Ahmadis – The Forgotten People

PS: And so that there is no confusion about point 1.... I am aware of Chaudhry Rahmat Ali and his Pakstan plan etc etc..... But Rahmat Ali was not associated with the Pakistan movement or the Muslim League and his ideas were rejected... which is why he had formed a Pakistan National Movement Party... that was holding its convention in Karachi .... the day Lahore Resolution was passed.

Shishapa....

1-Pakistan as a name was given to the movement by the Hindu Press.... and we took it and ran with it. Jinnah even thanked the Congress for ``Giving us one word- Pakistan.`` It really has little or no connotations... Infact the whole issue of ``purity`` was raised in a very positive way when Jinnah appealed to Muslims in Karachi not to taint the purity of Pakistan by killing innocent people.

2- If every thing has to be taken back to why we got the country- and many have pointed out that Ahmadi discrimination in Pakistan has been carried on the behest of those who had sided with the Congress Party during Partition- don`t you think we can take this back to Khilafat Movement in which Congress Party and Gandhi helped unleash the Mullah street power in the first place- or to the Congress in general which through the 1940s strengthened these Islamic groups? There is a direct cause and effect there- Khilafat movement-> Gandhi unleashes Mullah street power for the first time...

3- But I think it is unfair to go back and point accusatory fingers... The point is that you can`t hark on that anymore.... Most Ahmadis have no regrets about the Pakistan Movement ... most Ahmadis remain committed to Jinnah`s Pakistan... and it will be so one day.

4- Stop always talking of the plight of Sikhs and Hindus alone... some 70-80% of the people killed in partition were Muslims .... this is confirmed by any source- tell me you weren`t a ``separate religious identity-based state`` then why did that happen? Or was that justified? If 3.5 million Hindus and Sikhs moved to India ... atleast 6 million Muslims also moved to Pakistan ..

-YLH

Kulharee...

I am beginning to understand just exactly who you are now -though I don`t understand why you have left original nick... and I think you are an incredibly selfish and ridiculous person for giving Ahmadis a bad name.

You know very well... that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the HOLIEST figure in Ahmadi Islam above and beyond Mirza Ghulam Ahmed. You know full well that with your exception - you admittedly are as against your own Jamaat as you are against rest of Muslims- and you continue to bark ... creating a false impression that all Ahmadis are in line with your views.

If you are an atheist or irreligious... which you admitted you were in private... then why hold the entire community hostage to your own hatred for Islam of all types?

Re: # 139

>>>I am beginning to understand just exactly who you are now -though I don`t understand why you have left original nick... and I think you are an incredibly selfish and ridiculous person for giving Armadas a bad name.<<<

Manto Yaar, I am totally lost as to what you are implying here? What do you mean by my original nick? You mean, FQ? Because I never activated that nick after I registered with it, and if I did some years ago (I think 2003), I have forgotten my password. (I submit articles by Kulharee, and the System changes the writer to my real name – because that’s how my profile is set up). Secondly, if you think that my article or what I said has given Ahmadis a bad name, I think you are high on Barfee or something. Why would you call me Ridiculous and Selfish? I may be ridiculous, but I don’t think I am selfish. How can one lousy person such as myself give Islam or Ahmadis a bad name? Now you are talking like a Mullah who thinks that “one” Ahmadi reciting Kalma is a threat to Islam. Manto, put the Burfee down. Please.

>>>You know very well... that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the HOLIEST figure in Ahmadi Islam above and beyond Mirza Ghulam Ahmed. You know full well that with your exception - you admittedly are as against your own Jamaat as you are against rest of Muslims- and you continue to bark ... creating a false impression that all Armadas are in line with your views.<<<<

Manto. Manto. Manto. There is absolutely no question about Prophet Mohammad having the highest status in Ahmadiyyah Islam. And Manto, what impression are you talking about??? Why would I say that all Ahmadis are in line with my views?? Even in our own household we each have our own way of looking at things. I think you haven’t met Ahmadis like me. Trust me we don’t all look or think alike. I am not against my Jamaat. I love my Jamaat you knucklehead. But that’s between me and my Jamaat. I don’t have to flaunt my love for anything or anyone. It is a personal and private matter. You know as the saying goes, empty pots make the loudest noise.

