a muslim

    Dear brother Hani:

    “I think the law shouldn’t apply to Lahori Ahmadiyya, but again I think it’s just a by-product of the proximity of the two movements that they both get tarred by the same brush.”

    I disagree with you. I would say there should NOT be any such law. If Holy Quran allows person to be accepted as Muslim if he/she uses the Muslim salutation i.e. Aslam Alikum. Every reciter of Kalima-Shahada should be accepted as Muslim. Regardless how good or bad he/she is. Leave decision of their Iman (faith) to Allah. As Allah instructs in Holy Quran in regards to those who even totally denounce Islam and convert to some other religion.
    As Z.A Bhutto said, he enacted 2nd amendment because Qadianis were becoming King Makers in Pakistan like Jews in USA. (Col Rafi book: Last 323 days of Bhutto). The very basis of this amendment was political and NOT religious. This is the reason for keeping the complete proceedings as “top national secret” to this day.
    If ZAB was an honest person he could have referred the case to Pakistan Supreme Court the way it was done in 1953 i.e. Justice Munir Commission.

  122. Bin Ismail

    @Hani (May 31, 2010 at 2:33 am)

    1. “…..governments do set parameters with respect to social values and beliefs…..”

    The issue at hand is not what “governments do”, but what is morally right with respect to the requirements of good governance. “Governments do” all sorts of things. Was it not a handful of governments who led to both the worldwars? Speaking rationally as well as morally, the issuance of edicts on the religious beliefs of people is not within the scope of statecraft. The principle of “the majority rules” applies only to temporal matters, not to the realm of spirituality. Each and every single God-sent reformer was outnumbered, opposed and persecuted. If the number-game was to be accepted as a criterion for judging the veracity of God-sent reformers, they would all be voted out. If today, a world-wide referendum was to be conducted, say under the auspices of the UN, regarding the truthfulness of the claim of Muhammad the Holy Prophet, the vote of the world’s majority would most certainly be against him – or for that matter against any reformer subjected to such an irrational test.

    2. “….. Bhutto passed the amendment not b/c he had some kind of grudge against individual Ahmadis, it’s b/c that’s what the populace was calling for in the face of what Ahmadiyya publicly held to be true…..”

    Why did Z. A. Bhutto get the 2nd amendment passed in 1974? Essentially, there were 3 reasons:

    a) There was Saudi pressure and Bhutto was badly in need of their riyals.
    b) Bhutto was an ambitious politician and desperately wanted to expand his vote-bank by including the rightist segments of the society. He had to please them.
    c) Bhutto wanted to minimize the political leverage of Ahmadis as voters.

  123. a muslim

    Dear brother Bin Ismail:
    “c) Bhutto wanted to minimize the political leverage of Ahmadis as voters.”

    I think ZA Bhutto wanted to minimize more than political leverage of Ahmadis (Qadianis-Ahmadis) as “voters”. Qadianis were instrumental in helping ZAB win election in 1971, especially in Punjab and help in other provinces. Qadianis helped ZAB/PPP by providing full organizational support/ vounteers/workers/ finances/ and of course votes.
    Thus Qadiani khalifa 3 Mirza Nasir Ahmad and his brother (later Qadiani Khalifa 4) were very powerful in Punjab and on first name basis with ZAB. Moreover, Qadiani khalifas started dictating Punjab Chief ministers and ZAB. And to blackmail ZAB they started flirting with Asghar Khan of Tarikh-i-istiqlal. ZAB could not afford qadianis supporting his opponent.
    I wish Qadianis who claim to be a religious organization should NOT have interfered in Pakistani politics at an organizational level.

    “a) There was Saudi pressure and Bhutto was badly in need of their riyals.”

    Saudi Arabia got involved into qadianis issue after Pakistan national assembly had declared Ahmadis (both Qadianis and Lahori groups) as kaffir. I’m not sure to what level that involvement went.
    Remember: King Faisal of SA had offered prayers in Woking Mosque/mission run by Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM). There are photos on Woking mission webpage maintained by LAM.

    “b) Bhutto was an ambitious politician and desperately wanted to expand his vote-bank by including the rightist segments of the society. He had to please them.”

    Well actually ZAB wanted to steal GLORY OF SERVICE TO ISLAM from his mullah opponent politicians. And of course to beef up his Islamic credentials. And he did think his action was also the only noble action of his life and could become source of his salvation. (Ref; col Rafi book)

  124. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim (June 1, 2010 at 4:07 am)

    Thank you for your views. Respectfully, with reference to your 3 points, I would be inclined to view things a bit differently.

    1. Around the time the 1970 elections were taking place, there was only one party of substance, that believed in Pakistan. The Awami League wanted the secession of East Pakistan, a goal they eventually acheived. The Jamaate Islami and JUI were known to have opposed the very creation of Pakistan. Around independence, these parties had dubbed Quaid-e Azam as “Kafir-e Azam” and Pakistan as “Paleedistan”. There was no reason to believe that they would have abandoned their original agenda.The Muslim League was fragmented and had lost its influence. The only party that could do anything to keep Pakistan alive, then, was the PPP. It was for this reason that the Ahmadiyya leadership chose to support the PPP.

    2. For the sake of record, it was not King Faisal, it was Prince Faisal. But then you ought to know how people change, in the world of politics. Faisal was offering a package-deal to Pakistan. The Riyals would roll in, but only in the company of Wahhabism. The Ahmadiyya Jamaat’s existence could not be accommodated in this scenario.

    Again, for the sake of record, Saudi opposition towards the Ahmadis had commenced well ahead of 1974. The 1974 amendment followed the Saudi-led Rabita campaign to make things difficult for Ahmadis living in Muslim countries.

    3. Political salvation meant much more to Bhutto than his spiritual salvation.

    Regards.

  125. AZW

    Hani:

    So from your latest comment, you are meandering between Swiss ban on minarets, to Germany not being a role model to me being a by-product of something, to secular humanism being the most homogenizing force on the planet (more than bigoted tribesman you add)…. to the fourth to last paragraph that I am still trying to understand what it exactly means (though I seem to belong to some global elite group, which is always nice to hear, but I still don’t see any benefits for being part of an elite group), to the fact that if not Islam then why Pakistan.

    Talk about some clichés barrage, so where do we start. First, ban on minarets is wrong. And last time I checked Swiss are as fallible humans as you or I are. And bigotry does run deep inside humans be it a white supremacist group in the United States, far right Austrian parties, or kick out the immigrants political parties that dot each country across the globe, or racist African tribal chiefs living in Western Saharan countries. Countries do make mistakes; Swiss example seems to be an egregious one. But this is why secular societies institute multiple checks in the system, starting from constitutional safeguards to free press that both writes for and against any issue. The despotic majority is always a small chance, but real life and societies work on minimizing that chance. There will be exceptions like Swiss ban on minarets where a referendum voted in favor of that ban (though legal challenges remain), or anti immigration far right parties success in Austria or Netherlands. But being an astute observer, you would of course look at the tiny exceptions rather than the overwhelming cases of better standard of livings enjoyed by the Muslims in Europe and North America.

    For that measure, let me ask a simple poll question to all Muslims living in Europe and North America that visit the PTH: “Has anyone ever asked you to stop calling yourself being a Muslim? Has anyone ever stopped you from practicing your faith? Would you practice your faith more freely here than let’s say in going to Saudi Arabia, Iran or Pakistan (the defenders of the faith nations of the world) and practicing your faith there?”

    For the same measure, let me get the number of pious Muslims lining up to go to Europe or North America to live (I am assuming they are not going to shed their faith and they fully intend to practice that faith in the foreign lands, where by the way – they can). And let’s hear from Sunni Hanafi/Shaafi/Salafi folks who feel that they are going to become better Muslims by moving back from the West to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, where not only you are the majority sect, you are also free to call Ahmadis (and for that measure throw in Ismailis, who unfortunately seem the next on the list of zealots) infidels. The state will make sure that you are never going to come under the disturbing influence of this heretical sect of Ahmadis who are forever causing problems for the true Muslims.

    This is the so called koolaid many of us are drinking here at PTH. All we ask for is that what we give is what we get. We expect to be treated with dignity in foreign lands inhabited by majority belonging to non Muslims. And for us to expect that for ourselves, and then turn around and treat the minority in the land of our birth as infidels is disgustingly hypocritical.

    Second, humanistic secularism as you call it, requires people of various cultures and religions living under one set of laws, same for everyone regardless of their faith or beliefs. This is why a heterogonous society will have occasional problems when a set of religious beliefs run against the collective values of the society. And not to worry, this is not Islam-specific, as many right wing commentators in Pakistan eagerly proclaim. The issues may involve Sikhs being barred from carrying their ceremonial kirpaan in public places, devout sub-sect of Mormon Christians being barred from practicing polygamy (which is almost considered a religious requirement for them), Jehovah Witness’s young cancer patient children being forced to undergo chemotherapy (as JW devout practitioners shun modern medicine), state making sure that Pakistani women in UK are not forcibly taken back home and get married against their will, West African women not taken back home and forcibly female circumcised in their native lands, and women niqab debate in France (where even many French public is opposed to the ban and the proposal is finding it hard to find legs, despite being debated for almost a year now).

    So relax, world is not out to get Islam. Secular society values will butt heads with occasional religious convictions of all religions. But last time I checked, it is people collectively deciding amongst themselves how to deal with the issues on the holistic society level, not some divine law (which unfortunately was meant for not more than one religion, which is too bad for the other religions). They rather use simple tools such as public legislature, free press and judicial precedents to find the best solutions. And mind you, all the society members have been reasonably satisfied with the outcomes.

