Ahmadis in Pakistan

[T-Faz]

Ahmadis should be allowed to live in peace, but they should once and for all declare that they are non-muslims. If they keep claiming to be muslims then there will be tension.

The tell me why did Pakistan lay claim to Qadian as a a holy Muslim site. Why did an Ahmadi plead the Muslim case in Radcliffe Boundary Commission and presented the case of the Muslims. Why do some of these Ahmadis enter Mecca and Medina even after being declared as a Kafirs.

Why do other Muslims sometimes pray with Ahmadis, when an Ahmadi Major died recently, many others prayed his janazza together. After the Lahore attacks, many other Muslims went to pray with the Ahmadis.

Why did Mian Tufail Mohammad of Jamaat-e-Islami tell one of the leaders of Ahmadis that they consider them to be muslims but the law they are pushing for is more political in nature. Ahmadi's were made scapegoat for political and economic gains by these religious groups and you have fallen for their propaganda.

The government does not have the right to declare who is what or not. That is Allah's decision and only he withholds the right to do so.

 

[T-Faz]

The wife of the first Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, had this to say about Ahmadies (Daily Dawn, Karachi, July 10th 1985):

“During the past one year, Newspapers have reported murders of Ahmadi notables in mysterious circumstances. More recently, hundreds of arrests have been made of members of this peace loving Community. Those arrested have been reportedly subjected to physical torture, while the charge against them is usually that of wearing Kalima Tayabba badges. This situation deserves to be condemned forthrightly without any reservations. It is known history that while the Ahmadiyya Community supported the cause of Pakistan, most of Mullah Community, their present persecutors, opposed the creation of Pakistan tooth and nail. The two great Quaids, Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan, appreciated the contribution of Ahmadis towards the Muslim cause and recognised it by appointing Chaudhry Muhammad Zafrullah Khan as the first Foreign Minister of Pakistan. In those great days, Pakistan had not been reduced to a theocratic State, and not only Muslims, regardless of the auxiliary beliefs, but even Hindus, were given Cabinet posts. The rights of minorities and small groups were not paid just lip service, but were protected with deliberate effort.”

 

[tnt123]

Look I don't care what government says but I know what Quran says. Quran makes it clear who is muslim and who is not. Then were is the debate? Why are these people calling themselves muslim if they do not follow the Quran?

 

[T-Faz]

Look I don't care what government says but I know what Quran says. Quran makes it clear who is muslim and who is not. Then were is the debate? Why are these people calling themselves muslim if they do not follow the Quran?

So tell me who is a Muslim and who is not a Muslim, Ahmadis believe that Mohammed (SAW) was the Seal of the Prophets but they proclaim that Mirza Ghulam is the professed messenger who came to rejuvenate the message of Islam. There will be no other religion bearing prophet after Mohammed (SAW).

Can you quote the Quran according to what you stated there.

Thanks.

EDIT: Sorry I just read that you consider Deobandi to be the most peaceful sect, I think its best not to argue anymore.

 

[Kompromat]

So tell me who is a Muslim and who is not a Muslim, Ahmadis believe that Mohammed (SAW) was the Seal of the Prophets but they proclaim that Mirza Ghulam is the professed messenger who came to rejuvenate the message of Islam. There will be no other religion bearing prophet after Mohammed (SAW).

Can you quote the Quran according to what you stated there.

Thanks.

Mate you seem too confused in this matter - Seal of Prophet SAW means no more Messengers.

Ahmadis have ripped their a$$ over to try to prove that there is distinction between a Messenger (Rassol) and a Prophet (Nabi).

There is NO Distinction between them they are two names of the same entity.

The only difference is between the Prophets with a Book and those without a Book.

So Hazoor e Paak SAW is the Last Messenger/Prophet/Nabi/Rasool.

Other aspect of it is that Mirza claimed to be the Imam mehdi and Hazrat ISA (jesus) which is no less than a bad Joke as Muslims know that They are two different people , Hazrat Imam Mahdi will descend from the family Tree of Hazoor Muhammad SAW aka he would be a Sayed.

we know that he will speak Arabic & the Most important fact is Imam Mahdi R.A would be Recognized by People themselves - he wont claim to be an Imam - a voice from the heaven in Makkah will confirm it and None of two muslims would have a different view about him.

We Know that Hazrat Isa PBUH will come and team up with Imam Mahdi in Makkah and 40 years after that there would be the qayyam of the Qayamat or the Judgment day.

Good luck

 

[T-Faz]

So whatever they believe does not alter your point of view, then what is the problem.

It's a free world, you can believe in what you like, additionally the government cannot take on Allahs's role to declare anyone anything.

Refrain from writing things in an insulting manner, if you are used to conversing this way, it does not mean that everyone else is also of the same vulgar mind.