>>>If you are an atheist or irreligious... which you admitted you were in private... then why hold the entire community hostage to your own hatred for Islam of all types?<<<

Manto, I don’t remember saying or admitting any of that. and once again, I do not hate Islam of any or all Types. Yes, I find intolerant views of some sects (e.g., Wahabi) a bit too much to handle. I will be a hypocrite if I expected others to show respect to my beliefs while I don’t show respect to theirs.

Re: # 147

The spellcheck messed up some words when I quoted Manto…I am sorry about that.

Agar Mirza hota Khuda ka Nabi ...
to Tatti mein gir key na murta kabhi.

Atif mian...

Accusations ka kiya hai... These Hindutvists launch similar accusations against all Muslims- about British etc.. But just so that you are aware of certain things... one alleged anti-imperialist ``hero`` of ``Sunni Muslims`` - ``Ghazi`` Ilmdin ``Shaheed`` was a cousin of my paternal Ahmadi grandmother - now close to 90- ... so it wasn`t as clear cut as you make it out to be. Ofcourse if I was to recount the real events of Ilmdin`s famous murder and his incarceration - he wouldn`t seem like much of a hero...

However I don`t want to make this an Ahmadi vs rest of Muslims thing... because the issue of Ahmadis persecution is our internal issue- certainly no business of the Hindu- (last time a person of Indian nationality raised this issue in my very staunchly Ahmadi father`s presence, he threw him out) ... and we will stand by Pakistan no matter what.

So instead of playing into the hands of the Hindutvists- like Ahrar and JUH did in 1947- put up a united front .... to keep Pakistan strong and viable.

I don`t know why Indians are trying to make this a Pakistan vs India issue... when most Ahmadis like my family remains staunchly Pakistani nationalist. And this is the case across the board.... despite all the discrimination that we have had to go through.



Jang...

As usual you are commenting on something you know little about.

You don`t know anything about Jamaat-e-Ahmadiyya... your lack of knowledge is appalling. Read some Ahmadi literature and you will know that Jamaat-Ahmaddiya was the first one to come out in open support of the Pakistan movement.


This following is from the Jamaat mouthpiece:


http://www.thepersecution.org/50years/mov1.html
Jamaat-Ahmaddiya aur Pakistan movement

Since you said you could read Urdu... you might want to read this.

Mr M. A. Jinnah had quit the Indian political scene and out of the frustration left Indian politics. He retreated to London (U.K.) after attending the second Round Table Conference in 1932, where he established a remarkable legal practice.

It was a great loss to Muslims in India. It provided immense relief to Indian Congress, as their main adversary left the field.

He was persuaded back to India by no other person than Hadhrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, the Head of Ahmadiyya Movement. This divine figure surveyed the Indian political horizon and found no honest and outstanding Muslim figure to lead the Muslims of India, the Muslims who lost their empire in India after five centuries of Moghal rule.

Hadhrat Sahib asked the then Ahmadiyya Missionary in London (UK) Mr Abdur Raheem Dard to get in touch with Mr M. A. Jinnah who initially turned down all overtures. It took Mr Dard in three hours face to face talk successfully persuaded him to return to India. Mr Jinnah was most reluctant, but he eventually changed his mind.

The Sunday Times London (April 9,1933) carried a report of a reception that was held by the Imam of London Mosque Mr Dard, where Mr Jinnah frankly acknowledged the fact that:

“The eloquent persuasion of Imam left me no way of escape”


Sardar Shaukat Hayat in his book “The Nation that lost its soul” (page 147) mentions the following event:

“One day, I got a message from Quaid e Azam saying ‘Shaukat, I believe you are going to Batala, which I understand is about five miles from Qadian, please go to Qadian and meet Hadhrat Sahib and request him on my behalf for his blessings and support for Pakistan`s cause.’ After the meeting (in Batala) I reached Qadian about midnight, I sent a word that I had brought a message from Quaid e Azam. He came down immediately and enquired what were Quaid`s wishes. I conveyed his message for prayer and for his support for Pakistan. He said: ‘Please convey to the Quaid e Azam that we have been praying for his mission from the very beginning.’ Where the help of his followers is concerned, no Ahmadi will stand against any Muslim Leaguer.”