    Would Pakistan want secular humanism? How about putting the horse before the cart, rather than the other way around? How about letting democracy work, without forever talking about making Pakistan an undefined fortress of Islam? See when you keep talking about making Pakistan a fortress of Islam, advocate Jihad (not just defensive unfortunately as per the spiritual leaders of modern political Islam, Sayyed Qutub and Moudoudi, and isn’t a certain individual named Owais Tahir on this forum is deriding the fact that Jihad cannot be only defensive), cause riots incessantly to declare Sharia law in Pakistan (1948, 1953, 1960s against the family law, 1970s against Ahmadis, 1980s for General Zia) and then claim that democracy does not work in Pakistan; sounds a bit contrived don’t you think.

    And while you ask my if not Islam, why Pakistan, then I would remind you that this was the exact same question that Mr. Moudoudi (your spiritual torchbearer) was asking a gentlemen named Muhammad Ali Jinnah. The details may bore you since you seem to have made up your mind, but do search this forum a four part series titled “The Undefined Equilibrium between Pakistan and Islam”. Muslim nationalism is not equal to Islamized Pakistan ; Jinnah was clear about that. He was derisively called Western elitist Mussalman by Moudoudi, and Ahsan Islahi called Jinnah’s idea of Pakistan a devil’s creation. So if this is the elitist group that you accuse me of belonging to, I am perfectly honored to belong to that group. I want Muslims to prosper, practice their faith; but not by subjugating others, and carrying a hatred against the infidels by carrying a banner of political Islam, that ”everyone talks about but nobody understands” (read Justice Munir and Kiyani report into the riots against the Ahmadi community to understand this phrase better).

    So we can go on and on about our ideologies. For the record, I am a sunni Muslim and feel zero empathy towards your ideas. They are nothing but a product of insecure mindset, where everything new becomes a threat to the very survival of Islam. Where to keep your idea of a dominant Islam imposed, you have stifled every breath out of the minorities in Pakistan. Why, because you can, and you did. Your political Islam is spawning the very monsters that roam the streets of Lahore and Mumbai. Why, because a divine injunction is not subject to mine or yours pleadings. And we shake our heads in quiet frustration when Islamist brigade innocently exclaims that no Muslim can do this atrocity. Well, from what I have seen in Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, an Islamic or pseudo Islamic government has bring nothing but destruction and misery for their folks as well as for people around the world. And do the same poll now in Far East, to Europe, to North America to South America and judge for yourself how your political religion ideology is despised around the globe.

    For me and many readers on this forum, you come out as an empty bigot, secure in the supremacy of your faith, and the ordinariness of anyone who is not like you. You are as empty as a catholic church clergyman who was subjugating Muslims and Jews and heretics under his command, or for me, an right wing Israeli settler, who in his infinite trust in his promised land and his 3,500 year old surviving-against-all-odds faith is discriminating and humiliating a native Palestinian who has lived for centuries on that land. You see, bigotry knows no boundaries, no nationalities. And if in your mistaken belief that minorities in Pakistan are not being discriminated, and are honorable citizens of Pakistan, let me ask a simple question to all Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus on this forum who have ever lived in Pakistan: “Are you an equal citizen of Pakistan, the land of your birth. Or you do feel debased and discriminated by the defenders of the faith, the pious ones who consider you inferior because you are not momin enough. Are you less of a human, or in Pakistan just being born into a wrong faith is the crime that punishes you throughout your life?”

  126. @Bin Ismail

    A doubt: I am not sure that Mujib’s 6-Point Programme meant separation from the rest of Pakistan. According to some commentators better informed on these matters, he was reflecting the same arrangement that was originally to have been the basis of administration in Pakistan. This basis was apparently altered immutably by successive centralising autocrats such as Ghulam Mohammed and Mirza Ismail, then by Ayub and Yahya.

    This doesn’t have a material bearing on your analysis of course. For all practical purposes, the Ahmedis would not have considered the Awami League to join. If they had, the history of political dissent in Pakistan might have had a sharper, still more tragic flavour.

  127. Bin Ismail

    @ Vajra

    Thank you. You’re right in arguing that Mujib’s 6-Point Programme envisaged an arrangement very close to the demands made in the Lahore Resolution of 1940, but the realities on the ground, which were rapidly developing in the direction of an ultimate secession, were also quite glaring. Keeping in view that eventuality, Mirza Nasir Ahmad, who was then the Imam of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat, decided to contribute, in whatever way was possible, to the stability of what was visibly to remain of Pakistan.

    Regards.

  128. sonachenab

    AZW………….. i salute u………. for enhancing my brain capacity.

  129. OMLK

    “No one blamed Prophet SAW to be blood thirsty. Thats your own thinking coming out !”

    Obviously you are totally ignorant of the criticism heaped upon the last Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) by the anti-Islam camp. With over a 100 years plus history of defending Islam and its Prophet (SAWS) we know the criticism and know how to counter it.

    btw your speculation on my thinking is inconsequential as you do not know what my thinking is, but your own twisted thinking about our blessed Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) (who is a blessing to the entire humanity) is fully exposed when you write: ““If the goal of ‘global Islamic order’ has been possible without bloodshed, Prophet Muhammad SAW would have never raised a sword.”

    The Ahmadi position has always been and will always be based on the Quran and the Sunnah. You knee jerk incantations of “America” are typical of the Mullah mindset whose arguments are based on the demonization of the other party rather than the logical or rational merits of the issue itself.
    If you believe that Islam allows bloodshed and violence is pursuit of its propagation then you are entitled to that opinion. I will not question your faith because of this or try to demonize by you saying that you are not following the Quran but following Robert Spencer. But I would certainly disagree with you, and on another forum debate you if time permits and try to show that Islam is a peaceful religion and base my argument from the Quran (and not from a White House memo as you seem to be alleging).

  130. Hani

    @Bin Ismail

    In short, “governments do” often what they think is “morally right.” It doesn’t mean you’ll find yourself agreeing with it or you’ll think it’s right. Maybe you’re in the “minority” thought regarding it, maybe your not, but that’s just how the chips often fall.

    @a muslim

    Of course if someone was to say salam to me I would reply with a wasalam, but I’m an individual why presume and be needlessly rude🙂.

    I agree with you that I myself don’t have any right to ‘judge’ any individual but I also am not the State. Meaning I cannot judge as an individual but the State has every right to exercise this power if someone is for instance a Muslim or not or right or wrong when it comes to virtually any matter b/c virtually any matter can be negotiated between the people and the State (or no negotiation at all happens too). But, as with all things whether the State uses its power with justice in mind is another matter. Similarly, it’s not my right to declare jihad (war) on anybody or any state as an individual, but it is every much the right of the State to do so.

    @AZW

    Well just to let you know if you didn’t catch on I was being facetious with the whole PTH cabal comment. I’m sure you and everyone else here at PTH are all upstanding and nice people in real life, even you YLH (you’re my favorite by the way).

    With respect to your piece, I guess we both find each others arguments to be trite for our own reasons and perspectives. Though I do have to commend you on your prose in your last piece even if I may disagree with its conclusions. As but one example my feeling is that the book’s not closed on the Muslim immigrant experience in the West that you laud as a largely unmitigated success. This development that you speak of is only a generation or two old and the final results of it may not even be seen for another few more generations. And your own astuteness may keen you in on the fact that all these ‘exceptions’ in your words (the swiss, the french, the dutch) are all a year or two old in their conception and execution and have continued on largely unabated despite your smugness in the ‘secular checks.’

    Similarly, another place we disagree is in the cold comfort you provide about how all religions (and said followers of that religion) will get equally ruffled in the New Secular Pakistan. Don’t worry Muslims having to tolerate Muhammad (saw) drawn as a pig, take comfort in Ganesha being drawn as a clown. Progress indeed. Another secular value we can learn from the West.

    Anyhow, I really don’t mean you harm AZW and I know you come from a position of sincerity towards Pakistan. And I don’t mean to sound mocking, but your vision will never get traction in Pakistan nor will it ever be accepted by any but the few. You’re right I am an ‘Islamist’ in so far as my loyalty lies to Islam (or my conception of Islam) more than to any nation-state or to any Quaid. The vast majority of Pakistan Muslims feel exactly the way I do (yes it’s b/c I say so or the mullahs say so. btw that’s me being facetious again) though we feel our supreme loyalty to Islam doesn’t preclude us from love for country (you may think differently). Maybe Maududi and his cohort that trashed the idea of Pakistan had a similar transformation, I don’t know. But that’s just the reality of Pakistan and despite what you think is best for Pakistan, it makes more sense to work with my ‘majority’ to counter-act the violent ‘minority’ then to agitate for constitutional changes which divide the country more than bringing it together (despite your good intent).

    The purpose of the TTP attack was to draw a line in the sand and create a dichotomy that no decent Pakistani would wish to adhere to even if they are a henna-dyed ‘Islamist.’ The TTP dichotomy that either you’re a Muslim and you support us massacres and all or you are an “Ahmadi-loving kaffir” is utterly false. However, as I said in my earliest post the way these undeniably cruel attacks have been used by some elements in Pakistan as leverage to push for a ‘secularized’ Pakistan is just as false of a dichotomy in which we are either for your secular vision or we are “TTP-loving barbarians.” Such a choice is equally as unproductive and does more harm than good.

  131. yasserlatifhamdani

    Why don’t you leave these judgements to God hani? Don’t you believe in that deity?

  132. Bin Ismail

    @yasserlatifhamdani (June 1, 2010 at 4:41 pm)

    This is an interesting psychological state. Essentially, it’s that unfulfilled desire of playing “God”.

  133. Tilsim

    This need for judgements by the State in religious matters is where this whole political Islam project starts to become farcical. I was involved in a legal case involving my marriage and I had to declare that being a Sunni in Pakistan, I followed the Hanifi fiqh. I choked at that: why should I make such a declaration when I just want to be a Muslim. I chose not to dissect my faith according to the different schools of Islamic law, why should the State force me to?

