In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth

Urstruly,

If Issa is still above clouds and Solomon talked to ants, then anything is possible.

You think that either one believes, or he does not; faith is beyond question ... beyond reason ... and has little to do with sense. Takbeer. Verily, Allah does what He wills …

… so what about them Muslims who believe in science and evolution. I reckon their faith is weak. No??

... or we could wait for your Issa to descend from the clouds and settle this matter. Till then you are only making a fool of yourself ...

teshah,

… you’re welcome.

It seems Bahais are not seen as a threat and perhaps hence largely ignored by mullah in Pakistan. They seem to be persecuted in Iran though … I don’t know the details …

Regarding the riddle: this child may or may not be considered illegitimate, depending upon who you ask. For the mother, it is legitimate; for the father it is not. Others may form opinions based upon hearsay. A court could decide by looking at circumstantial evidence, DNA tests etc. So no clear cut answers at this point …

Although if the child has a mole on its butt right where the father has one ... chances are it is his kid indeed ...

Re: # 442
sattar

``It seems Bahais are not seen as a threat and perhaps hence largely ignored by mullah in Pakistan. They seem to be persecuted in Iran though … I don’t know the details …``

Right! Bhaies are persecuted in Iran, there home-ground and Ahmadies likewise in Pakistan. I think Bhaies may not present a challenge to the Paky Mullah but they are evidently a greater challenge to Islam as they assert that Islam, which had a life of 1200 years only, has long since expired like the other pre-Islamic Abrahamic religions. But the Paky Mullah totally ignored it because it did not affect his business. I wonder Bhais have a palatial centre here in Islamabad but few people know about it. Probably because the Mullah did not provide it negative publicity as they did in the case of Ahmadiat. In fact the greatest danger to the mullah business is the appearance of a prophet, even a false one, as they may call.

khuram,

My post #439 to Zeena addresses some of the points you seemingly alluded to.

Mirza Sahib claimed to be the prophet of Islam raised by Allah, foretold by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). For him and his followers, Islam represents a complete way of life.

Disbelievers tend to ostracize prophet and his followers, who, in response, develop an identity separate from that of non-believers. I don’t think there is anything new or unusual here.

Parallels between early Muslims and Ahmadi-Muslims …

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) foretold revival of Islam by its future prophet. Ahmadis claim to have accepted this prophet. It is therefore fitting for them to draw parallels between themselves and early Muslims.

Some details … Early Muslims were persecuted for declaring their faith in Islam; today Ahamdi-Muslims are imprisoned for declaring their faith in Islam. In both cases this persecution has been harshest in the land of the prophet. Early Muslims bore this persecution with patience, without retaliating with violence. Same is the case with Ahamdi-Muslims – despite their violent persecution, you will be hard pressed to find incidents where Ahmadis engaged in violence.

Early Muslims were not allowed to perform Haj; today Ahmadi-Muslims are not allowed to perform Haj. Demise of the Prophet in each case led to establishment of institution of khilafat.

Parallels are quite obvious to the discerning eye.

Furthermore … Abu Jehal, staunchest leader of opposition, was killed as he fought against the Prophet (pbuh) and his people. Quran tell us that Pharaoh died a humiliating death as he opposed Prophet Moses (pbuh) and his people. 3 kings of our times who were instrumental in persecution of Ahmadis … Faisal, Bhutto, Zia … all died most horrible deaths: one was killed by his own nephew, one was hanged like an animal, and one was blown up in the sky.

Ahmadi-Muslims are justified in interpreting these events as signs of divine support. History of early Islam is full of such events ... often cited by Muslims, even today, to support truthfulness of Islam.

Once again, I insist that you use same criterion in both cases.

National Assembly

Transcripts of “Ahmadi hearings” of 1973 by National Assembly remain a secret. The government refused to make them public. One can only wonder what government and their ullema are hiding.

”True” Muslims

You are incorrect in suggesting that Ahmadis do not consider rest of Muslims as “true” Muslims. Yours is an erroneous view. While Ahmadis have accepted Imam of this age, they consider rest of Muslims as Muslims indeed.

Intelligence and wisdom

I am not sure what to make of your comment regarding Ahmadis trapped in ideas of superiority of intelligence and wisdom …

One may also argue that … Muslims are trapped in idea of superiority of intelligence and wisdom of Prophet Muhammad and his Caliphs. So what does it all mean??

Ahmadis do study works of prominent Muslim scholars and hold them in esteem … unless of course, they tell us that suicide-bombings are jihad. Such ullema we call jamaatis :-)

I remain unsure of basis or purpose of your “superiority” comments. Without explanation or proper context, they come across as ill-thought out.

Re: # 440

I am only letting you get away with these lies and false quadiani propaganda, because I am too bored with this subject at the moment.

Zeena (#428),

You are using double-standards here …

One may also argue that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should have simply remained a philosopher and a saint, without claiming prophethood.

My answer would be … Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) claimed to be a prophet because Allah made him a prophet.