The second feat, during that crucial period after elections, was achieved, when Ch Zafrulla Khan who prevailed upon Khizar Hayat Khan Tiwana to resign at a time when Mr Tiwana enjoyed complete confidence of the Panjab Assembly, paving the way for the Muslim League to appear on the horizon.

Crucial Contribution of Ahamdi Divine in Making of Pakistan


Hadhrat Mirza Bashir ud Din Mahmud Ahmad was watching with dismay the unholy alliance between the Viceroy and the Congress Party, as an Interim Indian Government was formed in 1946 without Muslim participation. Mr Jinnah threatened to launch a protest movement.

On September 23, 1946, this divine figure arrived in Delhi along with a team of advisors and remained in Delhi at the residence of Ch Zafrulla Khan for three weeks.

He held high level discussions with top Indian leaders, Mr M. A. Jinnah, Mahtama Gandhi, Pandit Nehru, Nawab of Bhopal, Khawja Nazimuddin, Sardar Niashtar and Nawab Chattari. Hadhrat Sahib also wrote a letter to Lord Wavell indicating to him that the Muslim League enjoyed the total support of the Indian Muslims.

A day before his departure for Qadian, Lord Wavell invited the Muslim League to join the Interim Cabinet of India.The daily Nawa i waqt in its issue of October 14,1946 quoted Hindu Daily Milap:

“This act tantmounts to torpedeoing of the Indian Independence Movement. Hadhrat Sahib in a policy lecture forcefully supported the concept of Pakistan.” (Al Fazal May 21,1947)

Treacherous Ulema


In the crucial stages of delicate negotiations that Mr Jinnah conducted with the British Government, the whole gang of Ulema led by Ahrars (the Muslim clergy) abetted, instigated and funded by the Indian Congress, opposed Mr Jinnah at every step.

The Indian Congress party had dozens of powerful leaders, they had a powerful machinery and unlimited cash was available to defeat the single handed effort of a lone figure Mr Jinnah - fondly called as Quaid e Azam (the great leader).

Despite heavy odds, despite heavy opposition by the Muslims priesthood led by Ahrars, Mr Jinnah won and won convincingly because he enjoyed the prayers of this divine figure who called him to India.

Muslim League captured solid power in Panjab, NWFP and Bengal in 1946 elections. The real tragedy of Pakistan is that this very pack of ulema who opposed the Making of Pakistan overnight became the lovers of Pakistan.

“The monopoly” of this gang of priesthood was threatened by this divine figure (the Head of Ahmadiyya Movement) who was presenting the true face of Islam.

This corrupt priesthood never accepted the creation of a Muslim state. They thought in order to weaken Pakistan, the best way is to strike at the Ahmadiyya Movement and foment an agitation unparalleled in the history of the subcontinent.

First it was in 1953, when the Muslim clergy mounted an onslaught against the Ahmadiyya Movement demanding they be declared as non Muslims and it was skilfully engineered by the Premier of Panjab, Mian Mumtaz Daultana, who wanted to topple the Government of Pakistan. The Muslim clergy was headed by Jamat Islami and funded by Saudi Arabia. It failed.

Then a crook of the century, commonly known as Mr Z. A. Bhutto appeared on the scene in 1969. Posing as a socialist and secularist, he gained the sympathy of Ahmadiyya Jamat who was targeted by the fundamentalist Muslims.

Generally Ahmadiyya Movement keeps aloof from politics, but out of all the crooked and corrupt politicians, Mr Bhutto appeared to be a lesser devil. Once he won a majority in West Pakistan with the support of Ahmadis, like Machiavelli, he changed his colours.

Having being instrumental in the break up of Pakistan, East Pakistan becoming Bangla Desh, he desperately sought a political handle. And he found one, when he sided with priests and thought by declaring Ahmadis as non Muslims and he would gain another term, he did but soon he was kicked out by another bigger crook, commonly known as Gen Zia ul Haq. This so-called general who became a general without seeing “any action” did show some action by hanging his benefactor, Mr Bhutto. By 1984, his General saw his popularity going down the tube.

To flag his dwindling popularity he resorted to the same old political gimmick and this time he brought an ordinance under the cover of the Martial Law to declare that Ahmadis are non Muslims, and they would be put in jail if they call themselves Muslims.

This crook however unwittingly or wittingly entered into a prayer duel in 1988 with the son of that divine figure - Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad, the current head of Ahmadiyya Movement and disappeared in the fireball of plane crash in 1988 taking with him the USA Ambassador who was travelling with him.