  134. a muslim

    @Bin ismail:
    “It was for this reason that the Ahmadiyya leadership chose to support the PPP.”

    I’m glad you accepted Qadiani Khalifas AMBITIONS OF BECOMING POLITICAL FORCE IN PAKISTAN.
    Do you know qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza mahmud ahmad had earlier advice to his followes to move to baluchistan so that Qadianis can form majority in that province and control it like a ‘state with in a state’. Just the way Qadiani Khlifas controlled ‘State with in a State’ in rabwah and before that to some extent in Qadian.
    Do you know why the first people to came up with demand ‘Rabwah ko khula Shehir Karar Duo’ (Declare Rabwah an open city) WERE QADIANIS WHO FORMED HAQQAT PASSAND PARTY after witnessing the IMMORAL PERSONAL LIFE, FINANCIAL EMBAZZLEMENTS, AND POLITICAL AMBITIONS OF QADIANI KHALIFA 2 MIRZA MAHUD AHMAD.

  135. a muslim

    @AZW:

    ““Are you an equal citizen of Pakistan, the land of your birth. Or you do feel debased and discriminated by the defenders of the faith, the pious ones who consider you inferior because you are not momin enough. Are you less of a human, or in Pakistan just being born into a wrong faith is the crime that punishes you throughout your life?”

    In a famous Pakistani University, where i was a graduate student, I FOUGHT ON BEHALF OF QADIANIS IN HOSTEL MESS WITH MULLA-MAFIA STUDENTS, to stop them from discriminating against Qadiani students by keeping plates, and forks etc AWAY AND APART from rest of general Muslim students.

    My father a lawyer, a very senior supreme court attorney, took up Qadianis cases against all the threats from Mullah Mafia in NWFP high courts. This he did at the height of qadiani opposition in 1980s and early 1990s. general muslims lawyers under fear of mullah mafia refused to take qadianis cases.

    For the sake of record: neither I nore my father was Qadiani.

  136. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim

    Regretfully your mastery of history matches your mastery of English.

  137. a muslim

    @Bin Ismail:
    “Regretfully your mastery of history matches your mastery of English.”

    Your comment is tantamount to opponents of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad who say, “he was no good, he knew nothing, his writings are false….because he did not know how to tie laces of ENGLISH STYLE SHOES”.

    Bin ismail, is this the best critisim you could come up with???

    Qadianis more accurately mahmudis have problem:
    When some one points out to them the CRMININAL FACTUAL POLICIES of Qadiani Khalifas they start attacking grammar of their critics. My friend this is not your Qadiani TV channel MTA where there is only one sided propaganda!!!

    BTW: Did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian come to teach you Mahmudis English grammar???

    Just because you modern day mahmudies don’t know about your history, it does not mean what i said is not historically true.

  138. AZW

    Hani:

    You said: And I don’t mean to sound mocking, but your vision will never get traction in Pakistan nor will it ever be accepted by any but the few. You’re right I am an ‘Islamist’ in so far as my loyalty lies to Islam (or my conception of Islam) more than to any nation-state or to any Quaid. The vast majority of Pakistan Muslims feel exactly the way I do (yes it’s b/c I say so or the mullahs say so. btw that’s me being facetious again) though we feel our supreme loyalty to Islam doesn’t preclude us from love for country (you may think differently). Maybe Maududi and his cohort that trashed the idea of Pakistan had a similar transformation, I don’t know. But that’s just the reality of Pakistan and despite what you think is best for Pakistan, it makes more sense to work with my ‘majority’ to counter-act the violent ‘minority’ then to agitate for constitutional changes which divide the country more than bringing it together (despite your good intent)

    I believe you have the best intentions for Pakistan. But if there is anything that you can take from this discussion then I would earnestly ask you to consider the following:

    1) Granted the idea of a secular Pakistan where each single Pakistani is equal first and foremost, is in minority in Pakistan. But if that was the criterion, how would have change happened throughout human history. If tide is against, and no one wants to fight it, nothing would ever happen. Sitting back and doing nothing is not going to cost anything, and will not result in any thing as well.

    2) Pakistan does not need secularism now. Pakistan needs democracy with the rule of law now. Pakistanis need to make informed decisions by having an option to make informed decisions. Secularism is a nice concept on paper for most Pakistanis. But first they need food on the table, protection of their lives and properties, before they opt for the equality for all.

    3) If you feel smug in your inherent right to treat your co-citizens as unworthy, or lesser of citizens, by all means have a great life. Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. Read what your fellow citizens are saying about the very society they share with you. Read how they have to watch out for even a minor mistake, lest they get thrown in jail. I have met various Ahmadis who had to migrate from Pakistan because life was made unbearable for them. Feel free to remain secure in your righteous belief; but don’t forget injustice cannot go on forever.

    4) See what mutilation Pakistan has suffered as it tried to cloak itself as an Islamic republic. From its 1971 debacle to the present state as the most dangerous nation on earth; Any observer of history will tell you that political religion has never resulted in a stable or just society. Today it is Ahmadis, tomorrow it will be Ismailis, Naziris, then regular Shias. The list will not stop if political Islam of any sect comes into power.

    5) The confusion is apparent when political Islam gets at odd with the state of Pakistan. This confusion allowed Taliban to take over Afghanistan, reign terror across the globe and in particular Pakistani minorities. When Islamic Emirate was established in FATA, the right wing was in knots how to deal with the scourge that was beginning to threaten Pakistan itself. Of course, if religion was not involved, a thug would be prompty identified as a thug and firmly dealt with. Yet, to this day, Jamaat Islami and right wing leaders do mental somersaults to connect RAW, MOSSAD and CIA to explain the very Frankenstein that was created in the very name of religion.

    There is nothing really more for me to say. Headlines scream a thousand more words, as the very people you consider (or considered) your religious heroes are now killing indiscriminately. You are most welcome to wait as much as you want to see how secularism will play out in the future. History is an unforgiving experience, and there is only so long you can stay disconnected from the reality. The failure of political Islam is apparent to all across the globe, the same way political Christianity or any organized religion that came before it.

    And last, regarding your comment “as I said in my earliest post the way these undeniably cruel attacks have been used by some elements in Pakistan as leverage to push for a ‘secularized’ Pakistan is just as false of a dichotomy in which we are either for your secular vision or we are “TTP-loving barbarians.”

    We have been talking of an equal Pakistani society without its religious long before these cruel attacks happened.

  139. Moosa

    I humbly request that every person be civil and maintain control over their nafs/ego in this discussion.

    I cannot speak personally regarding the second khalifa because I was born after he died. However, I do personally know people (including my father) who spent time with him and tell me he was a profoundly spiritual person, furthermore the majority of the followers of Ghulam Ahmad (as) were attracted to his spirituality. These were muslims who made great sacrifices for their beliefs, including being martyred and disowned by their families, it doesn’t seem reasonable to think they would follow a khalifa who was openly immoral.

    I did know the fourth ahmadi khalifa personally, I know that he lived in a small apartment on a mosque, he mended his own clothes, and he used to go on the bicycle to work and travel economy-class on airplanes until his security staff begged him that it was impossible to ensure his security under these conditions. He was a beautiful personality, and many non-ahmadis who met him testified to this fact.

    In any case, I would urge that people refrain from making allegations against brothers who have already departed from this world, because this is not correct islamic etiquette and it simply shows bad character. Similar allegations were made against the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) and against Hadrat Aysha (ra) and the khulafaa-rashideen of early Islam, such allegations are usually a sign of moral weakness in the person who makes the allegations.

    If you have something substantive to say on the religious principles, for instance on lahori beliefs versus qadiani beliefs versus mainstream sunni beliefs versus shia beliefs versus atheist beliefs, then I would be interested in such ideas of substance. Insha Allah we can have a constructive discussion on this basis.

  140. a muslim

    Dear AZW:
    Hani sahib will only understand what you are writing, when he understands the first verse of Sura-Fatiah: Allah is Raab-il-Alimeen (the Lord of the Worlds). And Allah is NOT only Lord of Pakistani Sunni majority Muslims.
    Any father who has one child tries his best to move heavens and earths to get treatment for his sick child. If Allah was only Lord of Pakistani Muslims or Muslims in general He would NOT have left His “favorites” suffer for last few hundred years and Pakistani Muslims especially for last few decades.
    And to expect Allah will just let the ruthless, inhumane, unjust, THIRD CLASS Pakistani nation without paying for its behavior goes against the attributes and justice of Him.
    Remember: Allah is Malik-e-Yomideen (Master of the Day of Requital). Every day is the Day of Requital in the life of a Pakistani. Pakistanis are BURNING IN HELL IN THIS LIFE. Today every fair minded, self respecting person is ASHAMED of being born in that Allah’s CURSED land.

  141. Moosa

    Last but not least, regarding the common accusation against the ahmadi khalifa that he is living in luxury, this is an example of why Islam forbids suspicion and allegations without proof. My father had worked for 19 years in Jamaat Ahmadiyya’s Central Finance Office, therefore I know the facts, it saddens me that malicious rumours are given credence without an ounce of supporting evidence.

    I do not know how the Lahori jamaat finances itself. I do know that finance is a very important issue for any organisation. Regarding the ‘Qadiani’ branch of Jamaat Ahmadiyya, every ahmadi gives one sixteenth of his/her salary to the Jamaat, and increasing numbers of ahmadis are giving one tenth to one third of their salaries. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, Jamaat Ahmadiyya has to maintain financial independence if it is to act with integrity. We do not wish to be like a political party that accepts money from a government or a financial organisation, and then has to ‘pay back’ by supporting the government/organisation when it follows immoral policies. We want to be able to be able to follow our beliefs independently and with moral integrity, and we cannot do this without financing ourselves. Secondly, Jamaat Ahmadiyya has an enormous output in terms of Muslim Television Ahmadiyya (the first international muslim satellite programme), free literature, building hospitals and schools and mosques, sending Aid missions to countries after natural disasters, etc. We do not possess oil wealth or natural resources, therefore we cannot implement these works without financial sacrifice by our members. My father works in the Central Finance Office, he tells me that majority of the funds come from wealthy ahmadis in USA and Europe, and the funds go through the Central Office and then are sent mostly to poorer communities in Africa.