Similarly, Mirza Sahib claimed to be a prophet since Allah Almighty made him a prophet.

You further asked:

”… why he and his new religion never got accepted among majority of Muslims? …”

But first you must ask … “why Muhamamd (pbuh) and his new religion never got accepted among majority of people of the world?

Even after 1400 years, 80% of world population has not accepted Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Why??

+++

teshah (#429),

Since Allah Almighty calls believers “Muslim” in Quran, Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims. Others may consider them non-Muslims … that’s their choice.

As Munir report showed, politics of definition of “Muslim” is pitiful. When asked, ullema could not agree to a definition of Muslim. At the same time each considered his definition to be the correct one, and that those who disagree with him are non-Muslims. It was a joke ...

Leader of Ahmadi-Muslim community is their “khalifa”. Wives of khulfaa are considered “ummulmomieen” by the community. The khalifa may be called “Abulmomineen” if there is such a term. Actually he is called “ameer-ul-momineen” … just like khulfaa Abu-bakr, Omar, Usman, Ali were referred to by early Muslims.

Re: # 439

Sattar2

Thank you for the clarification.

But Bhaaies used almost all paraphernalia of Islam minus rituals without claiming to be Muslim and so the Paky Mullah is not after them for that reason.

My question is; what would you call a person whom one`s wife claims to be her son or is supposed to be so but her husband doesn`t consider him to be so? Will he not technically be called an illegitimate son?

khuram

Well-written posts, with proper context, albeit a few caveats. A few comments:

#416: I don’t know about Mirza Sahib’s direct invitation to the Queen to accept Islam. He may have offered it. A prophet’s role is to invite everyone to religion of Allah, so I would not be surprised if he did; will try to find out more as time permits.

#427: I am not sure what claim came first: that of Mahdi or Issa; will try to follow up on this too.

Aik ghalti ka izala had to do with beliefs regarding Prophet Issa. One of the first books of Mirza Sahib was Buraheen-e-Ahmadiyya, which he wrote before attaining prophethood. In Buraheen-e-Ahmadiyya he elucidated strength, completeness of Islam. Here he also expressed support for “Islamic” belief that Issa was alive. This turned out to be incorrect, as was later revealed to him by Allah Almighty.

To correct this error, which he had made as a human without divine help, he wrote Aik ghalti ka izala. In this book he corrected his mistake and argued that Issa had indeed died like any other mortal human. He cited verses from Quran and reasoned in support of this view. This view was a major step forward in reconciliation of Quran with reason.

He later wrote another book “Masih Hindustan MeiN” (Issa in Hindustan). In this book he quoted from Quran as well as Biblical accounts to show how events unfolded as Jews conspired with Roman Judge (Pontius Pilate) to have Issa-ibne-Marriam crucified. To sum things up, Issa was nailed to cross, he became unconscious, was assumed dead, was taken down while still alive, and was nursed back to health. He then migrated from Jerusalem in search of remaining tribes of Israel. He traveled eastwards, reaching Kashmir, where he eventually died his natural death.

As Quran explains, Issa was sent for reformation of Israelites. During this time, out of 12 tribes of Israel, only 2 were to be found in Jerusalem. Remaining 10 tribes had migrated eastwards owing to wars and persecution. Even today, tribal people of Kashmir trace their roots to Israelite tribes.

Mirza Sahib wrote some 80-odd books … mostly in Arabic, Urdu, and Persian.

He wrote Islamic Usool Ki Philosophy (Philosophy of Principles of Islam) in 1895. This book was written as a paper to be presented at a inter-religious conference, organized by a Hindu scholar. Mirza Sahib could not attend this conference. This paper was read on his behalf by a companion of his. The paper was well-received. The conference was extended beyond its allocated days in order to allow time for this paper to be fully read.

More later …

#436 by Tehsinabbasi,

Tehsin, I would be glad to do that. However, I don`t like to be ridiculed. That`s fair, isn`t it? You have seen a non-Muslim i.e. Kaalchakra understand and contemplate and then come out in his tremendous intellect in trying to expound on what I say. That`s his choice. And his choice is not an easy one. It takes walking through hell`s fire and brimstones to do that.

If you want to find the `Principles`, do those on your own. If you can`t find them, I wish you the best of luck.

But, I could help you. However, I`m not very welcoming to vile abuse. To you your God, to me my Allah.

Regards.

Echoboom has produced a palque that reads that Muhammed is the LAST prophet from Al-Lah.

Why so?

Does self-proclamation by Muhammed is enough? It`s at best is self-aggrandisement on the pat of Muhammed.

Muhammed is a human being and Al-lah is supreme. He/She (al Lah) can choose to communicate with his people as and when he pleases. It`s foolish that he spoke some 1400 years ago and kept quiet from then on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It appears that self-appointed thekedar like Muhammed had many followers and these guyz must be known as Muhammedans. Let people who believe in the prophethood of Ali be called as Shias (they are being called, in fact) and people who believe in the prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed be called Ahmadis.

