Ahmadis – The Forgotten People

atfimian, again, please understand islam clearly, pakistan is NOT a just islamic state, and such laws can only be allowed in a just islamic state. your argument is only valid for a good just islamic state. until then we should ensure that inferior instruments of power like the paki law, which you will admit to be far from true sharia monitored by a good kalifa. these laws are imperfect and end up screwing up people unnecessarily. so until a true kaliphate is established, such laws should be suspended, for they will not escape gods punishment anyways.

The more I think about it, the more completely I am befuddled by this serious topic. Perhaps somebody can enlighten me. Here is how I understand the situation:

(1) Ahmedis fought for Pakistan – without their support there would not have been a Pakistan – a “Muslim” homeland.

(2) Now most Pakistanis – who are “Muslims” – instead of being grateful, do not recognize this group as “Muslim” at all and the constitution of Pakistan lays that out in writing! So essentially, this group is being punished for being “different”.

(3) “Muslim” religious scholars agree with that interpretation.

(4) “Muslim” non-religious ``intellectuals`` generally do not agree with their treatment of this group but do not appear to disagree with the interpretation in (3) or are at least too chicken to admit disagreement.

Now for solutions:

Intuition says that this ought to be simple – based on whether there is support for this group within the mainstream Pakistanis, or not.

If there is, why does the mainstream let this outrage continue?

If there is not, why – and what can be done to change things?

This nut appears a lot tougher to crack than it appears.

Re: # 29
[2. A Quadiani can freely vote for any candidate of his liking though he has to identify himself as a non-Muslim minority along with all non Muslims.]

Correct me if I`m wrong but isn`t this a bit of a stretch? I was under the impression that even after the 2001 supreme court ruling non-Muslims can only cast their vote for very few open seats, and that too, only at the local level. So it seems that they can only vote for their own minority candidates for their reserved seats at the national level and provincial, and have severe restrictions on whom they can vote for at the city level.

In the case of Ahmedis this is of course further complicated by the fact that most Ahmedis still want to be called Muslims and so do not choose to be candidates, or vote in their minority capacity. Effectively, they seem to have no representation at all... quite far from your claim of their being ``doubly enfranchised``

[.. a fair analysis would show that the thesis of ``institutionalized discrimination`` of Quadianis by the state of Pakistan is absolutely baseless]

Do you really believe this?

``Secondly, If Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims, why should that be such a big deal for Muslims?
``

This is interesting to me only because the Ahmadi situation is similar to that of the Nirankaris.

The Nirankaris also consider themselves Sikhs but they believe that thier ``Guru`` is a continuation of the Sikh Gurus.

If Islam says that Mohammad is the Last Prophet, why don`t Ahdmadis simply discard their prophet and acknowledge Mohammad as the Last Prophet thereby becoming true Muslims?

If you follow another prophetm why call yourself Muslims?

Same issue with Nirankaris who cannot not be Sikhs yet claim to be so.

Re: # 57

Sattar Sahib, thank you very much for the corrections. Ahmadis do indeed consider Mirza Sahib a Prophet of Islam. I am an Ahmadi, and there are certain things about my Jamat that I find a bit harsh. For example, Jammat has a right to ‘ex-communicate’ anyone who doesn’t fit their definition of an Ahmadi. That has always bothered me. Here, we Ahamdis complain about not being considered Muslims by other Muslims, but at the same time we reserve the right to expel (they call it ‘Murtad’) anyone they think has not met their expectations. I think the right to consider who what person is, or what religion that person belongs to, should rest solely with that person. Having said that, there are other wonderful things that my Jammat does that I admire, for example, their missionary presence in Africa and how they are so involved in building schools and stuff.

Somehow Beej and Kulharee got mixed up…blame Al-Gore for that… This is real Kulahree.

Re: # 58
Atif, does the Patriot Act define who is an Ahamdi? That’s excellent..

You are totally wrong. The two General Brothers of 1965 war, considered the Heroes of Kashmir were Ahmadis. If we meet someday, I will show you their photos.

Do you really think that Prophet Mohammad and Allah needs Mullahs to protect them?

#60, #61

For what it`s worth, no, I am not the man with the axe!

#59

Need I remind you that most of the individuals who are being marginalized today as Ahmadis were not even born when their forefathers took part in that idiotic exercise of dividing a people through partition. Why should the children of today pay for the lack of foresight of their forefathers?

#59

Need I remind you that most of the individuals who are being marginalized today as Ahmadis were not even born when their forefathers took part in that idiotic exercise of dividing a people through partition. Why should the children of today pay for the lack of foresight of their forefathers?

