Hazrat Sarmad Shaheed: The Naked Sufi Martyr

Hazrat Isa ibn Maryam alayhisalatu wa salam WILL descend down to Earth on the wings of two angels in Damascus, in the Umayyad mosque, at the time of the Fajr prayer. No MUSLIM has any doubts about this, only kafir qadianis don`t believe in it because it cannot fit into their minds.

Urstruly (#146):

Your post one again highlights corruption of Islam at the hands of your ullema.

You claim that maximum punishment of apostasy, according to every school of jurist thought in Islam … is death.

Note that Quran discusses apostasy in several places … without even remotely suggesting any worldly punishment for it. In essence, every school of jurist thought in Islam now has nothing to do with Quran.

Your Islam is a hodge-podge of ill-conceived violent ideas. No wonder Ahmadi-Muslims get under your skin …

i have presented a host of quranic ayats and hadith, sattar, you are the one who cannot accept them but insist on proving them `wrong` or misunderstood.

the bottom line:

agar mirza hota khuda ka nabi
tatti mein gir kar marta na kabhi

Re: # 146 further...

and the principles on which the area of Harm Shareef are established were dictated by Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself at the time of the conquest of Mecca, when he broke all the idols placed in Kaa`ba with his own hands and ordered idolators to be expelled oustside of the limits of Harm Shareef. This is the reason Hindus are not allowed to establish a temple in KSA, whereas they have temples in all all surrounding Arab and Muslim countries, where they worship freely.

Initially, Jews and Chirstians were allowed to enter Masjid-e-Nabwi, where they used to have polemic debates with Holy Prophet (pbuh) and Prophet himself encouraged them to ask questions but they used this opportunity to conspire among Muslims and even poisoned Holy Prophet (pbuh), so they, and any other non-Muslim, were forbidden from enetering any mosque, unless the Mutwalli (custodian) of Mosque expresses his permission. This is the reason Quadianis are forbidden to name their place of worship as a Masjid because logically non-Muslims are not allowed in a Masjid, and if the erect their own building and start calling this building a Masjid then either they should be forced to chage the name of the place or state should take that building away from them if they refuse.

Urstruly (#145):

You are lying once again.

As I explained, baghi means “a female slave” … without any reference to her sexual conduct.

“Children of baghi” is an Arabic idiom suggesting people without courage and moral qualities to accept truth when faced with it.

Now why would your ullema insist on being labeled as “children of prostitutes” is beyond me. However, if you personally prefer to be labeled child of a “sex worker” … that’s your choice … and has nothing to do with what Mirza Sahib wrote … (wink).


PS: What about the ``last prophet and last mosque`` hadith? Any profound thoughts, little genius?

Re: # 144 Rizwan

Yes there is a list of exclusions:

1. A non-Muslim is not allowed to proselytize Muslim subjects of state because the maximum punishment for apostasy is death according every school of jurist thought in Islam. So if a non-Muslim is allowed to proselytize Muslims, the law becomes contrdictory.

2. A non-Muslim is not allowed to practice his faith in a Muslim place of worship, i.e. Mosque

3. A non-Muslim is not allowed to practice his faith in the place of `Harm` ulness he is Christian or Jew. The place of Harm Shareef is an area of a radius of approx. 10 miles around the city of Mecca. During the time of Sultan Nuruddin Zangi (May Allah be pleased with him and grant him high place in heaven) the area of Harm Shareef was extended to include the 10 mile area around the of Mosque of the Prophet (pbuh) - Masjid-e- Nabwi in Medina as well. And in 1918 with Kingdom of Saudi Arabia became a nation state, this area was extended to the borders of the state.

Re: # 143 Sattar

I think I had appologized to you when you explained to me that Mirza sahib used the Arabic word ``baghia`` for his opponents i.e. Islamic scholars, who opposed him. You told me that the the translation of this word as done by Moulvis, which is, ``KanjriyoN ke bachchay (children of whores)`` was incorrect and the correct translation was ``Children of sex workers`` and that Mirza sahib meant well. I don`t know why you raise this issue time and again.

Ustruly # 141

Read your response again, and cry and weep at the sorry state of affairs for muslims.

This is what you call the rational thinking of Islam and Quran, is this the Sunnah of Holy Prophet Muhammad.

You need a psychiatrist to help you out.

Isalm and Quran and Muhammad are not your personal property, God has not allocated these to you on a ``Ishtam Paper``.

Islam is a religion of justice and equality. Now weigh what you claim on the basis of this principle.

1. How to determin who is given the right to decide how is muslim and non muslim

such a complex issue and non-solvable issue, and yet Sunnah of Holy Prophet is very simple and practile, however say salam and claim muslim he is Muslim. Now if he is a Muslim at heart, leave that to God. Islam is under no threat, as God, All powerfull is protector of Islam.

2. Islam uses one/single yardstick to apply standards; no duality and hypocracy in real Islam. Everyone is free to believe whatever he wants to believe in Islam state, in one breath you assert this and in next breath you assert BUT he should not be this, this, this, this. So process of exclusion started already, and it is only first URSTRULY, some time later and second URSTRULY will come and say now I want to add more things in ``EXCLUDING LIST``. By the time every USTRULY is done, ``EXCLUDING LIST`` have everything on it and there is practically no freedom of expression in URSTRULY ISLAMIC STATE. It is ``ikrah-phi-din`` and not ``La-ikrah-phi-din``.

Now take a look, this is what has happened in Muslim world, corrupted by these scholars and their followers.