  142. Moosa

    @ a muslim: I see your point but I think it needs to be refined. Allah (swt) does sometimes permit His true followers to suffer for decades or even centuries. It is not suffering that sets apart the follower from the hypocrite/disbeliever. The difference is that the true believer suffers but he demonstrates his faith in Allah (swt) at the time of suffering. For instance, he increases his prayers, he behaves in the best way to his neighbours, he helps other people, he speaks always the truth. For the true believer, suffering is a trial which brings him closer to Allah (swt). However, the hypocrite/disbeliever shows by his behaviour that his suffering is a punishment, not a trial.

  143. Moosa

    However, I do agree with you that the current behaviours which is prevalent in the pakistani population, suggests that their current condition is a Divine punishment.

  144. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim (June 1, 2010 at 11:47 pm)

    1. The comment I made was not in ill-will, but simply with the intention of pointing out to you that history has to dealt with, more with objectivity and less with passion and prejudice.

    2. The issue at hand was neither English grammar nor English footwear, it was merely an effort – and admittedly a futile one – to make you realize that there is a difference between making criticism and adopting eternal lodging in fantasyland.

    3. I could not help noticing, by the way, that while you choose to call Ahmadis “Qadianis” and “Mahmudis”, they seem to have chosen not to respond reciprocally. I suppose Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has indeeed succeeded in imparting higher moral values and better ettiquette to his followers.

  145. a muslim

    @Moosa:
    “I cannot speak personally regarding the second khalifa because I was born after he died.”

    This does NOT mean Qadiani Khalifa 2 (QK2) Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was a pious person. Through out his life allegations of sexual misconduct were leveled against him by none other than his staunch followers. This was not limited to only one generation. Every few years there were new people and new statements and oaths and publications. They kept challenging QK2 to hold open inquiry and setup a inquiry commission, comprising members of his choice. Still he never dared too. Because they knew his critics will make QK2 testify, along with the victims, witnesses and accusers.

    “he was a profoundly spiritual person”
    Do you consider a father to be a decent person let alone a spiritual when he has SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH HIS BIOLOGICAL DAUGHTERS AND SONS???? You don’t have to read too much, just read few books published by Haqqiqat Passand Party, who were his staunch disciples.

    Talking about sacrifices:
    QK2 kept telling his followers that no one will leave Qadian (India) . Guess who was the first one to leave and how??? Yes, it was QK2 and he left in BURQA (like Lal Masjid Mullah), and he did this without informing his disciples. He left everyone at the mercy of Sikhs. It was Allah’s blessing Sikhs did not do to Qadianis in Qadian that was done last week in Lahore.

    “fourth ahmadi khalifa personally, I know that he lived in a small apartment on a mosque,”
    Do you know he never worked in his life. How come he had houses and properties???
    Do you know when his grand father Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian passed away his children were starving to death, and Sadar Anjuman started stipend for them.

    “he mended his own clothes, and he used to go on the bicycle to work”

    I personally know he had Mercedes cars and horses. Don’t give me this crap.

    “ and travel economy-class on airplanes until his security staff begged him that it was impossible to ensure his security under these conditions.”

    Yah, yah, yah… it is always others who make you do wrong things. If he was so scared why he threw other candidate his brother Mirza Rafi Ahmad out of room at the time of election of Khalifa, and managed to get elected.

    “In any case, I would urge that people refrain from making allegations against brothers who have already departed from this world, because this is not correct islamic etiquette and it simply shows bad character.”

    Qadiani khalifas don’t answer questions in their lives, then after their life its discouraged to question them. He not only claimed to be a “spiritual person”, he also took MY AND OTHER CITIZENS of my country’s TAX MONEY. Instead of paying taxes to the country, Qadianis get tax break by paying money to “charity” i.e. Qadiani Khalifas and Qadiani jamaat. So we have right to question a public figures i.e. qadiani khalifas.
    BTW: It is more than 1400 years, still critics of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) question him. So, who is QK2???

    “Similar allegations were made against the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) and against Hadrat Aysha (ra) and the khulafaa-rashideen of early Islam,”

    A real Mahmudiat (followers of QK2) is coming out of you. Exactly this is the kind of behavior of Mahmudies/Qadianis that INFURIATES general Muslims. Instead of answer QK 2 followers bring up Jews, Christians and Hindus accusations on Islam’s holy personages. You are no different than PPP leader Babar Awan who instead of replying to Rupees 4 crores bribery accusation called it a Qadiani conspiracy.

    “If you have something substantive to say on the religious principles, for instance on lahori beliefs versus qadiani beliefs versus mainstream sunni beliefs versus shia beliefs versus atheist beliefs”

    Okay you Qadianis/mahmudis please tell us you guys are DENIERS OF FINALITY OF PROPHETHOOD with prophet Muhammad (pbuh). You tell us that you guys do NOT offer prayer behind other Muslims. You people do NOT offer funeral prayers (jinazah) of other Muslims. You people don’t marry other Muslims, especially you people do not let your qadiani females marry other Muslims. YOU PEOPLE CONSIDER ALL OTHER MUSLIMS KAFFIR.

    FOR INFORMATION OF MUSLIMS ESPECIALLY THOSE LIVING IN SAUDI ARABIA:
    If you find one particular person always jumping a head to lead prayers in any private gathering. Chances are he will be a Qadiani. As Qadiani hold belief that they can not offer prayer behind other Muslim Imam, so to avoid being caught as some one not praying with Muslim gather at time of prayer, the Qadiani will jump ahead to lead the prayer. This way he does not offer prayer behind a non-Qadiani imam, rather other Muslims offer behind him!!!

    I bet if Qadianis were in majority in Pakistan, they would have done the same to general Muslims, the way it was done to them in 1974.

  146. a muslim

    @Moosa:

    This forum is not to expose Qadiani Jamaat. Otherwise there is more than enough to show qadiani jamaat black history. Much more and damaging and of course legal than people like Kashifiat can imagine.
    Just check the You Tube videos of Qadiani who has seen all this from very close:
    ahmediyyagazette Channel and read Haqiqqat Passand Party literature.
    You must read the latest book
    RABWAH KAA RASPUTIN (Mirza Mahmud ki Khani Mureedon Ki Zabani)
    By Tahir Rafiq

  147. Ace

    You people are putting forth such severe allegations against such pious people. You should be aware of the wrath of God, this is all that i can say.

  148. Moosa

    @ a muslim

    You are wasting your breath with me, because I have first-hand knowledge.

    I do feel a little bit worried for other people on this blog, because they don’t have first-hand knowledge and therefore they might give credence to some of your wild accusations. But hopefully they will be turned away by your vulgar language, your lack of civility, and your vindictive tone.

    Ahmadi Muslims have refrained for 35 years from responding violently to relentless persecution. In deference to their noble spirit, I will simply respond to you with a beautiful verse of the Holy Qur’an:

    “And the servants of the Gracious God are those who walk on the earth in a dignified manner, and when the ignorant address them, they say, ‘Peace!’” [Holy Qur’an 25:64]

  149. Moosa

    @ Ace

    Don’t worry, brother. The same allegations were made against Prophet Muhammad (saw), it was alleged by the medieval christians that he was a sexual predator, nauzubillah. Even the Holy Qur’an says that a sexual allegation was made against Hadrat Aysha (ra). This is the methodology of the low-minded people, they use these vulgar types of arguments when they cannot put forward any valid religious or philosophical ideas.

  150. a muslim

    @Moosa:
    “My father works in the Central Finance Office, he tells me that majority of the funds come from wealthy ahmadis in USA and Europe, ”

    So you admit, Qadiani Khalifa and Qadiani organization recieve TAX MONEY from tax payers citizens of USA and Europe. So tax payers of these countries have right to question Qadiani khalifas and their organizations.

    I will love to see a published independent audit of qadiani jamaat done by some reputable independent organization/ company. Every year hundred of millions of euros, dollars, and pounds are collected by Qadiani khalifa.
    Even on occassion of this unfortunate lahore incident, Qadiani khalifa get to make money from his followers who get to be buried in “bahasti-Muqbra”-Rabwah.
    Also a NEW Chanda scheme will be started to help the victims and majority share will go to Qadiani khalifa.

  151. a muslim

    @Moosa:
    “Don’t worry, brother. The same allegations were made against Prophet Muhammad (saw), it was alleged by the medieval christians that he was a sexual predator, nauzubillah. Even the Holy Qur’an says that a sexual allegation was made against Hadrat Aysha (ra). This is the methodology of the low-minded people, they use these vulgar types of arguments when they cannot put forward any valid religious or philosophical ideas”.

    Don’t infuriate muslims.
    NO ALLEGATION WAS MADE ON LIFE OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD (SAWS) IN HIS LIFE. No follower of prophet Muhammad (saws) made any such allegation.

    All allegations came later on by jews and christians etc. where as allegations of Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza mahmud ahmad were made in his life time, by his staunch followers. Not once but years after year. Haqiqqat Passand Party worked in offices of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. Mian Zahid of Mubaliah group was himself involved with Mirza Mahmud as young man. But when his own sister became victim of QK2 lust he turned against him etc.

    English Judge of Lahore High Court judgment gave decision that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was responsible for the Murder of Fakhar ud Din Multani by zealot young Qadiani Aziz.