 

[Kompromat]

So whatever they believe does not alter your point of view, then what is the problem.

It's a free world, you can believe in what you like, additionally the government cannot take on Allahs's role to declare anyone anything.

Refrain from writing things in an insulting manner, if you are used to conversing this way, it does not mean that everyone else is also of the same vulgar mind.

Dude what are you talking about ?

 

[Kompromat]

@ T-Faz.

This is the issue - that it does alter Islamic teachings which wont be accepted.

 

[T-Faz]

Writing comments like 'ripped their ***' do not add anything to the argument, that is what is offensive.

If Islamic teaching have been altered and you do not accept it, that is fine, but you just leave it at that and the rest is up to Allah then. I would say that the majority of Muslims do not follow the Islamic teachings, they alter their understanding of text and examples to suit their lifestyle.

If you do not accept something, it does not mean that the state have to insert the same into it's constitution. Shias were declared non Muslims long ago but it did not achieve anything. The whole point of this thread is to discuss the laws of Pakistan that should not be in place. One can call himself what he wants, the state has no right to declare someone non Muslim. I believe that right belongs only to one entity known as Allah.

 

[Kompromat]

Writing comments like 'ripped their ***' do not add anything to the argument, that is what is offensive.

Lol - dude its a normal term used for someone trying hard to prove something btw in English traditions its not offensive at all , its like you & me talking in a normal tone.

If Islamic teaching have been altered and you do not accept it, that is fine, but you just leave it at that and the rest is up to Allah then.

Altering teachings are Fine ????

No - Allah SWT has ordered to Fight Any fitna that will appear in anytime.

Hazrat Umar RA fought against Muslema Kazzab and wiped his finta out , this is the example for us.

I would say that the majority of Muslims do not follow the Islamic teachings, they alter their understanding of text and examples to suit their lifestyle.

Thats just your view - i know people are 100% practicing Muslims under extreme circumstances and besides I hate those who alter teachings to suit their lifestyle - they ain't different than TTP are the ?


Fellow - islam is there to transform you to a Momin and many people amongst us try to tailor it to suit their needs which is wrong and must be stopped.

If you do not accept something, it does not mean that the state have to insert the same into it's constitution.

The constitution is made according to the wises of People living in that country - so if i share a majority view then it will be in the constitution automatically.

Shias were declared non Muslims long ago but it did not achieve anything.

By who ? Fanatic TTP leaders or LEJ leaders ie Tariq azam & Haqnawaz Jhangvi ?

Dude they dont have any credibility as they were politicians and not Molvis.

Shias do not evade any of the basic islamic tenants unlike Ahmadis.
Remember if you do not pray it will not make you a kafir but you will have a very low and vulnerable faith.

But if you evade any of the basic tenants of Islam ie - Tohid , Khatam e nabuah etc will make you a Kafir as it is the Condition of entry to Islam.

I wont defend anyone as i dont have a sect but the main issues with shias is that they pray differently which to me is justifiable as Prophet saw prayed in 3 different ways and none of them have been prohibited.

The whole point of this thread is to discuss the laws of Pakistan that should not be in place.

They should be in Place though they are tough but they are necessary Until we reach an agreement with Ahmadi community.

Honestly i dont want to see any restrictions on ahmadi Religion but there must be some sort of dialogue to discuss this matter on a higher level.

One can call himself what he wants

yes but one can't call himself what he is not !

The state has no right to declare someone non Muslim. I believe that right belongs only to one entity known as Allah.

State shares the Majority view and this is what exactly happens everywhere - there is nothing wrong with it.

 

[T-Faz]

Lol - dude its a normal term used for someone trying hard to prove something btw in English traditions its not offensive at all , its like you & me talking in a normal tone.

It is offensive to me and I am very laid back, I guess different levels of acceptability exist but many would agree that what you wrote is offensive.

Altering teachings are Fine ????

No - Allah SWT has ordered to Fight Any fitna that will appear in anytime.

Hazrat Umar RA fought against Muslema Kazzab and wiped his finta out , this is the example for us.

There you go using the word fight again, this mentality of fight has not really helped us in anything. So the example you gave and what you are saying implies to me that the Ahmadis should be wiped out. What kind of thinking is this, you can go ahead and do what you may feel necessary but this thinking is the same as the terrorist use. Different times required different ways of conducting things. After all the time that has gone by, it would be amoral and despicable to take any averse action. Fitna also appeared when Shia's gained a foothold under the caliphate.

Thats just your view - i know people are 100% practicing Muslims under extreme circumstances and besides I hate those who alter teachings to suit their lifestyle - they ain't different than TTP are the ?