Screw the Ahmadis. The Ahmadis were in the forfront of the Pakistan movement. Good lesson they are learning. Talk about ironies..the Depobandis were pro India and anti-Partition, they sit on the head of Pk today and are shahenshash of Pak ideology. The Ahmadis who worked for Pak movement are considered a subversive qaum.

kulharee #56 writes ``And yes, they are within their rights to consider whomever they deem fit to be a Muslim. But do they really need to make that to be part of their Constitution, a Public document?``

Yes. If the muslims in Pakistan will be threatened by the intolerance of qadiyanis, they will enact laws to protect themselves. When the americans felt threatened by the muslims, they enacted Patriot law. Whether it is right or wrong is a separate debate. With the history of qadiyanis siding with persecutors of muslims (during the British rule the qadiyanis actively aided colonizers in persecuting muslims), I am not surprised that you and your ilk have often cheered the killings of muslims in Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir and their persecution in America.

Also, you have personally used the most foulest possible language against Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) on unplugged. This despite the fact that no one provoked you by using the same language against Mirza Ahmed - although it is quite easy to do so. It is this kind of intolerance and bigotry that has gotten your ilk into problems in Pakistan. You, the writer of the supposed persectuation of qadiyanis, is the perfect embodiment of the intolerance of qadiyanis and the reason why the constituition of Pakistan includes the provisions that it does.

Qadiyanis in Pakistan should be accorded the freedoms that every minority in Pakistan enjoys - except when they start their mischievouse activities. This supposed ``nationalist`` group was the biggest cheerleader of British colonizers` persecution of Muslims. We, the Pakistanis (christians, hindus, and others), will make sure that no fifth element exists amongst us who sides with malicious outsiders to persecute our people again. And hence my firm belief that Musharraf will be hung by his balls, inshallah!

Minor clarifications … (based on my understanding)

- Ahmadi-Muslims consider Mirza Sahib a prophet of Islam, and not only a mujaddid (reformer). The Lahori Group, which is somewhat of a different entity, considers Mirza Sahib not a prophet, but only a reformer of Islam.

- Ahmadis believe in Allah Almighty as explained in Quran, in message of Quran, and in prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). They accept that Divine Law was perfected and completed in Quran and that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the most exalted, honorable prophet of Allah. They further believe that prophethood is an on-going phenomenon, and Allah may continue to raise prophets to guide mankind, as need arises.

- Regarding fighting jihad … here’s the deal: Quran contains guidance, conditions, and limitations regarding fighting jihad. For Ahmadis, teachings of Quran are valid for all times. Mirza Sahib forbade fighting jihad since pre-requisite conditions for such jihad, as defined by Quran, did not exist then. Quran commands Muslims to practice tolerance, patience, and steadfastness when dealing with persecution or violence. It even encourages Muslims to migrate to other lands if conditions become unbearable in homeland. Quran severely discourages Muslims from engaging in unrest and violence, as it carefully restricts the scope and application of fighting jihad.

- As far as I know, when Ahmadis were declared non-Muslims in Pakistan (~ 1974), hearings were held where theological discussions were conducted between mainstream Islamic ullema and Ahmadi leadership. All this was done behind closed doors. Finality of Prophethood, writings of Mirza Sahib, views of Ahmadi-Muslims were discussed over several days, before Ahmadis were declared non-Muslims. However, the government of Pakistan did not release transcripts of these hearings. This was a travesty which reeks of backroom deal making between ullema and politicians.

Re: # 53

Krishna Sahib, very valid point indeed. You are absolutely right, the majority of Muslims do not consider Ahmadis a Muslim (from North Africa to Indonesia to New Zealand). And yes, they are within their rights to consider whomever they deem fit to be a Muslim. But do they really need to make that to be part of their Constitution, a Public document?

Secondly, If Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims, why should that be such a big deal for Muslims?

Let me ask you this question (I am assuming you are an Indian). Are there any definitions of Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu in the Constitution of the Republic, as it is in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic or Pakistan. The Constitution of Pakistan clearly defines who is a Muslim, and clearly excludes Ahmadis (by name) from the fold of Islam.

``Every sane Pakistani should be ashmed of what was done to this patriotic group. ``

here we go again..first zeena, and now HP

whats this got to do with either SANITY or PATRIOTISM?
so does it mean insane mullahs can do whatever they please?
or non-patriotic group can be screwd at will?

this sounds like something Manto would post..

Well I would all to read ``Qadiyanioon ka Ilmi Muhasibah`` by Prof. Ilyas Burni and use ur brains..

While I decry the atrocities commited on Ahmedis and share the angst of the author, there is a merit to the argument put forward by mainstream muslims.

If Islam is rigidly defined and majority of Muslims who follow that want to preserve the definition, they should have the power to do so. If a group does not agree with this rigid definition, then by default, they are a seperate religion. What`s the point of forcing the majority when they dont want to accept you?

Of course, the issue remains whether this exclusion of Ahmedis was determined by a minority power group within Muslims or whether the rank and file of Muslims in Pakistan are also in favour of this exclusion. I may be wrong, but it looks like the majority of Muslims agree with their Mullahs on this

Thanks,
Avkrishna