  152. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim

    Your phenomenally profound and authentic research on the Ahmadiyya Jamaat is based essentially on 5 ultimately authentic sources:

    1. You Tube
    2. Wikipedia
    3. Urdu Digest
    4. Suspense Digest
    5. Your own fantasies

    It goes without saying that poor Dr Abdus Salam could never even have dreamt of competing with you. You are truly an asset for this nation.

  153. a muslim

    @Moosa:
    “because I have first-hand knowledge.”

    How you can have a first hand knowledge.
    Were you ever in need of punjab police guard accompanying you and providing protection for years on receieving death threats, and possible murder by Qadiani followers on instructions of Qadiani Khalifa 2????

  154. Moosa

    @ a muslim.

    This is getting ridiculous. We pay AFTER taxation. It’s none of your business, but I get paid £4000 gross monthly as medical doctor, about £1400 goes to the British government as taxation, that leaves me £2600 which I can do what I like. Out of this £2600, I pay £260 to Jamaat Ahmadiyya every month.

    Regarding auditing, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association UK is registered as a charity in the UK, its registered charity number is 299081. Registered charities are required by British law to describe in their trustees’ annual report how they have delivered their charitable purposes for the public benefit. It’s already audited.

    Regarding the other accusations, my understanding of justice is that allegations must be proven, otherwise it is slander. The Holy Qur’an also says that it is a great evil to make accusations without evidence. Please give me your documented financial audited evidence that the majority of funds are going to the Ahmadi Khalifa?

  155. a muslim

    @Bin Ismail:
    “It goes without saying that poor Dr Abdus Salam could never even have dreamt of competing with you.”

    Issue is character and policies of Qadiani Khalifa 2 and his followers. And you are bringing Dr. Abdus salam in it.

    Dr. Salam was never in need of police protection after death threats by QK2 Mirza mahmud Ahmad.

  156. a muslim

    @Moosa:
    I’m a physician too. In my country when we pay charity we deduct it from our tax returns.
    Same is the case in UK. Money that goes to charity is amount that does NOT go to federal government. So less money goes into public services, defense etc.

    BTW:
    Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian wrote in his book ‘The Will’ (Al-wassiyat) (you can read it on Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement main website) that from which ever country you collect fianancial contributions (chanda) you must spend it in the same country. This way money will not be embazzled. Local people know best how to use it in service of islam. Money does not leave country border and does NOT get stolen.

    Then how come your qadiani khalifas gets contributions from all the countries into UK???
    Why chanda from usa leaves usa and goes to uk?? Why chanda from canada goes to uk??

  157. a muslim

    CORRECTION:

    @Bin ismail:
    Issue is character and policies of Qadiani Khalifa 2 and his follower QADIANI KAHLIFAS.

  158. Moosa

    @ a muslim.

    If you take a step back, you’ll realise how strange is your way of thinking. It is a documented historical fact that the second ahmadi khalifa was stabbed in the neck by a sunni while he was praying. If the second ahmadi khalifa was a murderous evil person, then why didn’t he order that this sunni should be killed by the ahmadi congregation who seized him? Even in this situation, the congregation simply handed the sunni over to the pakistani police.

    For the last 20 years, ahmadis have been persecuted and killed, but not even one proven case of the ahmadi khalifa or any ahmadi killing any sunni in pakistan during this time. Yet you insist that you were going to be murdered by ahmadis? We don’t even kill a man who stabs our khalifa in the neck in front of our eyes, but somehow you think we want to kill you?

    The allegation about Mirza Mahmud Ahmad being found guilty of murder by a British judge simply does not ring true with me. I can only find it on websites like alhafeez, which are full of lies.

    Either you are sincere (and extremely misinformed) or there is something insincere in you.

    Lastly, many followers of Prophet Muhammad (saw) made the rumour that Hadrat Aysha (ra) committed adultery, nauzubillah. This is documented in the Holy Qur’an, it happened during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad (saw). Furthermore, the Holy Qur’an condemns such allegations in general, because this type of allegation is made by low-minded people.

  159. Moosa

    @ muslim

    Are you trying to explain to me British tax law? I’ve lived here my entire life, I think I know British taxation system better than you. I pay my full taxes. In fact, I’m paid by the British government’s National Health Service, so they tax me automatically even before they give me my salary, it’s not even possible for me to evade taxes. It’s not that they give me my £4000, then I pay them £1400. They take the £1400 taxation first, then they give me £2600 after taxation. I can legally do whatever I want with that £2600, it’s all mine, none of it is taxable, I can spend it on vacation, car, buying apples for my horses, anything I want. I then give £260 to Ahmadiyya Muslim Association UK, which is a registered charity. It’s true that registered charities don’t have to pay taxation, but they don’t pay taxation on the £260 after I already fully paid my taxes. And no registered charity pays taxation, including Great Ormond Street, Red Cross, Islamic Relief, etc, so what’s your problem if AMA UK doesn’t pay taxation on donations it receives from its members?

  160. a muslim

    @Moosa:

    “If you take a step back, you’ll realise how strange is your way of thinking. It is a documented historical fact that the second ahmadi khalifa was stabbed in the neck by a sunni while he was praying. If the second ahmadi khalifa was a murderous evil person, then why didn’t he order that this sunni should be killed by the ahmadi congregation who seized him?”

    Do you know how old was that “murderer”??? What he used as attack weapon??? What did he do after “stabbing”??? Where did he go after attack??? Who caught him from his arm???

    Murder was student of middle school from Chinot about 12/ 13 year old boy student of 7th / 8th grade.
    He used a small pocket fruit knife.
    He kept standing there. He did not know what to do.
    He did not go any where. He remained there.
    My uncle caught him, from his arm.

    Read sir Zafrulla Khan book ‘Ahmadiyyat renaissance of Islam’. He admits according to physicians QK2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad paralysis were result of stab injury in neck. QK2 survived for almost 11 years after the attack. But his last 7 years were spent on his death bed. His body has atrophied (shrunk). As people who saw him in that miserable condition.

    Again you are infuriating Muslims by bringing Hazrat Ayesha (RA) issue. That Accusation was made by a JEW and it was clarified by Holy Quran.
    Allegations of QK2 were made by his staunch followers and they published sworn testimonials with invitation of Allah wrath and death and destructions on their themselves and their childrens in case they falsify.

  161. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim (June 2, 2010 at 8:23 am)

    “…..I’m a physician too…..”

    Physician. Heal thyself.

    @ a muslim (June 2, 2010 at 8:24 am)

    “…..CORRECTION: @Bin ismail: Issue is character and policies of Qadiani Khalifa 2 and his follower QADIANI KAHLIFAS…..”

    Further correction: The issue is your supremely exalted and inaccessible logic.

  162. a muslim

    In USA at time of federal tax returns, tax payers claim deductions agaisnt their contributions to charities. So less money goes in to federal treasury.

  163. a muslim

    @Bin Ismail:
    Unfortunately, i have to spend my CME time here correcting lies and misunderstanding spread by POOR BRAINWASHED qadianis in defense of their Qadiani khalifas.

  164. Moosa

    Regarding your quotation from Al-Wasiyyat, this is another example of quotations out of context and without common sense. Every prophet’s advice includes universal advice (eternal principles which always apply) and specific advice (which apply to a specific time or situation). At the time of writing Al-Wasiyyat, the Jamaat was very small with majority in India and only a handful in other countries. Now there are 10,000 wealthy ahmadis in America, and millions of poor ahmadis in Africa. Are you seriously proposing that the Islamic moral teaching is that in this situation, the 10,000 wealthy american ahmadis should spend all their money on themselves, and leave the millions of poor african ahmadis to starve?? Do you think in today’s situation, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) would say this? How can you allow your hatred against ahmadis lead you to such foolish ideas?

    Regarding why the money goes first to UK, it’s because the leadership and Central Organisation is in UK and because UK is a global financial centre with good links to USA and to Europe and to Africa. Similarly, all the taxation of British citizens goes to London, because the Prime Minister is in London, but that doesn’t mean that the British Prime Minister takes all the money for himself !!! It just means that he can direct the money more easily to where it’s needed. At the time of Prophet Muhammad (saw), all charity went to Prophet Muhammad (saw) in Madina, and then he distributed it where he decided. That’s how most organisations with leaders function.

  165. Moosa

    @ a muslim

    Let me explain again, you’re completely failing to understand taxation systems.

    The deduction is claimed against contributions to charities, it’s not claimed against the taxation on your salary.

    Let me explain again, with concrete example:

    Moosa pays nothing to Jamaat Ahmadiyya:
    gross salary: £4000
    taxation: £1400
    net salary: £3600
    Moosa can spend all this £3600 on cars, food, cinema, clothes. None of this £3600 goes to the government.

    Moosa pays money to Jamaat Ahmadiyya:
    gross salary: £4000
    taxation: £1400
    net salary: £3600
    Moosa spends £3340 on cars, food, cinema, clothes, but he gives £260 to Jamaat Ahmadiyya, and Jamaat Ahmadiyya will not have to pay taxation on this.

    In both situations, the British government is still getting £1400 taxation. I’m not claiming any money back from the British government.

    I’m not sure what the American system is, but in any case, the same law applies to all charities. Islamic Relief UK is a Sunni charity in the UK, Red Cross is another charity, Great Ormond Street Hospital is another charity. Are you suggesting that none of us should pay any money to charity? Or are you specifically opposed to Ahmadis paying charity, but everybody else can pay charity?

  166. Moosa

    Can I ask how the Lahori jamaat functions? How do they fund their activities?

  167. Moosa

    @ a muslim

    I also should be studying for my PACES examination.

    I would just like to say that I’ve found your psychology extremely disturbing. You remind me of the jews who keep complaining about the Holocaust but at the same time they have no sympathy for palestinians who suffer.