So TTP killing people is similar to someone who would choose to alter their understanding of text or an example to suit their liking, odd thought I must say. Some Muslims say that Hijab is not compulsory and use certain Quranic quotes to explain their views. If this is the case then they too are similar to TTP according to your statement.

Fellow - islam is there to transform you to a Momin and many people amongst us try to tailor it to suit their needs which is wrong and must be stopped.

How do you want to stop it, clearly all that has been tried so far has not stopped Ahmadi's. I certainly hope that you are not implying violent action again.

The constitution is made according to the wises of People living in that country - so if i share a majority view then it will be in the constitution automatically.

No, it does not work that way. The constitution should provide freedom to preach and practice religion. The Pak gov does not allow that right to Ahmadi's. When Mohammed (SAW) granted a charter to Christians by declaring for them the freedom to freely practice their faith. As for freedom of worship, there were hundreds of idols in the sacred Kaaba that had been built by Abraham and consecrated for the worship of one God. Before he returned as the conqueror (and therefore as a ruler), the Prophet spent fifty years of his life in Mecca but never took the law in his own hands to demolish them. You might also want to look up Ummat-un-wahida.

By who ? Fanatic TTP leaders or LEJ leaders ie Tariq azam & Haqnawaz Jhangvi ?

Dude they dont have any credibility as they were politicians and not Molvis.

So if these guys and their followers become the majority tomorrow, they can go put it in the constitution that Shia's are non Mulims. Will you live with such a declaration and that too by the state.

But if you evade any of the basic tenants of Islam ie - Tohid , Khatam e nabuah etc will make you a Kafir as it is the Condition of entry to Islam.

Again, you do not hold the power to declare someone a kafir, only Allah has that right. But we are talking about right to worship and preach that Islam allows all.

They should be in Place though they are tough but they are necessary Until we reach an agreement with Ahmadi community.

Honestly i dont want to see any restrictions on ahmadi Religion but there must be some sort of dialogue to discuss this matter on a higher level.

Tell the Pak Gov to release the documents which contained the argument between the Ahmadi leadership and the Gov of Pak in 1974. Those documents indicate that an agreement was reached but because of the campaign being political in nature, the documents remain confidential.

http://anthropology.jhu.edu/bin/i/d/Trespasses.pdf

yes but one can't call himself what he is not !

Who says?

State shares the Majority view and this is what exactly happens everywhere - there is nothing wrong with it.

The majority in US want the wars their army is engaged in to end but it is clearly not happening. Did not really happen the way you think it ought to.

 

[sparklingway]

One of the best replies ever. Most of the fundos here won't like to accept it, but there's violence hiding under their skin. They might not do it themselves, but probably will smile or at least not shed a tear if members of other religious groups are killed.

As one friend recently put it, in twenty years this will be a country for only Sunni Deobandi men. No women, Barelvi, Shia, Christian, etc. will have the right to citizenship.

If you're a religious man, than perhaps you understand that you or any group of people cannot assume the role of the Almighty. Hence, you have no right to declare a group as non-Muslims and limit their rights.

 

[SekrutYakhni]

Ahmedis have all the right to exist like us. Pakistan was not made for Sunnis, Shiites, Deo bandis, Wahabis etc

Mr. Jinnah said, "I have always maintained that no nation can ever be worthy of its existence that cannot take its women along with the men. No struggle can ever succeed without women participating side by side with men. There are two powers in the world; one is the sword and the other is the pen. There is a great competition and rivalry between the two. There is a third power stronger than both, that of the women."
Speech at Islamia College for women
March 25, 1940

“If we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor... you are free- you are free to go to your temples mosques or any other place of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the state... in due course of time Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to Muslims- not in a religious sense for that is the personal faith of an individual- but in a political sense as citizens of one state”
Address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, Karachi
August 11, 1947


Considering the fact, where did Mr. Jinnah say that political class had to be Muslim >> Sunni perhaps?
In my opinion, every Pakistani regardless of his or her religion should be given equal opportunity. If a capable Christian or Hindu etc can revolutionize our country than there should not be any objection. Furthermore, the only thing we should protect is our culture and religion should be left in at individual level.

There is no such term 'minority' in my opinion. Giving minority equal rights is BS. I mean do we have to state in our constitution that minority will be given equal rights; isn't it obvious?
You cannot distinguish minority and majority considering religion. However, minority and majority should only work on political bases and so on.

 

[Sinnerman108]

The three people who are speaking in favor of Qadyani (non muslims)
have a western flag as their location.

Need we debate more ?

 

[sparklingway]

The three people who are speaking in favor of Qadyani (non muslims)
have a western flag as their location.

Need we debate more ?

There is this guy whose been living under Wahabist influence. How does that feel?

Stop accusing others.