Persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan contradicts the teachings of Islam

[Indus Pakistan]

@mike2000 is back

"According to the constitution, the 70 seats reserved for women and religious minorities are allocated to the political parties according to their proportional representation".

There was a Ministry of Minorities which has been subsumed into the religious affairs ministry. It's remit was to protect and bring to fore minority rights.

Link > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Minorities_(Pakistan)

 

[Hamza913]

Current US (or Romanian) policies can always be changed. Secondly, many Muslim countries are involved in crimes against Muslims too. Is it a sin simply to become the leader of them, regardless of what actions they choose to take while in office? I think every head of state in any country, including Muslim ones, could be considered sinners by this standard.




I consider Muslims to be my fellow allies. Not every single one though. Quite a few have caused me harm. Should I treat the ones that have as my allies too simply because they happen to be Muslim, even if they continually cause me harm? Do you?

I'm afraid that you are twisting the meaning of the verses you cited a bit (though are not trying to do so). They warn Muslims of something. There is no mention that it is a sin to do so. And they don't mean that you cannot be allies with non-Muslims.


Here is a verse from Surah Al-Mumtahanah:

"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.

Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers."

https://quran.com/60/8-9

Becoming the leader of a non Muslim nation has proven that the individual has chosen to help the Kuffar over his fellow Muslims. Why not go help a Muslim nation? It's not like Muslims don't need help (if anything we need it more than the Kuffar). Also, I doubt she will be able to majorly change any Romanian polices even if it's her intention. If she wants to help, persuade them to change before leading them. Did the prophet lead the Kuffar into battle before changing them? No. Change come first.

As for leading Muslim nations who have committed sins, you may do so if they still retain major Islamic qualities so long as you attempt to correct them. If they have lost every major Islamic quality about them, then it's best to do the same with them as you would the Kuffar.

Of course not every single Muslim would be your ally. But if there is a Muslim and a Kuffar who are both noble men, but you chose the Kuffar over the Muslim, that is a sin.

I have said it before, you should definitely act justly. My earlier point was don't rely on them like you would an ally. I never said you were forbidden from speaking to them and should shun them. My point still stands. Show me a verse in the Quran saying you should make allies with the Kuffar, and then I will believe you.

When you use terms like almost and bar them from holding key positions, you have already discriminated so much and treating them as subclass. I just want to remind you a historical records and you are free to disagree

When Hazrat Umar R.A went to Jerusalem, he refrained from praying inside Church as he feared Muslim may convert this Church into Mosque if he prayed inside the Church.

This is the way most Kafir countries treat Muslims too, and it's perfectly acceptable. What you're asking for is like a capitalist asking to govern the USSR. It's not logical.

Yes that's a very nice example of how we should treat the Kuffar well and not mistreat them. But I never claimed otherwise. Give me an example of a Kuffar being allowed to rule a Muslim nation, and I will side with you.

Only when you are powerful enough to defend yourself .. Remember Sulah-e-Hudaibya ? there was a reason behind it , one can say Allah Commands it , but Allah is best Planner and he knows that Muslims need Breathing time , if the peace was not made the Muslims would be in some deep trouble .. because they dont have Resources and man power to fight a longer war which Meccans can easily and intentionally do ..

Yes of course, there are exceptions as with almost every rule.

 

[Hyde]

I personally do not consider Ghulam Ahmed as a Prophet of Allah (or even Mehdi)

My point is : We should not be the ones deciding who is Muslim or who is not ... That authority/judgement lies with Allah alone

@Oscar can you please correct my example of Raja se uske ministers zayada wafadar... something if you know

If you don't know what Ahmedis believe, if you are not representing them, if you do not have any knowledge of their faith then what are you trying to defend?

Its like you are not hired and you are in the court ready to defend your client

I would just back off now as your post was so funny

 

[M. Sarmad]

@Oscar can you please correct my example of Raja se uske ministers zayada wafadar... something if you know

If you don't know what Ahmedis believe, if you are not representing them, if you do not have any knowledge of their faith then what are you trying to defend?

