No place for Ahmadis in Imran Khan’s Naya Pakistan

[Developereo]

What exactly is pakistans Issue with Ahemadis, can someone explain please!

A fundamental tenet of Islam is that Muhammad (pbuh) was the last and final prophet.

Ahmedis claim that they have a new prophet who succeeds Muhammad (pbuh).

It's sort of like someone denying the Holy Trinity but still claiming to be Christian.

 

[ajpirzada]

@muse im not getting your morality argument. how is declaring ahmedis non-muslims an issue of morality? i think im missing ur point. can u explain? thanks

 

[Dance]

The people of Pakistan excommunicated the Ahmadi? That's makes a rather complicated issue into a simple one, this excommunication was the result of agitation the Jamaat and to equate the jamaat with the people of Pakistan is problematic - on the other hand the ratification was done done by Majlis, here again, the issue is one of morality of such a thing, not who owes it.

Actually zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was the one who declared Ahmedis non-Muslim in the 1973 constitution (with pressure from Jamaat and other religious parties of course)

So I don't get how people can consider PPP a liberal party when their founder was the one who introduced this

 

[nastikan]

Rather shameful chickening out by imran khan. Who believes in which dogma should be none of government's business. Medieval christiandom was going through a similar phase. It took them a couple of centuries to come to their senses. How many centuries will Pakistan take?

 

[Dubious]

@muse Dude it has nothing to do with Jamaat...Nor its a morality issue unless you are talking about the Morality of the Ahmedis for Introducing such an article in the basics of Islam!

the basic in fact the 1st principal of Islam was changed by the Ahmedis....How can you change the fundaments and still proclaim yourself as Muslim?!

 

[MilSpec]

A fundamental tenet of Islam is that Muhammad (pbuh) was the last and final prophet.

Ahmedis claim that they have a new prophet who succeeds Muhammad (pbuh).

It's sort of like someone denying the Holy Trinity but still claiming to be Christian.

Do they still believe and respect , Muhhamad as a prophet...??

 

[nastikan]

@muse Dude it has nothing to do with Jamaat...Nor its a morality issue unless you are talking about the Morality of the Ahmedis for Introducing such an article in the basics of Islam!

the fundamental of Islam was changed by the Ahmedis....How can you change the fundaments and still proclaim yourself as Muslim?!

Christianity has tens of sects some with radically different views. But they have learnt to coexist. Similarly Hinduism was reformed to include different sects to unify the religion.

 

[Dubious]

Do they still believe and respect , Muhhamad as a prophet...??

It is like saying No Buddha was not Buddha and yet proclaiming himself Buddhist! Well, even that is not even equal to what the Ahmadis proclaimed!

 

[muse]

@muse im not getting your morality argument. how is declaring ahmedis non-muslims an issue of morality? i think im missing ur point. can u explain? thanks

See, whether they are Muslims or not, this must not be the business of the state - because the law is supposed to be above that, Pakistanis can't be equal before the law, if the law itself asserts that they are not - Equality before the law is itself a issue of morality.

See when we begin assigning politics on the basis of confession, we are really going down the path of sectarian war - is that not a moral issue?? We have already entered a stage where we argue who is a Muslim, real Muslim, and real Shariah, and real Islam, the more we thread this path the greater the opportunity that it will result in civil war- just look at the TTP and it's support base, we are already there -- Rights, Responsibilities, war and peace are issues of morality and unfortunately for us, we seem to be more concerned that these Ahmadi not be considered Muslims because we have chosen to define Muslim in a way that ensures that we can do this to another group - for instance are Takfiri Muslims??? If yes, then let the blood flow??

Instead of expanding the world of Islam we have constricted it - we abrogate the duties of God to ourselves, for no reason other than political expediency - is that moral?

 

[Dubious]

Christianity has tens of sects some with radically different views. But they have learnt to coexist. Similarly Hinduism was reformed to include different sects to unify the religion.

@nastikan that is the problem ....we are not like other religions...We DO NOT CHANGE the basic and then say it is Islam...

We have many schools of thoughts BUT ALL HAVE SAME BASICS....

See, whether they are Muslims or not, this must not be the business of the state - because the law is supposed to be above that, Pakistanis can't be equal before the law, if the law itself asserts that they are not - Equality before the law is itself a issue of morality.

See when we begin assigning politics on the basis of confession, we are really going down the path of sectarian war - is that not a moral issue?? We have already entered a stage where we argue who is a Muslim, real Muslim, and real Shariah, and real Islam, the more we thread this path the greater the opportunity that it will result in civil war- just look at the TTP and it's support base, we are already there -- Rights, Responsibilities, war and peace are issues of morality and unfortunately for us, we seem to be more concerned that these Ahmadi not be considered Muslims because we have chosen to define Muslim in a way that ensures that we can do this to another group - for instance are Takfiri Muslims??? If yes, then let the blood flow??