What Keeps Pakistan Intact - Prayers of a Prince of Islam


Pakistan came into being in the name of Islam - but now that rasion d`etre is gone. It is now a linguistic state populated by people who speak Punjabi, Sindhi, Pushto, Baluchi and Urdu speaking refugees.

It would have become Bosnia or Zaire but for the prayers of that Prince of Islam, Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad, the illustrious son of the Hadhrat Mirza Bashir ud Din Mahmud Ahmad. It is his prayers that is sustaining Pakistan.

Despite persecution of his followers and the fact he is living in another country (UK), that Prince of Islam still prays for the integrity and solidarity of Pakistan.

Sattar2 writes <<< Masadi (#113):

Quran is a book, not a dictionary. Neither is it a lexicon. It is futile to suggest that … if Quran uses a word, it must use this word in each and every possible meaning and connotation. This essentially sums up your illogical, unreasonable position. >>>

My position is not illogical, your position is quite illiterate. When you have a book that is extremely consistent in how it has used words and it has used them in the literal sense in all spots concerning that word and you come along and say in this one particular place, it implies something else, (because you want to distort it to fit in with your ideology) you are the one being illogical.

Then he writes (after a bunch of extra-Quranic nonsense):

<<<... If this is too difficult, then never mind. And if you think I am distorting Quran, you can go to hell. If this harsh language bothers you, refrain from getting carried away next time. >>>

How exactly did I get carried away? You cannot respond decently because you have no argument. The Quran is indeed a lexicon for understanding the words it has used and the meanings it has implied to them within its text. It is unique as a book in this very aspect as the very rules of the language were extracted from the book itself. The literal meaning of that word used in that context implies what it says, a seal or an ending or completion- the completion is implied in 5:3 as well. You on the other hand are forced to look outside for distortions and exceptions and interpretive meanings that have nothing to do with the Quran or how it has used the word, to fit them in with your narrow ideological formula. The other groups do the same, each with its hand picked hadith tale. All of those groups can come up with a tale here a tale there, an understanding or tafsir here or there to distort the literal meaning of the Quran and how the Quran itself uses its words.

We are specifically told not to differentiate between God`s messengers in several places why would God then go out of his way to point one out by name as the greatest, if we take your distorted meaning? Ever thought about that? Further, 4:69-71, not by a wild stretch of the imagination has anything to say about prophets continuing to come, that is a distorted, deliberately contrived interpretation which is neither directly nor indirectly implied by a literal reading of the aya.

Also let me assure you that you wont be deciding who will go to hell, and given by the slip shod way in which you are distorting the Quran based on whim, you might not be too far away from it.

One of the illusions about Qadianism is that its emergence merely signifies the addition of one more sect to the large number of already existing sectarian and juristic schools of Islam, and that the followers of Qadianism are, at the most, a new sect. Thus, Qadianism is not a unique phenomenon in the history of Muslim sects and schools. A careful study of Qadianism is bound to shatter this illusion and to force upon every fair-minded student the conclusion that Qadianism is a religion by itself, and the Qadianis a separate community (Ummah), parallel to Islam and the Ummah of Islam.

Among the different anti-Islam movements which have arisen in our history, Qadianism is unique. For, if other movements had been directed against Islam as a whole, Qadianism is a conspiracy which is specifically directed against the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be on him), and challenges the finality of Islam and the unity of Muslims. By repudiating the finality of prophethood, Qadianism obliterated the very borderlines which distinguished this Ummah from all other.

Moreover, it is also to be noted that the Mirza raised the standard of his prophethood and declared all those who did not accept his claim as Kafirs in a Muslim world which was already torn by dissension. By so doing, however, the Mirza raised an iron wall between himself and the Muslims. On the one side of this wall there are a few thousand followers of the Mirza, and on the other side is the rest of the Muslim world which stretches from Morocco to China and has great personalities, virtuous movements of reform, and valuable institutions. They stand isolated from and opposed to the whole of this world. Thus he unnecessarily added to the difficulties of Muslims, further aggravated their disunity and added a new complication to the problems facing them.