Whoever believes in Al Lah is a Muslim.

#430 zeemax

Re:- Very clear concept.

zeemax

You have closed the whole discussion in to few words and said it all. Very well said.

Exactly, I felt the samething. If, you re read my post # 428, it is almost the same concept.
Now i am more clear about all this mess.....

#431 by khuram,

If they do not like to study Maududi,, then they should listen to let`s say Ghamidi,

Yes. Ghamdi in my opinion is the best and sincere scholar who can bridge the divide between the estranged Liberals who quote things like ``there is no compulsion in religion`` and take it as a license to lead any kind of a life as convenient while still claiming to be Muslims, and the hardliners who believe Islamic Principles above all are to dictate daily conduct of individuals.

This is not saying that Ghamdi is right. He tends to attempt to rationalise the basic Principles in light of current environment, but side steps the heated contentious issues. However, his manner of interpretation is one which reduces conflict. And that is a significant contribution.

In my opinion, the basic societal principles of Islam are inviolable. The only thing which can be open to a compromise in light of current environment is the penal code. Other things like the manner of female dress, work, intermingling of the sexes in normal day-today activities, mandatory prayers, curbs on entertainment and other such are just the harsh remedies also allowed in the vast spectrum of political Islam, but their implementation hardened and compounded by Islamophobist propoganda.

There have indeed been Islamic societies which imposed these, but only as an extreme measure to regiment a wayward society and to curb the lose family and sexual mores as in Iran during Pehlavi time, or even in Afghanistan during Nadir shah, therefore the tough sanctions imposed by Khomeini and the Taliban. I see this phenomenon as no different than when Mao imposed identical uniforms on men and women so it was hard to tell which one was which. But none of these were there in the original Islamic societies of Muhammad himself and his Companions.

If a liberally inclined Muslim understands and accepts as true the underlying principles of Islamic society, rest would be easy. The lament is that none of these do because for them identity is not important. Their daily rations and the freedoms that selfishness brings are.

#432 by zeemax

“If a liberally inclined Muslim understands and accepts as true the underlying principles of Islamic society”

May be you can elaborate on these fundamental principles. Better yet why don’t you define them first and then just describe them with some examples.

Thanks!

Re: # 432

I like Wasif Ali Wasif and Ghamidi and likes because they are meeting the religious and intellectual problems of our present day. They don`t just stay in the false pride of past glory. They are meeting the challenges of today.

Yes Mirza has used Islam ... and Islamic teachings as a try to get recognition in the eyes of whole Muslim Ummah. But it was the demand of his nature of claims as well. He had the claims of being ``Imam Mehdi for Muslims``,, and ``Issa - who was to appear among Muslim in the capacity of a sub-ordinate to the Prophet of Islam (PBUH). So with these types of claims, he just could not go outside the teachings of Islam. He only has ``interpretated`` many Islamic teachings in a particular way.

And yes I had been thinking of what could be the exact need of forming a new community. My findings are same as pointed out by Zeemax as well; that the exact reason was only his claims. Those who accepted those claims, became a separate party and then eventually organized into the form of a community.

Ahmedies got themselves more isolated when they started making analogy of their own community with the early period of Islam. One of the posts of Sattar also reveals this thing where he pointed out resemblence of Muslim attitude with Ahmedies and the early Kuffars`s attitude with the early Muslims.

In this way, Ahmedies became an isolated community. Perhaps they also do not consider rest of Muslims to be ``true`` Muslims for the reason that rest of Muslims have been failed in rescognizing true Imam Mehdi. I think that this was the main reason of why National Assembely declared then to be ``Non-Muslims``.

Sattar also had pointed out resemblance of this community with the early Christian community. Hazrat Issa also had not crossed the boundaries of the Shariah of Hazrat Musa but still formed a separate community.

Ahmedies do are trapped in false ideas of some ``superiority of intelligence and wisdom`` of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed and his Caliphs. My advice to them is that they should study the works of other prominent Muslim Scholars in order to know that there are many other more intelligent and wise people in Muslims. If they do not like to study Maududi,, then they should listen to let`s say Ghamidi,, or should study Wasif Ali Wasif.

Regards!

Regards!

#427 by khuram,

Regretfully you have failed again in answering my query. Claiming to be Jesus Christ is a `Claim`, not a teaching. Claiming to be Mahdi is a `Claim`, not a teaching. Khatme-Nabuwwat or lack of it is a `Claim`, not a teaching. His being intelligent if you say so is nothing special. Hundreds of others were much more intelligent. I hope you follow me.

By using his `claims` and `intelligence`, all he taught was for his followers to undermine Jihad. To act as fifth columnists within the Muslim community posing as one of them, and to infiltrate into their highest echelons. To work in the interests of British and get rewarded in return, and to ultimately become the power elite in the Muslim ranks.

That is why they were exposed and kicked out of Muslims ranks. That is solely what Mirza ever taught. Nothing else. Other pranks of his were just `claims`.