Instead of expanding the world of Islam we have constricted it - we abrogate the duties of God to ourselves, for no reason other than political expediency - is that moral?

@muse Pakistan was built as an Islamic state separate from India....KNOWINGLY they came to Pakistan...they were not forced into Pakistan...Knowing that the 1st basic principal of Islam is the shahadah and they change that...and then WANT to be accepted as Muslims....is asking for too much esp when ALLAH forbids the adding and removing ANYTHING from the basics!

I think your morality gun should be pointed at them too...

 

[qamar1990]

The point is why does the State have to decide who is Muslim and who is not.
Why does the State have laws that anyone who wishes to leave Islam must be killed.

becuase the state is a an islamic republic not only does it look out for pakistani interests but islam as well, its the reason we carved pakistan out india.

 

[Developereo]

Do they still believe and respect , Muhhamad as a prophet...??

Yes, they do.

They have some convoluted reasoning to get around the "final prophet" tenet -- claiming Muhammad (pbuh) was the final "major" prophet, but "minor" prophets can still arise -- theirs being, of course, a prime example.

 

[KingMamba]

Is there a specific verse in quran which says mohammed is the last prophet? the bold bit neither says 'only' nor 'last'.
I remember you saying quran is the final word (compared to hadees).Or was it somebody else?

Yes there is. Along with many hadiths to boot.

See, whether they are Muslims or not, this must not be the business of the state - because the law is supposed to be above that, Pakistanis can't be equal before the law, if the law itself asserts that they are not - Equality before the law is itself a issue of morality.

See when we begin assigning politics on the basis of confession, we are really going down the path of sectarian war - is that not a moral issue?? We have already entered a stage where we argue who is a Muslim, real Muslim, and real Shariah, and real Islam, the more we thread this path the greater the opportunity that it will result in civil war- just look at the TTP and it's support base, we are already there -- Rights, Responsibilities, war and peace are issues of morality and unfortunately for us, we seem to be more concerned that these Ahmadi not be considered Muslims because we have chosen to define Muslim in a way that ensures that we can do this to another group - for instance are Takfiri Muslims??? If yes, then let the blood flow??

Instead of expanding the world of Islam we have constricted it - we abrogate the duties of God to ourselves, for no reason other than political expediency - is that moral?

Under normal circumstances it would be unmoral but ahmadi doctrine makes a mockery out of Islam and all Muslim majority countries got together and declared them non-Muslim so the verdict should stand, it is one of the few things all Muslims regardless of sect ever agreed upon.

 

[KingMamba]

Do they still believe and respect , Muhhamad as a prophet...??

No they do not, let me tell you why. Prophet Muhammad PBUH said from his own mouth that "there will be none after me, I am the last and the seal of the prophets". The minute they say that is false, it means they are calling him a liar, if they are calling him a liar then they are calling God a liar because God says in the Quran that Prophet Muhammad only says what he directs him to say so when he said he is the last it means God told him to say he is the last.

So you call both our God and our Prophet liars but then expect us to consider you one of our own.

 

[MilSpec]

Yes, they do.

They have some convoluted reasoning to get around the "final prophet" tenet -- claiming Muhammad (pbuh) was the final "major" prophet, but "minor" prophets can still arise -- theirs being, of course, a prime example.

Can there be any provisions in islam where these guys can be accommodated, seems like they just want to have an additional prophet, they are not really insulting the old one. More importantly can there be no provisions in islam where the almighty might have changed his mind and decided to send another prophet in 1400 years.

I dont intend to offend anyone, but If I am not mistaken, I think muslims do believe that jesus, moses abraham were early prophets, and god did have a sense of humor , when he asked arbraham to hog tie his son. So is it possible that allah might have changed his mind in 1400 years and decided to send a "minor prophet"

No they do not, let me tell you why. Prophet Muhammad PBUH said from his own mouth that "there will be none after me, I am the last and the seal of the prophets". The minute they say that is false, it means they are calling him a liar, if they are calling him a liar then they are calling God a liar because God says in the Quran that Prophet Muhammad only says what he directs him to say so when he said he is the last it means God told him to say he is the last.

So you call both our God and our Prophet liars but then expect us to consider you one of our own.

Well that was said by the mohammed the prophet, not allah, what if he made a mistake, or was misquoted or just his words were taken out of context, as I understand, the prophet did not write the quran, did he?

No they do not, let me tell you why. Prophet Muhammad PBUH said from his own mouth that "there will be none after me, I am the last and the seal of the prophets". The minute they say that is false, it means they are calling him a liar, if they are calling him a liar then they are calling God a liar because God says in the Quran that Prophet Muhammad only says what he directs him to say so when he said he is the last it means God told him to say he is the last.

So you call both our God and our Prophet liars but then expect us to consider you one of our own.

Well that was said by the mohammed the prophet, not allah, what if he made a mistake, or was misquoted or just his words were taken out of context, as I understand, the prophet did not write the quran, did he?