Its like you are not hired and you are in the court ready to defend your client

I know what Ahmadis believe, I have enough knowledge of their faith ..... but I don't represent them ... And I am not trying to defend them (or their beliefs) ..... All I am saying is that it's not for us (or the state) to decide who is Muslim or who is not ........Anything else, sir ?

 

[Hyde]

I know what Ahmadis believe, I have enough knowledge of their faith ..... but I don't represent them ... And I am not trying to defend them. ..... Anything else, sir ?

Oh my God... finally I met someone who really knows what they believe!

Please englighten us all with your knowledge about Qadiyanis so that we can all learn from you. Please also let me know if you are giving the point of view of TV station wale Qadiyanis (Ahmaddiya Muslim Community) or Lahoris who denied the Prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed after their first caliph died.

The mainstream Qadiani (TV station wale) believes that Muslim (us) are Kafir as we did not believe in their new Prophet while the Lahoris are apologistic and whenever you try to debate with them they behave like... no please no we are like you.. we also believe he is not a prophet we just believe he is like a saint same as you guys believe in many saints etc... so when enlightening us with your knowledge please do tell us which faction of qadianis you are representing

PS: It will be shocking revelation for me as I have always had contrary views from Qadiyani friends, nobody is really sure what their true faith is

 

[M. Sarmad]

Oh my God... finally I met someone who really knows what they believe!

Please englighten us all with your knowledge about Qadiyanis so that we can all learn from you. Please also let me know if you are giving the point of view of TV station wale Qadiyanis (Ahmaddiya Muslim Community) or Lahoris who denied the Prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed after their first caliph died.

The mainstream Qadiani (TV station wale) believes that Muslim (us) are Kafir as we did not believe in their new Prophet while the Lahoris are apologistic and whenever you try to debate with them they behave like... no please no we are like you.. we also believe he is not a prophet we just believe he is like a saint same as you guys believe in many saints etc... so when enlightening us with your knowledge please do tell us which faction of qadianis you are representing

PS: It will be shocking revelation for me as I have always had contrary views from Qadiyani friends, nobody is really sure what their true faith is

Trolling effort by a Mod ??

@Pakistani Exile, bro can you please explain it to this gentleman here that You guys are as clear on your beliefs as any other sect of Muslims ?

 

[Hyde]

A Mod making a troll post ??

@Pakistani Exile, bro can you please explain it to this gentleman here that You guys are as clear on your beliefs as any other sect of Muslims ?

I could have quoted him too... but I want you to explain me.. in last 100 posts you have only talked with no facts or references...

I already know the point of view of Pakistani Exile so no need to call him for help

Thank you

 

[Baba Google]

Surah Ahzab
33:40

Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.

Just provided the proof above for the Quran, please do not shoot tangents and now defend your baseless argument. Or will you shoot the usual tangent?

Sir, I have a question, the above verse you posted, uses 2 different words with different meanings (Rasool and Nabi) I mean the verse explains last of the prophets (Khatam un Nabi) - not last of the messenger of Allah (Rasool Allah) - now there is a difference between "Rasool" and "Nabi" - since you mentioned the above verse which says last of the Prophets - how do you prove that Muhammad is the last messenger of Allah as well? I mean in above verse - Allah says but [he is] the Messenger of Allah - not last messenger of Allah. so how do u explain that?

 

[LA se Karachi]

Becoming the leader of a non Muslim nation has proven that the individual has chosen to help the Kuffar over his fellow Muslims. Why not go help a Muslim nation? It's not like Muslims don't need help (if anything we need it more than the Kuffar).

Becoming a leader of a non-Muslim country is not sinful on its own. Actions can be considered sinful, but both Muslim and non-Muslim leaders in any country are subject to that judgement.

Also, I doubt she will be able to majorly change any Romanian polices even if it's her intention. If she wants to help, persuade them to change before leading them. Did the prophet lead the Kuffar into battle before changing them? No. Change come first.

You do not "persuade" someone to change in modern democratic governments in the way you are suggesting. It's not that simple. You (or your party) win an election and make the changes yourself with the authority you are given.

Also, not all non-Muslims are the same. They come from different countries, have different religions (or none at all), and different cultures and languages. Some countries, like Nigeria, are a complete mix.