    You keep complaining about alleged death threats against you, and yet you’ve failed to even once express any heartfelt condolence to the 100 innocent ahmadis who have been murdered. Instead, you’ve used their murders to score your own political points against the Ahmadi khalifa in a very calculated heartless way. This is similar to what the mullahs are doing, it’s really a very despicable disregard for the value of human life and the terrible suffering of dozens of ahmadi wives and children who will be left without husbands and fathers. If this is what Lahori jamaat has done to your heart, then you are the best proof against the Lahori jamaat.

    I’m very disappointed. I’ve tried to establish a dialogue with you, but I can’t bring myself to talk further to a person who shows such disrespect for the dead.

    Peace and goodbye to you.

    Wassalam,
    Moosa

  168. a muslim

    @Moosa:
    Okay you don’t want me to catch up on my readings (medical journals).

    “Every prophet’s advice includes universal advice (eternal principles which always apply) and specific advice (which apply to a specific time or situation).”

    So you are accepting Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as PROPHET. So you are accepting that you qadianis DENY finality of prophet hood (Khatam-e-nabuwat) o with prophet Muhammad (saws)????

    “Now there are 10,000 wealthy ahmadis in America, and millions of poor ahmadis in Africa. Are you seriously proposing that the Islamic moral teaching is that in this situation, the 10,000 wealthy american ahmadis should spend all their money on themselves, and leave the millions of poor african ahmadis to starve??”

    Mirza Ghulam Ahmad did NOT come to start some NGO 9non governmental organization).
    Neither he came to adopt Christians/ catholics tricks to spread his message i.e. to open schools in Africa etc. Streets in Rabwah were always dusty and qadianis were poor living in small houses, until Mirza tahir ran to UK and and qadianis started following him and then sent money to their families in rabwah.
    Per Mirza Ghulam Ahmad own claim his mission was to reform Muslims and help them better understand Holy Quran and life of holy prophet Muhammad pbuh. And take message of Islam to Europe.
    From where qadianis got this NGO concept???? Of course Qadiani Khalifas can easily embezzle money this way. Qadiani chanda contributors can not go to see school building in some “African village”!!!! You can print phtos of “starving” Africans and make movies.
    BTW what happened TO YOUR 200 MILLION QADIANI CONVERTS DURING TIME OF Qadiani Khalifa 4 Mirza tahir Ahmad. Qadiani Khalifa 4 claimed there are 80 MILLIONS CONVERTs IN INDIA. How come you people don’t demand for your own country carved out of India. This way you can take surviving Pakistani qadianis into safety of “Qadiani-Land”.

    “Regarding why the money goes first to UK, it’s because the leadership and Central Organisation is in UK and because UK is a global financial centre with good links to USA and to Europe and to Africa. Similarly, all the taxation of British citizens goes to London, because the Prime Minister is in London, but that doesn’t mean that the British Prime Minister takes all the money for himself !!! It just means that he can direct the money more easily to where it’s needed.”

    US tax dollars do NOT go to British PM, unless US president wants to use Britsih PM as his lap dog and US ambassador.

    If Qadianis like you can believe their Qadiani Khalifas statement of 200 million converts including 80 million in India, then it is much easier to believe chanda money is used on “religious” services and “feeding” hungry mouths in Africa.

    “At the time of Prophet Muhammad (saw), all charity went to Prophet Muhammad (saw) in Madina, and then he distributed it where he decided. That’s how most organisations with leaders function.”

    We know how prophet Muhammad and his Khulifa-e-rashideen lived their daily lives. Don’t even go there. You will make muslims more angry.

  169. Moosa

    I am ignoring the psychopathic person from now on, but for the benefit of my more rational colleagues here, I would like to clarify that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) claimed to be a prophet who was a reflection of the prophethood of Muhammad (saw). He used the terminology “buroozi nabi” to describe himself.

    People who are ignorant of Arabic say that this statement goes against the Qu’ranic statement that Prophet Muhammad (saw) was the khatam-an-nabiyeen (seal of the prophets) because in urdu language “khatam” means “finish” and most pakistanis don’t know the Arabic meanings of this word.

    In Arabic, it is common to speak of a great poet as “khatam ash shuara” (seal of the poets). It is well known that Mohiyudin Ibn Arabi claimed that he was “khatam al awliyaa” (seal of the saints). A person with minimal intelligence can see that he did not mean he was the LAST saint by saying this.

    If you pick up a classical Arabic lexicon (my wife is Arab), you will find that the word “khatam”‘s primary meaning is a seal of authentication or a ring. The meaning ‘ring’ comes from the fact that ancient kings used to wear a ring with their royal seal on the ring, and they would dip this seal-ring in ink, and then put the seal on a document to authenticate that it was a royal document. It has nothing to do with last in time, it means that there is a seal of approval. Ahmadis interpret “khatam an nabiyeen” to mean that Prophet Muhammad (saw) was Allah’s seal which He placed on all the prophets, he was the prophet who authenticated the truthfulness of all other prophets. Again, this has nothing to do with time; we believe it applies to prophets before and after him.

    However, in one sense there is a consequence of finality. Because if any future prophet is to be under the seal of Prophet Muhammad (saw), then he cannot bring any new teaching or new religion, because then his teaching would fall outside of the seal. Therefore the consequence is that Prophet Muhammad (saw) is the last law-bearing prophet, his Qur’anic teaching is final, and any future prophets must simply revive the true original teaching of Islam after being inspired by Allah (swt).

    This is a valid Arabic interpretation of “khatam an nabiyeen”, I have asked from Syrian professors of Arabic and they have agreed it is linguistically valid. You can say that our interpretation goes against the mainstream interpretation, but you cannot say we don’t believe he is khatam an nabiyeen. We do believe he is khatam an nabiyeen, but our interpretation of this simply goes against the mainstream interpretation.

    Moreover, the idea that Prophet Muhammad (saw) is “last” in time is very problematic. Firstly, because it is recorded in Sunan At Tirmidhi that Prophet Muhammad (saw) said he was created at the time of Prophet Adam (as), hence logically every prophet is after Prophet Muhammad (saw). Secondly, because Prophet Muhammad (saw) is dead but Sahih Muslim says that Jesus (as) will return as a prophet.

    An interesting point is that the Lahoris believe Ghulam Ahmad (as) was “buroozi nabi” but he was not really a nabi. They also believe that Ghulam Ahmad (as) fulfils the prophecies regarding the return of Jesus (as), but they say that he is not nabi, even though Sahih Muslim says that Jesus (as) will be nabi when he returns.

    I hope this has been useful information. Apologies if it’s not entirely clear, I’ve been awake all night and it’s now almost 6am.
    🙂

  170. yasserlatifhamdani

    Very well written Mr. Moosa.
    *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

  171. Moosa

    The psychopathic person says I’ll make muslims more angry. I apologise, that’s not my intention, whatever I’ve said has been said sincerely. I believe it’s wrong to attempt to prove our points by maligning personalities, I believe Islam discourages it, I believe rationality discourages it, I believe civility discourages it. This was the methodology of the munafiqeen, it was never the methodology of the true muslims or even of decent-minded atheists. I believe we should discuss the religious, ethical and political issues, and I believe we should avoid emotion and vulgar language and personal accusations.

    Love and peace to you all,
    Darkeyedmuslim🙂

  172. a muslim

    @Moosa:

    Now you started calling me names. This shows you ran out or truthful arguments. Anways, With out going into academic discussions, who himself authored Dictionary of the Holy Quran by Abdul Mannan Omar (Check on Amazon): Qadianis concoct false meanings and then build their case on it.

    Lets for understanding of general readers, look at the issue from practical sense.
    Qadianis believe that since it is must for a Muslim to have believed on every prophet of Allah. And since Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a “prophet” of Allah, so it is must for very person who processes faith that he/ she is Muslim MUST NEED TO ACCEPT Mirza Ghualm Ahmad as true “prophet” otherwise that Muslim does not qualify to be as Muslim i.e. s/he becomes Kaffir. By this definition of Qadianis, all those who do not accept Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as “prophet” automatically become Kaffir. Thus according to qadianis (here poster Moosa) all posters such as Kashifiat, AZW, YLH, a muslim, Hani, mazbut….are KAFIRS (nauzubilah). This is the reason Qadianis do not even offer Jinazah prayer of Muslims and these people. Nor qadianis will offer their prayers behind them.
    So regardless of what ever twist Qadianis give to deceive Muslims of their DENYING OF FINALITY OF PROPHETHOOD with Holy prophet Muhammad (saws), their actions speaks louder than their words. Qadianis do NOT offer prayers behind or Jinazah prayer of Lahori-Ahmadis (Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement) because unlike Qadianis Lahori-Ahmadis do NOT believe Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was prophet. Rather they hold belief in ABSOLUTE FINALITY of prophethood with Holy prophet Muhammad (saws).