The Mirza has made no worthwhile contribution to the intellectual and religious heritage of Muslims which would call for his recognition and because of which he might deserve the gratitude of the present generation of Muslims. Nor did he initiate a broad-based movement for the revival of Islam which could profit the Muslims as a whole, nor help Muslims to solve any of the major problems facing them, nor did his movement contain any message for the contemporary civilization which is in the grips of major crisis and is interlocked in a life and death struggle. Nor can he even be credited with any significant achievement vis-a-vis the expansion of Islam either in India or Europe. His message remained addressed to the Muslims and of necessity could only lead to mental confusion and unnecessary religious squabbles within the Muslim community.


If the Mirza can be considered successful, it is only in so far as he bequeathed to his family the legacy of spiritual leadership and worldly prosperity, the legacy of a kind of theocracy in which respect he is comparable to the Agha Khan and his ancestors.

Sattar ,
theres a difference , I am not against Ahmedis ( individuals , people ) but against there beliefs - theres a difference , I don`t lie as most wannabes here kindly don`t misunderstand me - not being personal ...
cheers

Re: # 134

Why was Brother echoboom`s post filtered?

Brother, kindly post your email address for kaka to contact you!

@sattar,
Mirza Sahab is nor Mohammad (s.a.w) nor a Massiah kindly don`t compare him
with atleast the last prophet (s.a.w)
and my point is that Ahmedis or Qadyanism is not even a sect of Islam -
when Mohammad (s.a.w) said about 72 sects he meant about sects which
are Muslim - now somoene who claims that prophecy never ended is not a
Muslim - I repeat is not a Muslim & can not become one
It does not mean that any previous prophet is not alive. It simply means that if for the sake of argument all the previous prophets supposedly come in the world in the times of our Prophet Muhammad, (Sallallaho alaihe wassallam) and become his servants, even then our Prophet (Sallallaho alaihe wassallam) shall continue to be the last prophet since nobody has been awarded prophethood after him. With his arrival, the list of the holy prophets became complete. Hazrat Esa & Iman Mahdi , are two different individuals plus when we talk about there return we
do not contradict our belief of end of prophecy but these people will descend because according to us they never died & they will arrive without
the label of prophets or massiah(s) as prophecy has ended when Mohammad (s.a.w) died .
Although my memory is not that brilliant & one has to ask about all these religious beliefs from a proper Ulema but as far as I could
remember that Hazrat Imam Mehdi will take `bait` in Makkah or Madina from the believers & will fight first against his own faithful
who will refuse to acknowledge him in which he will succeeded ; Hazrat Esa will fight a war as well . There will be two wars according to
Dr.Israr Ahmed one against a `unidentified force` in which Muslims will help non-Muslims ( some say this has already happened 1992 , Gulf
War ) & the final war would be against Christians after that ( 40 years after that ) Soor will be on -
Hajood & Majood - two nations or set of population
Kara-Dajal - a devil like creature maybe a human with one eyes which will descend from sky on a donkey
@sattar bhai sahab, I am really not a hardcore one - I don`t even pray five times - & misses jumma ofcourse etc...

thank you zeena i just had to make sure of this..there tends to be a lot of judgement passed by humans whereas i know that the final judgement is in the hands (or feets or tentacles) of God alone.

based on parshuram here, i am sure ahmedis are polished, well mannered and can use language well ..salim is my witness.

#28 by jang on April 7, 2006 7:42am PT


{{{``Ahmedis are nice, disciplined,well educated, polished, well mannered and kind MUSLIMS and not only that they are kind humans. ``

This bothers me..so if some are not ``nice`` (e.g. the kaffirs), is it OK to hamla on them? }}}

jang sahib jii

Yes, everyone regardless of their religion has every right of state protection. There is no doubt about that.

I emphasised specific characteristics of Ahmedis , why? b/c these are my personal experiences , I just wished to applaud them for their good characteristics.

Sorry, you totally misunderstood my post. Kafir word is not in my dictionary. There was no reason to murder them . Hope you`re clear now. thank you

Good article,

For the record who are we to judge who is a muslim and whose not. I have seen Ahmedis say the same kalma, observe the same namaz, the same roza so how can we say they are not muslims. Maybe we can call them another sect like Ismaelees or Wahabis.
I learned my quran and namaz from an Ahmedi so does that make me a Sunni or an Ahmedi?
I wonder are the muslims afraid or are their beliefs so weak that they have to persecute an entire community?