As for leading Muslim nations who have committed sins, you may do so if they still retain major Islamic qualities so long as you attempt to correct them. If they have lost every major Islamic quality about them, then it's best to do the same with them as you would the Kuffar.

That is nothing more than your opinion, which I suppose I asked for. However, I don't believe that there are any definitive restrictions like the ones you suggest in the Quran. Also, I'm not sure how you define what constitutes a country that "retains major Islamic qualities". You may have a definition, but even if it can be applied almost perfectly to a particular country or group of countries (which won't be as easy as you might think), not every Muslim would necessarily agree with it.

Of course not every single Muslim would be your ally. But if there is a Muslim and a Kuffar who are both noble men, but you chose the Kuffar over the Muslim, that is a sin.

I have said it before, you should definitely act justly. My earlier point was don't rely on them like you would an ally. I never said you were forbidden from speaking to them and should shun them. My point still stands. Show me a verse in the Quran saying you should make allies with the Kuffar, and then I will believe you.

It's not an either/or concept. You are creating a false dilemma. You can have both Muslims and non-Muslims that are your friends and compatriots.

As for the "ally" concept, you are again twisting it a bit. Muslims, when taken as a religious group, should rely primarily on themselves. Of course you should be self-reliant and mindful of your own interests. But that does mean that all non-Muslims should be seen as untrustworthy or unworthy of fellowship, which was the point of the verses I cited.

If you don't know what Ahmedis believe, if you are not representing them, if you do not have any knowledge of their faith then what are you trying to defend?

Its like you are not hired and you are in the court ready to defend your client

I think his point was that the state should not be in the business of declaring people to be Muslim or non-Muslim. While I personally agree that Ahmedis/Qadiani should not be considered Muslim by my fellow Muslims, I don't believe the state should be involved in that decision. It is a private matter that should be left up to the judgment of each individual.

 

[M. Sarmad]

I could have quoted him too... but I want you to explain me.. in last 100 posts you have only talked with no facts or references...

I already know the point of view of Pakistani Exile so no need to call him for help

Thank you

Try "Reading" last 100 posts ... A lot of references and facts have been provided ....

Thank You

 

[Hyde]

Try "Reading" last 100 posts ... A lot of references and facts have been provided ....

Thank You

In another words you cannot explain in simple words what they really believe...

Good luck my friend

 

[VCheng]

In another words you cannot explain in simple words what they really believe...

Good luck my friend

So when is this thread being closed for violating PDF rules forbidding religious discussion?

 

[Hyde]

I think his point was that the state should not be in the business of declaring people to be Muslim or non-Muslim. While I personally agree that Ahmedis/Qayadanis should not be considered be Muslim by fellow Muslims, I don't believe the state should be involved in that decision. It is a private matter up to the judgment each individual.

I have been quite clear on this matter and agree with you in principle that their rights should be protected as much as any Pakistani. I find it disgrace when they have to take oath of denying his prophethood before getting your passport... They are equal Pakistanis and should be treated as such

So when is this thread being closed for violating PDF rules forbidding religious discussion?

Until someone comes to abuse and I have to ban few members

Until the cycle of debate is not rolling on the same circle again n again

 

[The Sandman]

Sir, I have a question, the above verse you posted, uses 2 different words with different meanings (Rasool and Nabi) I mean the verse explains last of the prophets (Khatam un Nabi) - not last of the messenger of Allah (Rasool Allah) - now there is a difference between "Rasool" and "Nabi" - since you mentioned the above verse which says last of the Prophets - how do you prove that Muhammad is the last messenger of Allah as well? I mean in above verse - Allah says but [he is] the Messenger of Allah - not last messenger of Allah. so how do u explain that?

http://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/2482/is-muhammad-the-last-rasool-messenger

 

[VCheng]

They are equal Pakistanis and should be treated as such

How can Pakistanis be treated and regarded as equals when the law itself mandates discrimination on the basis of religious beliefs, given that matters of state and religion are intertwined in Pakistan by expressed intent? Until this basic conundrum is resolved, discussions will be pointlessly circular.