    To help recall Moosa what were TRUE BELIEFS of his “spiritual” leader Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his brother Mirza basher Ahmad the so called ‘Qamar-ul-Anbiyya” (“Moon of prophets”) and their today’s qadiani jamaat, I just quote few of their statements:

    1) “So whatever has been ordained in the Holy Quran about non-belief in a Prophet, the same applies in the case of Mirza Sahib.” (Al-Qaul-al-Fasal, p. 33).
    2) “If we don’t believe in him as a Prophet then a dangerous flaw occurs (in iman [faith]) which is enough to render one a ‘kafir’.” (Haqeeqat-un-Nabuwwat, p. 204).
    3) “It is obligatory for us not to consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims.” (Anwaar-e-Khilafat, p. 90).
    4) “… and one who does not believe in the Promised Messiah, whatever his reasons for this non-belief, he is kafir.” (Zikar-e-Illahi, p. 22).
    5) “The third matter to which he (Maulana Muhammad Ali) calls my attention is the issue of ‘kufar and Islam’. He says the path of peace is that we consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims, but I say ‘the path of peace is that we accept the decision of the Holy Quran. The Holy Quran calls the non-believers in a Prophet a kafir, and the same Allah calls Mirza Sahib a Prophet’.” (Haqeeqat-ul-Amar, p. 17).
    6) “Is there any such irreligious non-Ahmadi who will marry his daughter to a Christian or a Hindu? You call them kafir but in this matter he is better than you in spite of being a kafir, but you even being Ahmadi marry your daughters to kafirs.” (Maliakatullah, p. 46).
    7) “We met a person in Lucknow who is a great scholar. He said ‘many of your adversaries falsely propagate about you that you call us kafir. I cannot believe that a person of your vast capacity would be saying so.’ Sheikh Yaqub Ali was talking to him. I told him, ‘you tell him that we in fact call him a kafir.’ On hearing this he was much astonished.” (Anwar-e-Khilafat, p. 92).
    8 ) All such Muslims who have not entered in the Baiat of the Promised Messiah, whether they have not heard the name of the Promised Messiah, are kafir and out of the pail of Islam. That these beliefs have my full concurrence. I readily admit. (Aaina-e-Saddaaqat. p. 35).

    Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in his book ‘Truth about the split’ (Aena-e-Sadaqat) page 157 writes:

    Quote:
    In the year 1912, I went on pilgrimage to Mecca….My maternal grandfather, Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib, also went on pilgrimage the same year. He went to Mecca direct from Qadian. We met at Jaddah, and from there journeyed together to Mecca. On the very first day at Mecca, while we were circumambulating the Kaaba, time came for the evening prayers. I wished to withdraw, but our way was barred and the service had already commenced. Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib told me that Hadrat Khalifatul Masih I ra had ordered that, while at Mecca, we might pray behind non-Ahmadi Imams. Upon this, I joined the service. Later on, when we were still in the precincts of the Kaaba, came the time for the night prayers, and we joined as before. When we returned to our residence, I said turning to Sayyid Abdul Muhyi Arab, “The prayers we offered were only to comply with the command of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih I ra, let us now offer our prayers for the sake of Allah. Such prayers cannot rightly be offered behind non-Ahmadi Imams.” We, then repeated both the services. The next day, I believe, we joined another service behind a non-Ahmadi Imam. But I began to feel that although we subsequently repeated the service, a certain weight was oppressing my mind, and I felt that if I continued like that, I should certainly fall ill.
    Unquote.

    Here we see Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 giving reasons for his offering of prayers behind a non-Qadiani Imam, although he did not want to do that. And later repeated his prayers. In other words Qadiani Khalifa 2 had no intention to pray behind a non-qadiani Imam and he just pretended to offer his prayers by standing with non-qadiani Muslims and performing rituals/ positions of prayers.

    Sir Zafarullah Khan, a very intellectual person and a seasoned expert in law, politics and international relations, knew that no one from Qadiani Jamaat would lead the Namaz-e-Jinazah. And people will take notice of his decision to not offer Namaz-e-Jinazah of any common Muslim, let alone of founder of Pakistan. Lo and behold, he was photographed sitting on ground, when rest of Muslims were offering Namaz-e-Jinazah. This photograph was published in Pakistan Times (English language daily in Pakistan). I’m sure Sir Zafarullah Khan must have known his this kind of attitude will only reinforce Jamat-I-Islami (Pakistani religio-political party) propaganda and his behavior will add to mayhem against Qadianis.

    Lord Headly El-Farooq (the person instrumental behind acquiring land for London Central Mosque) writes:

    Lord Headley while answering a set of questions posed to him, wrote in “Islam, The Guide to Modern Religious Thought” – Islamic Review, June 1929, pg 201-204, Vol XVII, No. 6, pub. The Mosque, Woking, England:

    I am sometimes asked questions about essentials and non-essentials, and not very long ago I received a letter from my friend Mr. Dard [Qadiani missionary Abdul Rahim Dard], the Imam of the Mosque at Southfields, in which he makes inquiries as to my views on certain subjects. He begins by an allusion to my lecture entitled “Is our House in Order?” delivered in London on July 29, 1928 [before British Muslim Society, with Abdullah Yusuf Ali in chair]. He asks me to enlighten him on the following points raised in that lecture, viz.:

    (1) …
    (2) What do you mean by “schism and those sacerdotal dogmas” from which you want Islam to be purged?
    (3) …

    As regards No. (2) I refer to the trouble caused by new sects which spring up with quite new ideas about what constitutes a follower of Islam. As an example I point to the Quadianis, followers of that very admirable teacher Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom they hold up with veneration as the “Promised Messiah.” This would not matter so very much, but they become bellicose if other Muslims decline to believe that he was the Messiah. I cannot but look upon these people as hostile to the spread of Islam to the West because their tenets indicate complete severance from the orthodox Muslims who are of the Hanifia persuasion. Lest you should think I am making too much complaint, I may point out that a Quadiani is not allowed to give his daughter to a Muslim who is not a Quadiani. A Quadiani is not allowed to say his prayers in a Mosque if the officiating Imam is not an Ahmadian of the Quadian, and finally a Quadiani may not attend the funeral service of his dearest friend unless that friend is a Quadiani thus carrying the unpleasant curtailments and restrictions even to the grave.

    It is also specially laid down that unless a man believes that Mirza Ghulum Ahmad was really the Messiah, that man shall be deprived of the light of Faith, and that it is as bad for him as though he denied his belief in the Holy Prophet Muhammad himself. In other words, he becomes a kafir.

    YLH PLEASE NOTE:
    Please read in Lord Headly El-Farooq statement, what Qadiani missionary Abdul Rahim Dard thought about Muslims.

  173. a muslim

    CORRECTION:
    Now you started calling me names. This shows you ran out or truthful arguments. Anways, With out going into academic discussions, according to Abdul Mannan Omar sahib who himself authored ‘Dictionary of the Holy Quran by Abdul Mannan Omar’ (Check comments on Amazon): Qadianis concoct false meanings and then build their case on it.

  174. Bin Ismail

    a muslim:

    Evident as it is from your posts, you tend to rely heavily on hearsay, gossip, discourtesy, slander and ridicule. And all this to what end. To get across a point that is entirely devoid of reason and rationality. To be irrational and insolent at the same time, requires considerable amounts of negative energy, an abundance of which you seem to possess.

    Take my advice and focus on your studies and your unfinished homework. Serious intellectual discourse is evidently not your cup of tea.

    You could have demonstrated a bare minimum level of decency and courtesy by a simple word of condolence. I’m quite sure that Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamaluddin, whom you so vehemently quote, would have felt disgusted with your sustained discourtesy.

  175. Moosa

    The Ahmadis have not “concocted” their interpretation of “khatam an nabiyeen”, this is a well-known and established meaning of “khatam”. Ibn Arabi has been known as “khatam al awliyaa” for many centuries before Jamaat Ahmadiyya, does this mean that anybody believed he was the last wali?

    Sahih Bukhari mentions that Prophet Muhammad (saw) had “khatam an nabuwwat” (the sign or mark of prophethood) between his shoulders. Was Sahih Bukhari also concocted by Jamaat Ahmadiyya?

    I think it’s absurd when a person’s enmity goes to this extent that he/she denies basic realities. It means that he/she is incapable of rational discussion, and nothing fruitful can be gained from discussion with such a person.

  176. @AZW

    As for the power and influence that minorities have, if it was as easy to disregard a minority as Hani makes it out to be, we wouldn’t be arguing today, would we? There would be no Pakistan in the first place.

    On the contrary, the minority that Hani derides has been getting more and more support every week, as we go along. It is clear to the dispassionate observer that there is a serious degree of introspection going on, and not among ‘the usual suspects’, either. I think events to come will speak for themselves.

  177. AZW

    Vajra:

    If there is a referendum held today in Pakistan without a prior notice, majority of Pakistanis would most probably vote to keep the second amendment in the Pakistani constitution.

    It is a sad fact, a stark reality that Pakistanis are extremely uncomfortable coming out of the religious identity that has been drummed into their heads for the last 63 years. Equality and secular democracy look very nice concepts on paper, but at the end the idea of political Islam and Pakistan being its bastion trumps many humanistic values that are attributed as novel western ideas.

    PTH sometimes feel like a voice in the wilderness, but it is a voice nevertheless. That there are many Pakistanis who share the ideals of rule of law, democracy and the separation of the mosque and the state is heartening. As I keep telling myself, never underestimate the power of compounding. Now only if we have a few decision makers in Pakistan following this blog, that would hopefully make even more of a difference.

  178. Bin Ismail

    @ Moosa (June 2, 2010 at 4:28 pm)

    You’re absolutely right about the translation of the Quranic term “Khaatam un Nabiyyeen”. Allow me to elaborate a bit. The word “Khatamun Nabiyyin”, phonetically Khaatamun Nabiyyeen” is, as is obvious, a compound word. It consists of 2 components:

    1. Khaatam
    2. Nabiyyeen

    These 2 words have the following meanings:

    1. Khaatam: (a) seal of attestation, (b) ring
    2. Nabiyyeen: all prophets

    With respect to the meanings of these component words, we may conclude that the term “khaatamun nabiyyeen” has two meanings, and both equally relevant:

    1. the attestative seal of all the prophets
    2. the ring [as an ornament] of all the prophets

    Whether we translate as “the attestative seal of the prophets” or as “the ornament of the prophets”, both ways the term would signify the unique excellence of the Holy Prophet. On the other hand, being last per se, that is in the chronological sense, does not necessarily impart the same effect.

    With respect to chronology, the Ahmadis do indeed believe that the Holy Prophet was the last law-bringing prophet.

    @ Vajra (June 2, 2010 at 8:54 pm)

    “…..I think events to come will speak for themselves…..”

    I fully agree and pray for the best.