Urstruly (#141),

Your post highlights idiocy of your Islam. According to you, non-Muslims are allowed to preach to non-Musilms. That’s just remarkable. But are they also allowed to preach to Muslims? What happens if a Muslim leaves Islam?

Don’t be shy … let us know what you really believe. While you are at it, do explain the hadith you yourself quoted … ”I am the last prophet and this mosque of mine is the last mosque”. What does “last” mean here?

Any word on your claim that Mirza Sahib called this opponents “children of prostitutes”? Or is this just propaganda from your ullema that you fell for?

ZahraJ (#135),

None of this would be needed if only Hazrat Alama Issa-ibne-Marriam … Naqshbandi’s long awaited prophet from two thousand years ago … finally agrees to descend down to earth from above the clouds, on shoulders of two angels.

One question remains though ... if this Issa refuses to wear clothes and is now a homosexual … how would Naqshbandi react? Love of the divine is all nice and fancy … but how about some clothes in the name of civility??

Naqsh,

Re #128 … can you substantiate your claims against Mirza Sahib? Do you also remain silent when asked your father’s name? You started this dialogue ... now deal with it if you are man enough.

In our discussion on basis of Quran and ahadith, you are unable to present anything at all. Your ultimate argument is that ullema agree with you … and that’s it.

Don’t be so sure of your ullema. None of Allah’s prophets had ullema on their side. Ullema in Aurengzeb’s court were insecure enough where they felt threatened by a naked fakir. In this day and age, these ullema are the one’s behind shia-sunni-violence and mob attacks on Ahmadi mosques in Pakistan and Bangladesh. These ullema are also the ones recruiting suicide-bombers on basis of a twisted jihad ideology.

Where has all this violence and hatred gotten the ummah?

Re: # 137 majumdar

In our religion, Islam, there is no compulsion in the matters of belief. Everyone is free to believe whatever he believes in an Islamic state. He can practice his religion in every which way he wants and he can even proselytize his religion to the non-Muslim subjects of the state. As Muslims we are forbidden to have any contempt towards anyone of other faith. If you look at closely, every issue that we have with yahood and hanood is of political nature and not of religious nature.

Quadianis can have all that, if they stop calling themselves Muslims. They must not be ashamed of calling themselves Mirzais or Quadianis. However, they cannot be allowed to call themselves Ahmadis either, because of a unanimous fatwa of ulemma of every school of thought in Islam, since one of the given name of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is Ahmad and word ``Ahmadi` may allude to some kind of assiciation with Prophet - which they have none. We could care less what their belief system is if they stop presenting it as ``Islamic``; because we know our religion as the religion that Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) brought to us. His word takes precedence over anyone else. Their beliefs are an anathema to the core beliefs of Islam. We will have better and amicable relations with them, the minute they stop calling themselves Muslims; just like Bihai`is who do not call themselves Muslims now and we care less what their beliefs are.

``Verily, thirty liars will be born in

my Ummah;

every one of them will claim to be a prophet,

though I am the last of the prophets,

and there will be no prophet after me.``


.............. why was our prophet so insecure ? ....... so what if other people claim to be prophets - if they can walk on water or talk to dead people then shouldn`t they be taken seriously ?.............. there are people who think i am a prophet because i can twitch my right ear and left eyebrow at the same time - is it fair to deprive them of their deen ? ..............

..............this is hilarious - i can think of so many great skits on this subject for saturday night live ! .....

Naqshbandi,

Your response is understandable. I think it is due to this, you are asked

What sort of Irfan is in being naked and being intoxicated.

And next you wrote:

``Hazrat Sarmad was a perfect intoxicated [majzub] saint. He had no equal in his Islamic knowledge and virtues``

Even the Holy Prophet was not equal to your Hazrat Sarmad?

---

Prediction of present time by Holy Prophet was, if yahood would put left foot in right shoe then so called Muslims would do the same.

Naqshbandi: You are doing the same as yahood, and we Ahmadies are trying to show you the beauty of Quran and Isalm, which is comprehensible with out any doubt, one has to fully awake though.

The beautifull religion of Islam, and exalted book of Quran is the best book. But unfortunately, actions of some of its so called adherents and thought process of some of its claimers has become distorted.

This parallel theologies of Faqirs, pirs and sunnah of intoxicated (so called majzoob faqir of yours) has diminshed the shine of the book and religion, we are tasked to show the real face of Islam and Quran, for your benifit and for the benifit of humankind.

You can certainly benifit from Quran, just for a moment think

What kind of Irfan comes from a naked, intoxicated pir?

If you think, honestly, the answer is none. This will free your mind and thoughts from such bounds and it will accelerate your understanding of Quran.

If Muslims, discard these parallel theologies of Pirs, Wahabi, Dubandi, Bralvi, etc, there are so many to list, and If Muslims return to Qur`an alone then Muslims will draw enermous benefits.

#137: majumdar, i have respect for the hanood and the yahood but none at all for the qadianis.

Urstruly/Naqshbandi,

Who is the more contemptible human being, the hanood, the yahood or the qadiani. Just want to know for academic interest.

Regards

ZahraJ,

option (e) please: usually I don`t even acknowledge qadianis but sattar and his buddies constant misquoting and using the qur`an in a way NEVER used before to prove their kazzab false prophet dajjal as being on truth forced me to respond lest they think that sunnis cannot reply to their idiocies and kufr. I have said what i wanted to say on this topic.

Any neutral reading all the hadith and qu`ranic verses will, no doubt, agree that the concept of finality of prophethood is as understood by muslims and not by qadianis who have to resort to fanciful and absurd interpretations [tawil] to support their (false) claims.