    @AZW (June 2, 2010 at 10:00 pm)

    “…..Pakistanis are extremely uncomfortable coming out of the religious identity that has been drummed into their heads for the last 63 years…..”

    This reminds me of a Pathan friend of mine who spent his early years in the rural environment. He would candidly recollect that during his childhood days, he had on innumerable occasions heard from the village Maulvi that Hindu women were, as a matter of rule, as ugly as “churhales”. He admitted that he actually grew up with this belief. Until, when he finally moved out to Peshawar for his college, that one day he got to watch an Indian movie, for the first time, in the company of his college-mates. He used to laughingly confess that the first glimpse of Madhuri Dixit was enough to make him realize that Maulvi Sahib was a liar.

    For 63 years, at least 3 generations have grown up with misconceptions drummed, or should I say pumped into their heads. Facts have to be laid out before our people.

  179. a muslim

    @Bin Ismail:

    You probably have not read my posts where vehemently i condemned Lahore attacks. But at the same time i’m reminding Qadianis of their responsibilities. You Qadianis don’t realize how much hurt you cause to ASHIQAN-E-RASOOL ‘Lovers of Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS’ (i.e. All Muslims EXCEPT Qadiani Muslims). Renounce and doenounce yur qadiani khalifa 2 statements and beliefs. InshAllah then Muslims will start accepting you into fold of Islam. It is so interesting that what ever Muhammad Ali and Khawaja Kamal uddin wrote about your i.e. Qadianis beliefs and attitudes towards Muslims and REACTION to that from Muslims is coming 100% TRUE. I’m sure Qadianis will change their beliefs and attitude, unfortunately they are determined to change only when MANY MORE POOR QADIANIS ARE KILLED BY STUPID MUSLIMS in Pakistan.

    Bin Ismail:
    Don’t you know your QK2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad took ITALIAN PROSTITUTE CUM DANCER MISS RUFO FROM FLATIES HOTEL, Lahore TO QADIAN TO “TEACH ENGLISH ACCENT” TO HIS WIVES AND DAUGHTERS!!!! As stated by QK2 in Juma Khutaba.
    Do you want reference from Qadiani Newspaper Alfazal????????

  180. a muslim

    @Moosa:

    “The Ahmadis have not “concocted” their interpretation of “khatam an nabiyeen”, this is a well-known and established meaning of “khatam”. Ibn Arabi has been known as “khatam al awliyaa” for many centuries before Jamaat Ahmadiyya, does this mean that anybody believed he was the last wali?”

    You can TWIST and ALWAYS CONCOCT meanings of Arabic words by changing their Ahraff (accents) etc as you qadianis very well know Arabic is NOT language of Pakistanis who can not even read Urdu, let alone English and Arabic.
    BUT THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED AS TALKED BY LORD HEADLY EL-FAROOQ (the driving force behind Muslims great London Islamic Center and Mosque, UK) IN REGARD TO FAMOUS QADIANI Abdur Rehman DARD (who Qadianis claim to have encourged Quaid-i-Azam for Pakistan movement etc) CONSIDERED MUSLIMS KAFFIR (non-Muslim). That is why you qadianis do NOT offer prayer behind a non-Qadiani Imam and don’t marry your daughters to non-Qadiani Muslim, and don’t offer funeral paryer of non-Qadiani Muslims just the way you don’t offer funeral parayer (jinazah) of Hindus, Christians, Monkies and Dogs.

  181. a muslim

    @Bin Ismail:

    “For 63 years, at least 3 generations have grown up with misconceptions drummed, or should I say pumped into their heads. Facts have to be laid out before our people.”

    Very well said when we CHANGE ‘For 63 years’ TO ‘For 96 years’ (i.e. since 1914) when Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad BECAME MASTER OF LIVES OF THOSE LIVING IN QADIAN, AT RAGING HORMONES AGE OF 26 YEARS, and brought Italian Prostitute Miss Rufo to Qadian, raped poor Qadiani girls and boys, and arranged the MURDER of those who questioned his immoral character, ambitions and policies.

  182. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim

    You seem to have an amazing dual skill of fabricating stories as well as narrating fabricated ones.

    Let me help you understand. If someone tells you exciting stories about his visit to the beaches of Afghanistan, there could be two ways of handling such bluffs, either you take the course of proving to the bluffer that Afghanistan has no beaches, or you take the second course and leave the compulsive bluffer to his bluffs and feel sorry for him.

    In dealing with you, Sir, I may have to take the second course.

  183. Bin Ismail

    @ a muslim

    Here we have a peace-loving community, whose 90 or so members have established their loyalty to their faith, not by taking lives but by laying down their own. Decent members of the human society, of diverse religious inclinations, have generously and decorously come forward to share with the Ahmadis their moment of grief. And here are you, insensitive and discourteous, obsessed with your own fantasies, drenched in your own malice and ablaze in your own hatred.

    I have met and known members of the Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore, but none as wanting in veracity, sobriety and decorum as yourself. I have my serious doubts regarding your projected affiliation with the Lahore branch of Ahmadis.

    As far as your allegations go, you are only a minuscule addition to a very long list of slanderers. It is not humanly possible to attend to and respond to the nonsense of every slanderer.

    You or your demands are not worthy even of the fleeting attention of the Spiritual Head of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat. However, since you appear to be so sure of your lies, you should have no inhibition in praying that “May the curse of Allah be on the liars” – Aameen.

  184. Pingback: The tragedy of being Ahmadis in Pakistan... - Page 13 - Pakistan Defence Forum

  185. Bin Ismail

    May God bless Jinnah eternally – Aameen.

  186. your posting is good, i’m interested your blog.

  187. Bin Ismail

    Mr. Kunwar Idris wrote the following words for Dawn, June 6, 2010:

    “The 1971 war is a sad chapter in Pakistan’s history which every citizen and soldier would like to forget. But not the children of Maj-Gen Nasir Chaudhry. They recall with some pride that their father was the only general seriously wounded on the frontline.

    Now, 40 years later, they mourn his death at the age of 90 and in a hail of bullets and grenades fired by his own countrymen. The invading Indians gave him a chance to fight back and live, the sneaking fanatics of his own country did not. They killed him while he kneeled in prayer.”

  188. Nusrat Pasha

    If the Pakistan Army can boast about a general who fought on the frontline, alonside the soldiers and sustained battle wounds – they have Major General Nasir Chaudhry. If the Pakistan Army can boast about their one and only general to die in combat – they have Major General Iftikhar Janjua.

    Both were Ahmadis.

  189. Nusrat Pasha

    If the Pakistan Army can boast about a general who fought on the frontline, alonside the soldiers and sustained battle wounds – they have Major General Nasir Chaudhry. If the Pakistan Army can boast about their one and only general who died in combat – they have Major General Iftikhar Janjua.

    Both were Ahmadis.

  190. Tilsim

    @ Nusrat Pasha

    Hmmm. I have always wondered why the Ahmedis are such hate figures for the likes of Hamid Mir who to me appears to be involved with the fundamentalists’ power struggle for the soul of Pakistan. I am hazarding a guess that he and other such groups believe that Ahmedis (unlike other minorities) exert ‘excessive’ influence within the establishment of Pakistan and because of their beliefs they cannot be supportive of the fundamentalism project for Pakistan. Their targeting could then also be just part of a broader power struggle for control of the Pakistani State – the doctrinal differences might be just a side issue.

  191. @Nusrat Pasha

    In an earlier thread, probably titled An Ahmadi Major Lays Down His Life…, in an exchange of correspondence with Lutf, there was an opportunity to make brief mention of what Ahmadis contributed in military terms to the nation of Pakistan. Even in a brief note, there was much to say. It was impressive to learn of General Nasir Chaudhry’s contribution.

    @Tilsim

    After reading the posts of Kashifiat and A Muslim, those that were not deleted, the general impression is that it was precisely what you mention, the failure of the Ahmedi to back the fundamentalists in their fundamentalist project for Pakistan, that excited anger and hatred. This is a tentative conclusion; the arguments were not easy to decipher.

    In this connection, please read Midfield Dynamo on another thread, where he mentions in a very thoughtful post that ‘nobody got the irony’. Sadly, he seems to be correct; only the Ahmedis seem to have got the irony, in ample measure.

  192. Tilsim

    @ Vajra

    Thanks, I shall see if I can find those comments that you mention.

    The other fact is that the Ahmedi community is highly educated so prior to discrimination becoming institutionalized, it would seem quite natural for their members to rise to the top of society. This of course opened up a new avenue for resentment and suspicion by bigots. However all said and done, violence against people of other beliefs regardless of religious affiliation seems to be a pet project of the extremist Sunni organisations for some time now.

    Anyways on a lighter note, if you like music. Here is a link to some uplifting stuff from Sunday in Pakistan.

    http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=403273668321

    Lots of comments are made that liberals represent a tiny minority in Pakistan. But its a complex picture.

  193. Nusrat Pasha

    @Tilsim (June 8, 2010 at 10:10 pm)

    “…….Their targeting could then also be just part of a broader power struggle for control of the Pakistani State – the doctrinal differences might be just a side issue……”

    I wouldn’t say so. Pakistan dates back to 1947. The Ahmadiyya Jamaat dates back to 1889. The opposition and persecution of Ahmadis began in 1889 and continues till today. Ahmadis have a history of serving the country they live in – whichever it may be. With reference to Pakistan, too, it was their service to the country that became prominent, not their control over it.

  194. Hussain

    Dear Sir,
    Hindu Gandhi and alcholic Churchill also considered Ahmidiyas as Muslims, but you have not mentioned the same in any writtings? For that matter many alcholic and non-nimazi persons, who still exclaim the nimaz as a good exercise, consider ahmidiyas as muslims. And that in my opinion is a greatest and only support for such creatures.
    Regards
    Hussain